Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a demanding title that stresses both the CPU and GPU heavily, and the combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti produces a set of measured results that are surprisingly consistent across resolutions. The data indicates this pairing is capable of high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, while still delivering playable performance at 4K, though the gap between settings tiers becomes more pronounced as resolution increases. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS, the role of each component, and how this specific combo ranks against the broader field of tested configurations.

FAQ

Q: What is the combo rank for the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The combo ranks 298th out of 2996 tested combinations, placing it in the top 10 percent of all recorded configurations for this game.

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo achieves at 1920x1080?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded at 1920x1080 is 193 FPS, which occurs with the Low settings preset. Medium settings deliver 150 FPS, High settings deliver 113 FPS, and Ultra settings deliver 108 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU's single-thread performance compare to its closest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 7 9700F has a Passmark single-thread score of 4691. Its nearest rivals by average benchmark score are the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, Intel Core i7-14700KF, AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, and Intel Core i7-14700K, with delta percentages of 0.2%, -0.2%, 0.7%, and 0.9% respectively, indicating a very tight grouping in overall CPU performance.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti features 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s. Its memory clock runs at 1313 MHz, with an effective speed of 21 Gbps.

Q: At which resolution and settings does the combo achieve the lowest average FPS?

A: The lowest recorded average FPS is 64 FPS, which is measured at 3840x2160 resolution with the Ultra settings preset.

Q: Is the data for this combo measured or estimated?

A: The data is marked as measured, meaning the FPS figures come from actual testing rather than theoretical calculations or projections.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture and uses the AD104 chip on a 5 nm process from TSMC. It contains 7680 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 80 raster output units, along with 60 RT cores and 240 tensor cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2310 MHz and boosts up to 2610 MHz. Its memory subsystem consists of 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 192-bit interface, which yields a bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s. The data shows that this memory configuration is sufficient for the demands of Microsoft Flight Simulator, as the GPU is able to maintain playable frame rates even at 4K Ultra settings.

The RTX 4070 Ti's raw compute capabilities include an FP32 throughput of 40.09 TFLOPS, a texture rate of 626.4 GTexel/s, and a pixel rate of 208.8 GPixel/s. These figures translate into a Passmark G3D score of 31624 and a Passmark GPU compute score of 18396. The GPU's percentile ranking against all GPUs is 84, meaning it outperforms the majority of graphics cards in the database. Its nearest rivals by average benchmark score include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile with a delta of -0.8%, the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT with a delta of -1.3%, the NVIDIA RTX A6000 with a delta of 1.6%, and the Intel Arc A730M with a delta of -1.7%. This places the RTX 4070 Ti in a competitive position, though its average benchmark score of 44795 is slightly below some of its closest competitors.

In the context of Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's role is distinctly visible in the scaling between settings. At 1920x1080, the average FPS drops from 193 on Low to 108 on Ultra, a difference of 85 FPS. At 2560x1440, the same settings span goes from 156 to 87, a difference of 69 FPS. At 3840x2160, the span is from 115 to 64, a difference of 51 FPS. This pattern shows that while the GPU is a significant factor at all resolutions, its impact on performance becomes more pronounced at lower resolutions where the CPU can feed it more frames. The RTX 4070 Ti's 12 GB VRAM appears to be adequate for this title, as no data suggests memory capacity becomes a limiting factor at any tested setting.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti achieves a rank of 298 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the 90th percentile of all recorded configurations, which is a strong result given the large number of possible CPU-GPU pairings. The rank of 298 means that roughly 2698 other combinations performed worse, while only 297 performed better. This is a notable position for a mid-range to high-end pairing, suggesting that the balance between the CPU and GPU is well-suited for this particular game.

To put this rank in perspective, the CPU's percentile ranking against all CPUs is 94, and the GPU's percentile ranking against all GPUs is 84. The combo rank of 298 out of 2996 is roughly equivalent to the 90th percentile, which is higher than the GPU's individual percentile but lower than the CPU's individual percentile. This indicates that the GPU is the more limiting factor in this pairing for Microsoft Flight Simulator, as the CPU has more headroom relative to its peers than the GPU does. The data supports this interpretation: at 3840x2160 Ultra, the average FPS is 64, which suggests the GPU is working near its limits, whereas at 1920x1080 Low, the average FPS of 193 indicates the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with a high number of frames.

The nearest rivals for the CPU include the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (0.2% delta), Intel Core i7-14700KF (-0.2% delta), AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (0.7% delta), and Intel Core i7-14700K (0.9% delta). These are all high-end processors, and the Ryzen 7 9700F sits comfortably among them in terms of average benchmark score. For the GPU, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile (-0.8% delta), AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT (-1.3% delta), NVIDIA RTX A6000 (1.6% delta), and Intel Arc A730M (-1.7% delta). The GPU's average score of 44795 is slightly lower than two of these rivals, but higher than the other two. Overall, the combo rank reflects the combined performance of these two components, and the 298 out of 2996 result confirms their compatibility for this flight simulator.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the combo shows a wide range of performance depending on the settings preset. With Low settings, the average FPS is 193, which is the highest figure recorded for this combo. Medium settings produce an average of 150 FPS, with a minimum of 128 and a maximum of 173. High settings yield an average of 113 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to an average of 108 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 85 FPS, indicating that the game's visual fidelity settings have a substantial impact on performance when the resolution is not the bottleneck. The minimum FPS data for the Medium preset shows that even in the most demanding scenes, the frame rate stays above 120 FPS, which is smooth for a flight simulator.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down as expected. Low settings deliver an average of 156 FPS, which is still very high. Medium settings produce an average of 121 FPS, with a minimum of 103 and a maximum of 139. High settings average 91 FPS, and Ultra settings average 87 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 69 FPS, which is smaller than at 1080p but still significant. The Medium preset's minimum of 103 FPS suggests that this resolution and settings combination is well within the capabilities of the hardware, providing a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold. The data shows that at 1440p, the combo can handle the game with high frame rates even on the most demanding presets.

At 3840x2160, the highest resolution tested, the performance drops considerably. Low settings average 115 FPS, which is still playable, but the higher presets show more strain. Medium settings average 89 FPS, with a minimum of 76 and a maximum of 103. High settings average 67 FPS, and Ultra settings average 64 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 51 FPS, which is the smallest gap across the three resolutions. This indicates that at 4K, the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck, and the settings presets have less relative impact on frame rate. The minimum FPS of 76 on Medium settings shows that even at this resolution, the combo can maintain a frame rate above 60 FPS, though the Ultra preset's average of 64 FPS is close to that threshold.

The overall pattern across all resolutions is that the combo performs best at 1080p and 1440p, where it can achieve very high frame rates on most settings. At 4K, it remains capable of playable performance, but the margin for error is smaller. The measured data includes no minimum or maximum FPS values for the Low, High, and Ultra presets, only averages, which limits the analysis of frame time consistency for those settings. However, the available data for the Medium preset at each resolution shows that the minimum FPS is consistently above 75, which suggests stable performance.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Granite Ridge. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process by TSMC and has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The CPU has a TDP of 65 watts and supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU's Passmark multithread score is 36470, and its single-thread score is 4691. It also achieves notable scores in specific workloads, such as 421988 in data compression and 21488 in data encryption.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is critical for handling the complex flight dynamics, AI traffic, and world simulation. The data shows that at lower resolutions, the CPU has a significant impact on performance. At 1920x1080 Low, the average FPS of 193 is likely limited by the CPU's ability to process the simulation logic, as the GPU has more than enough headroom to render frames at that speed. The CPU's 8 cores and 16 threads are well-suited for this workload, as the game can utilize multiple threads for different subsystems. The boost clock of 5.50 GHz provides high single-thread performance, which is important for the main simulation thread.

Compared to its nearest rivals, the Ryzen 7 9700F performs within a narrow range. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX has an average score that is 0.2% higher, while the Intel Core i7-14700KF is 0.2% lower. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X is 0.7% higher, and the Intel Core i7-14700K is 0.9% higher. These deltas are all under 1%, indicating that the Ryzen 7 9700F is essentially on par with these other high-end CPUs in terms of overall benchmark performance. For a flight simulator that relies heavily on CPU performance, this means the 9700F is not a weak link in the combo.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 94 against all CPUs further underscores its capability. It outperforms 94% of all processors in the database, which aligns with the combo's overall rank of 298 out of 2996. The CPU's architecture and clock speeds are well-matched to the demands of Microsoft Flight Simulator, and the data suggests that it does not bottleneck the RTX 4070 Ti except perhaps at the lowest resolution and settings, where the frame rates are extremely high. The 65-watt TDP is also a notable feature, as it indicates the CPU can deliver this level of performance without requiring excessive cooling or power delivery.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience depends on the resolution and the user's preference for visual fidelity versus frame rate. At 1920x1080, the High settings preset provides an average of 113 FPS, which is a strong balance between visual quality and performance. The Ultra preset only drops to 108 FPS, so the difference between High and Ultra is minimal at this resolution. For users who prioritize maximum frame rates, the Low preset at 193 FPS is available, but the visual compromise is significant. The Medium preset at 150 FPS is a good middle ground for those who want a high frame rate without the low-quality visuals.

At 2560x1440, the High settings preset delivers an average of 91 FPS, which is still quite smooth. The Ultra preset averages 87 FPS, which is only 4 FPS lower, making Ultra a viable choice for users with 1440p monitors who want the best visuals without sacrificing much performance. The Medium preset at 121 FPS is also excellent, providing a substantial frame rate buffer for more demanding scenes. The Low preset at 156 FPS is available for competitive or simulation-focused users who want the highest frame rates possible, but the quality loss may not be worth it for a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, where visual immersion is a key part of the experience.

At 3840x2160, the recommendations are different. The Medium settings preset averages 89 FPS, which is the best balance of quality and performance at this resolution. The High preset at 67 FPS is still playable, and the Ultra preset at 64 FPS is right at the edge of what many consider acceptable. The Low preset at 115 FPS offers a high frame rate, but the visual sacrifices are substantial. For 4K users, the Medium preset is the safest recommendation, as it maintains an average FPS above 60 and has a minimum of 76 FPS, ensuring that even the most complex scenes remain smooth.

Across all resolutions, the Medium settings preset consistently offers a strong balance. At 1080p, it delivers 150 FPS, at 1440p it delivers 121 FPS, and at 4K it delivers 89 FPS, all with minimum FPS values above 75. This makes Medium the most versatile setting for this combo. For users who want to maximize visual quality, the Ultra preset is viable at 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K it should be used with caution, as the average FPS of 64 is close to the 60 FPS threshold. The data clearly shows that the combo is most comfortable at 1440p and below, where it can handle even the highest settings with ease, while at 4K, users should be prepared to accept either Medium settings for smoothness or High/Ultra for visuals with a lower frame rate.