Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator presents an unusual challenge for hardware analysis, demanding immense fidelity from both the CPU and GPU simultaneously. This entry examines the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER, a combination that sits at a specific performance tier. The data reveals a system capable of high frame rates, but the scaling patterns expose where its bottlenecks truly lie. This analysis will dissect the measured FPS across resolutions and settings to understand the character of this specific pairing.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for this combo shows a clear and predictable trend: as resolution increases, average frame rates fall. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 209 FPS. Moving to 1440p drops that to 169 FPS, and at 4K, it further descends to 125 FPS. This represents a 40% decrease in performance from 1080p to 4K at the lowest settings, indicating that the workload is scaling significantly with pixel count, even when graphical complexity is minimal.

However, the story changes dramatically when we examine the highest settings. At Ultra settings, the average FPS at 1080p is 117. At 1440p, it's 94 FPS, and at 4K, it falls to 69 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 4K here is 41%, which is proportionally similar to the Low setting drop. Yet, the absolute numbers are much lower, suggesting that the Ultra preset introduces a heavy, resolution-independent load that taxes the system regardless of pixel count.

The data implies a dual-bottleneck scenario. At Low settings, the system is likely more CPU-bound, as the GPU has less work to do. The fact that 1080p Low yields 209 FPS while 4K Low yields 125 FPS suggests the CPU can still feed the GPU at high rates, but the GPU's rendering capacity is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. Conversely, at Ultra settings, the gap between 1080p and 4K is smaller in percentage terms, but the overall performance is lower, indicating that the CPU's ability to process the complex simulation logic is a more significant constraint.

The scaling between Medium and High settings is also informative. At 4K, Medium averages 97 FPS, while High averages 73 FPS. This 24 FPS difference is substantial, highlighting that the jump from Medium to High includes a considerable increase in graphical fidelity that has a direct and measurable impact on frame rate. This pattern repeats at 1440p and 1080p, confirming that the High preset is a significant performance hurdle for this combo.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific configuration of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER holds a combo rank of 180 out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the top 6% of all tested systems, a strong showing that underscores its high-end pedigree. The data indicates this is a formidable pairing for this title, capable of delivering playable performance at the most demanding settings.

The rank is a composite measure, but the individual component benchmarks help contextualize it. The CPU, with a Passmark multithread score of 36470, sits in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (0.2% faster) and the Intel Core i7-14700KF (0.2% slower), showing it's in the top tier of processing power. The GPU, with a Passmark G3D score of 34245, is in the 86th percentile, with its nearest rival being the original RTX 4080, which is only 0.1% slower.

The high combo rank suggests that these two components work well together for this specific game. The CPU's strong single-threaded performance, evidenced by its Passmark single-thread score of 4691, is likely crucial for Flight Simulator's simulation logic. The GPU's substantial memory bandwidth of 736.3 GB/s and 16 GB of VRAM are also key assets. The data shows that this isn't just a collection of powerful parts; it's a balanced system that ranks exceptionally well against other combinations tested in this demanding environment.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the user's target resolution and preference for smoothness over visual fidelity. At 1080p, every preset from Low to Ultra is playable, with the Ultra preset averaging 117 FPS. For users with high-refresh-rate monitors, the Medium preset offers a significant boost to 163 FPS, while High provides a balanced 123 FPS. The data suggests that at 1080p, the Ultra preset is entirely viable for a premium experience.

At 1440p, the situation remains strong. The Ultra preset averages 94 FPS, which is still very smooth for a flight simulator. The High preset at 99 FPS offers nearly identical performance, making the choice between them a matter of visual preference. However, the Medium preset jumps to 131 FPS, providing a more substantial performance buffer. For users prioritizing frame rate, Medium at 1440p is an excellent choice, while those wanting maximum fidelity can comfortably use Ultra.

The 4K resolution is where compromises become necessary. The Ultra preset averages 69 FPS, which is playable but may not be ideal for all users. The High preset drops to 73 FPS, a marginal difference. The Medium preset, however, provides a much more comfortable 97 FPS. The data clearly indicates that for 4K gaming, selecting the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance, nearly reaching the 100 FPS mark while still looking significantly better than the Low preset's 125 FPS. The Low preset at 4K is less recommended, as the visual hit is substantial for a frame rate that is already below what the Medium preset offers.

FAQ

Q: What is the maximum average FPS this combo can achieve at 1080p?

A: The highest average FPS recorded at 1920x1080 is 209, achieved with the Low settings preset.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K with the Ultra preset?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the combo produces an average FPS of 69, with no min or max FPS data recorded.

Q: Is this CPU more powerful than the Intel Core i7-14700KF?

A: Based on the average benchmark score, the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F scores 69996, while the Intel Core i7-14700KF scores 70163, making the Intel part 0.2% faster.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The lowest average FPS in the measured data is 69, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with the Ultra settings preset.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Medium and High settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Medium preset averages 131 FPS, while the High preset averages 99 FPS, a difference of 32 FPS.

Q: Does the RTX 4080 SUPER outperform the standard RTX 4080 in benchmarks?

A: No, the data shows the RTX 4080 SUPER has an average score of 54209, while the RTX 4080 has a score of 54247, making the SUPER 0.1% slower.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER plays a critical role in this combo's performance, particularly at higher resolutions. Its 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and 256-bit memory bus provide a bandwidth of 736.3 GB/s, which is essential for streaming the vast textures and terrain data that Microsoft Flight Simulator requires. The data shows that at 4K, even the Low preset averages 125 FPS, indicating the GPU is capable of immense throughput when not constrained by other factors.

The GPU's core architecture, based on Ada Lovelace, includes 10240 shading units and 80 RT cores. Its boost clock of 2550 MHz helps drive its FP32 performance of 52.22 TFLOPS. These specifications translate to a card that sits in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. Its benchmark scores, such as the 34245 in Passmark G3D, place it in a tight cluster with rivals like the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB, which is only 2.7% faster.

The measured FPS data highlights the GPU's scaling with settings. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 92 FPS (209 to 117), showing the GPU's capability to render at high speed. However, the GPU is also the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. The drop from 1440p High (99 FPS) to 4K High (73 FPS) is a 26 FPS decrease, a clear sign that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are being saturated by the increased pixel workload. The GPU's role is to translate the complex geometry and textures into pixels, and at 4K, this becomes its primary challenge.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is the other half of this equation, and its role is particularly pronounced in a simulation title like this. With 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 5 architecture, it has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. Its Passmark single-thread score of 4691 is a strong indicator of its ability to handle the game's main simulation thread, which is often a bottleneck in flight simulators.

The CPU's performance profile shows it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 69996. Its nearest rivals are all within 1% of its performance, including the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (0.2% faster) and the Intel Core i7-14700K (0.9% faster). This places it at the very top of the consumer CPU hierarchy, making it well-suited for the heavy computational load of Flight Simulator's physics, weather, and AI systems.

The data suggests the CPU's influence is most apparent at lower resolutions and settings. At 1080p Low, the system hits 209 FPS, a figure that is likely limited by the CPU's ability to issue draw calls and update the game world. Even at 4K Low, the 125 FPS is high, but the scaling from 1080p to 4K is less severe than at higher settings, implying the CPU is keeping up with the GPU's demands. Conversely, the performance drop from Medium to Ultra at all resolutions points to a CPU bottleneck, as the increased simulation complexity (more objects, more detailed physics) taxes the processor's cores. The CPU's 32 MB of shared L3 cache is also a key asset for storing the game's active data set.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following is the complete measured FPS data for this combo, showing average, minimum, and maximum frames per second across all tested configurations.

1920x1080:

• Low: Average 209 FPS (no min/max recorded)
• Medium: Average 163 FPS, Minimum 138 FPS, Maximum 187 FPS
• High: Average 123 FPS (no min/max recorded)
• Ultra: Average 117 FPS (no min/max recorded)

2560x1440:

• Low: Average 169 FPS (no min/max recorded)
• Medium: Average 131 FPS, Minimum 112 FPS, Maximum 151 FPS
• High: Average 99 FPS (no min/max recorded)
• Ultra: Average 94 FPS (no min/max recorded)

3840x2160:

• Low: Average 125 FPS (no min/max recorded)
• Medium: Average 97 FPS, Minimum 82 FPS, Maximum 111 FPS
• High: Average 73 FPS (no min/max recorded)
• Ultra: Average 69 FPS (no min/max recorded)

The Medium preset is the only one where min and max FPS data was captured, providing insight into frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the range is 138 to 187 FPS, a 49 FPS spread. At 1440p Medium, the range tightens to 112 to 151 FPS, a 39 FPS spread. At 4K Medium, the range narrows further to 82 to 111 FPS, a 29 FPS spread. This data suggests that as resolution increases, the frame rate becomes more consistent, likely due to the GPU becoming the primary bottleneck and smoothing out CPU-side hitches. The performance hierarchy is consistent across all resolutions: Low > Medium > High > Ultra, with the gap between each step being more pronounced at lower resolutions.