Microsoft Flight Simulator

# CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F sits at the heart of this build, built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Granite Ridge codename, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. This is an 8-core, 16-thread desktop processor with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, running on the AMD Socket AM5 platform. The CPU's 65 W TDP is notable for a high-core-count part, and it supports DDR5 memory through a dual-channel interface with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a 32 MB shared L3 pool, which is relevant for simulation workloads that repeatedly access terrain and aircraft data.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is substantial because the game constantly streams and processes world geometry, weather systems, and flight dynamics. The PassMark multithread score of 36470, combined with a single-thread score of 4691, indicates a balanced performer that can handle both the heavily threaded simulation logic and the single-threaded rendering tasks. The CPU's percentile rank of 94 against all CPUs places it in the top tier, meaning it outclasses the vast majority of installed processors. Its average benchmark score of 69996 positions it within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (69875) and 0.7% above the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (69515), while it trails the Intel Core i7-14700KF (70163) by 0.2% and the Intel Core i7-14700K (69355) by 0.9%. These margins are negligible in real-world terms, so the 9700F is essentially on par with those flagship rivals from a generation prior.

The boost clock of 5.50 GHz is particularly relevant for Flight Simulator's frame pacing, as the game's main thread often becomes the bottleneck at higher settings. Higher boost clocks translate to better minimum frame consistency, even if average FPS is governed by the GPU. The CPU's 16 threads also help with background tasks like scenery loading and AI traffic, which can cause hitches if the processor is oversubscribed. The data shows that at 1080p Low settings, the combo achieves 106 FPS, which is the highest measured frame rate, suggesting that the CPU is not the primary limiter at that resolution and setting combination. Instead, the GPU begins to dominate as resolution and settings increase, but the CPU's headroom ensures that frame drops are minimized when flying over dense urban areas or during rapid camera movements.

# GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is the graphics component, built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB207 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. This is a compact GPU with 16,900 million transistors on a 149 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 113.4 million per square millimeter. The GPU features 2560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units, along with 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores. Clock speeds are set at a base of 2317 MHz and a boost of 2572 MHz, while the memory operates at 2500 MHz, translating to 20 Gbps effective. The memory configuration is 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 320.0 GB/s. This is a dual-slot card with a 130 W TDP, requiring a single 8-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU, and it connects via PCIe 5.0 x8.

The RTX 5050's percentile rank of 66 against all GPUs shows it sits in the upper-middle tier, and its average benchmark score of 21035 is nearly identical to its nearest rivals. The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21153) is 0.6% faster, the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21237) is 1% faster, and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (21379) is 1.6% faster, while the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20713) is 1.6% slower. This clustering indicates that the RTX 5050's raw compute performance is competitive with older mid-range parts, but its modern architecture and features may give it an edge in specific workloads.

In Flight Simulator, the GPU's role is primarily to render the detailed cockpit, terrain textures, and lighting effects. The 8 GB VRAM is a critical factor at higher resolutions and settings, as the game can easily exceed this capacity with ultra textures and high-resolution terrain. The measured FPS data shows that at 4K Ultra, the combo manages 35 FPS, which is clearly GPU-limited. At 1080p Low, the same combo achieves 106 FPS, indicating that the GPU can push high frame rates when the rendering load is reduced. The GPU's memory bandwidth of 320.0 GB/s is moderate, and at 4K with High settings, the average FPS drops to 37, showing that the memory subsystem and compute throughput are both strained. The boost clock of 2572 MHz helps maintain performance, but the 8 GB VRAM limit is likely the reason why Ultra settings at any resolution produce significantly lower scores than Medium, as the game may be swapping textures in and out of system memory.

# FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The Ryzen 7 9700F has an average benchmark score of 69996, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (69875), 0.7% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (69515), and 0.9% higher than the Intel Core i7-14700K (69355). It is 0.2% lower than the Intel Core i7-14700KF (70163).

Q: What is the highest measured average FPS for this combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 106, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. The next highest is 85 FPS at 2560x1440 Low, followed by 82 FPS at 1920x1080 Medium.

Q: How does the RTX 5050's performance compare to the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT?

A: The RTX 5050 has an average benchmark score of 21035, which is 1.6% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT's score of 20713. This places the RTX 5050 slightly ahead in raw benchmark terms.

Q: What is the lowest measured average FPS for this combo, and at what settings?

A: The lowest measured average FPS is 35, achieved at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings. The next lowest is 37 FPS at 3840x2160 High, followed by 48 FPS at 2560x1440 Ultra.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU appear to be the limiting factor at 1080p with Medium settings?

A: At 1920x1080 Medium, the combo achieves 82 FPS with a minimum of 70 and maximum of 95. This relatively wide range suggests that neither component is fully saturated, but the CPU's single-thread performance is likely handling the simulation logic while the GPU renders the scene. The fact that 1080p Low reaches 106 FPS indicates the GPU is not the bottleneck at lower settings.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations in this game?

A: The combo ranks 1814 out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the 60th percentile of tested systems. This indicates that while it performs adequately, there are many faster combos available.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for this combo covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160) and four settings levels (Low, Medium, High, and Ultra), with average FPS values for all combinations and minimum/maximum FPS for Medium settings only.

At 1920x1080, the lowest settings yield the highest performance: Low averages 106 FPS, Medium averages 82 FPS with a range of 70 to 95, High averages 62 FPS, and Ultra averages 59 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 24 FPS, which is substantial, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 3 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset adds marginal visual quality at a small performance cost. Notably, the Medium preset's minimum of 70 FPS is still above the High average of 62 FPS, meaning that even the lows in Medium are smoother than the average in High.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds but with lower absolute values: Low averages 85 FPS, Medium averages 66 FPS with a range of 57 to 76, High averages 50 FPS, and Ultra averages 48 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium is 19 FPS, while the difference between High and Ultra narrows to just 2 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 57 FPS is above the High average of 50 FPS, reinforcing the idea that Medium provides a more consistent experience than High.

At 3840x2160, performance drops significantly: Low averages 63 FPS, Medium averages 49 FPS with a range of 42 to 56, High averages 37 FPS, and Ultra averages 35 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 14 FPS, while High and Ultra are nearly identical with a 2 FPS difference. At 4K, even Low settings only achieve 63 FPS, which is below the 1080p Medium result of 82 FPS, showing the heavy toll that 4K resolution takes on the GPU.

The trend across resolutions is clear: the scaling from 1080p to 1440p results in roughly a 20% FPS drop for each settings level, while scaling from 1440p to 4K results in a further 25-30% drop. The Medium preset is the only one with min/max data, and the spread between min and max is consistent at around 14 FPS across all resolutions, suggesting that the game's frame pacing is stable regardless of resolution.

# How This Combo Ranks

This combo ranks 1814 out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator, which places it in the 60th percentile of all tested systems. This is a mid-pack ranking, indicating that while the Ryzen 7 9700F and RTX 5050 are capable components, they do not lead the pack in this specific game. The rank of 1814 means there are 1813 combos that perform better, and 1182 that perform worse. Given that the CPU is highly ranked (94th percentile) and the GPU is moderately ranked (66th percentile), the combo's overall ranking is dragged down by the GPU's relative weakness.

The CPU's high percentile suggests that it is not the limiting factor in most scenarios, and the GPU's lower percentile means that upgrading the graphics card would likely yield the largest performance gains. The fact that the combo ranks in the 60th percentile of all systems, while the GPU ranks in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, indicates that the game is more GPU-bound than CPU-bound for this configuration. The CPU's strong single-thread score of 4691 and multithread score of 36470 provide a solid foundation, but the RTX 5050's 8 GB VRAM and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth are the primary constraints at higher settings.

In practical terms, this ranking means that users with this combo will experience playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p with Medium settings, but will struggle at 4K with High or Ultra presets. The combo's position in the middle of the pack suggests that it is a balanced entry-level to mid-range system, suitable for 1080p gaming with high frame rates and 1440p gaming with medium settings, but not for enthusiast-level 4K experiences.

# Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset provides the best balance between visual fidelity and performance across all three resolutions. At 1080p, Medium averages 82 FPS with a minimum of 70 and maximum of 95, which is well within the smooth range for a flight simulator. The minimum of 70 FPS ensures that even during complex scenes, the game remains responsive. At 1440p, Medium averages 66 FPS with a minimum of 57, which is still playable, though the minimum dips close to the 60 FPS threshold. At 4K, Medium averages 49 FPS with a minimum of 42, which is borderline playable but may feel choppy during fast maneuvers.

The Low preset is the only one that consistently delivers 60 FPS or above at all resolutions, with 106 FPS at 1080p, 85 FPS at 1440p, and 63 FPS at 4K. However, Low settings significantly reduce the visual quality of terrain and aircraft models, which detracts from the immersive experience that Flight Simulator is known for. The High and Ultra presets offer marginal visual improvements over Medium but come with substantial FPS penalties: at 1080p, High drops to 62 FPS and Ultra to 59 FPS, while at 1440p, High drops to 50 FPS and Ultra to 48 FPS. At 4K, High and Ultra are nearly identical at 37 and 35 FPS respectively, making them impractical for smooth gameplay.

For users prioritizing smoothness, the Medium preset at 1080p or 1440p is the recommended choice. At 1080p, Medium offers a 32 FPS improvement over High and a 23 FPS improvement over Ultra, while at 1440p, the improvement is 16 FPS over High and 18 FPS over Ultra. The Medium preset's minimum FPS values are also higher than the High or Ultra averages, ensuring a more consistent experience. For users with 4K displays, the Low preset is the only viable option for maintaining 60 FPS, but Medium is acceptable for those willing to tolerate occasional dips below 50 FPS.

# Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is substantial across all settings, revealing the limiting component in this system. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 106 at 1080p to 85 at 1440p (a 20% decrease) and then to 63 at 4K (a 26% decrease from 1440p). At Medium settings, the drop is from 82 at 1080p to 66 at 1440p (a 20% decrease) and then to 49 at 4K (a 26% decrease). At High settings, the drop is from 62 at 1080p to 50 at 1440p (a 19% decrease) and then to 37 at 4K (a 26% decrease). At Ultra settings, the drop is from 59 at 1080p to 48 at 1440p (a 19% decrease) and then to 35 at 4K (a 27% decrease).

The consistent 20% drop from 1080p to 1440p and the 26-27% drop from 1440p to 4K indicate that the GPU is the primary limiting factor as resolution increases. The RTX 5050's 8 GB VRAM and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth are likely the main constraints, as higher resolutions require more memory capacity and bandwidth for texture storage and rendering. The CPU's performance is not significantly affected by resolution changes, so the FPS scaling is primarily a function of the GPU's rendering capabilities.

The fact that the FPS drops are similar across all settings levels suggests that the GPU is consistently the bottleneck, even at Low settings where the rendering load is reduced. At 1080p Low, the GPU is able to push 106 FPS, but as resolution increases, the GPU's compute throughput and memory bandwidth are exhausted. The CPU, with its high single-thread score, is not the limiting factor even at 1080p Low, as evidenced by the 106 FPS result being the highest in the dataset. This tells us that to improve performance at higher resolutions, a GPU upgrade would be necessary, while the CPU has headroom to support a more powerful graphics card.