Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the AMD Ryzen 7 9700X and AMD Radeon RX 9060 reveals a classic GPU-bound scaling pattern as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the combo delivers 111 FPS, which drops to 89 FPS at 1440p Low (a 19.8% reduction) and further to 66 FPS at 4K Low (a 40.5% reduction from 1080p). This steep decline indicates that the Radeon RX 9060’s rendering throughput is the primary constraint at higher resolutions, as the CPU’s headroom cannot compensate for the increased pixel workload.

The scaling behavior becomes more pronounced at higher settings. Moving from 1080p High (65 FPS) to 1440p High (52 FPS) represents a 20% drop, while 4K High (39 FPS) is 40% lower than 1080p High. This consistent ~20% penalty per resolution step across all settings strongly suggests that the GPU’s fill rate and shading capacity—not the CPU—are the limiting factors. The Ryzen 7 9700X, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, provides ample processing power for the simulation’s physics and AI workloads, but the RX 9060’s 64 ROPs and 1792 shading units become saturated as pixel count quadruples from 1080p to 4K.

Interestingly, the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows as resolution increases. At 1080p, Ultra (62 FPS) is 44% slower than Low (111 FPS), but at 4K, Ultra (37 FPS) is only 44% slower than Low (66 FPS) as well—the percentage remains constant, though the absolute delta shrinks from 49 FPS to 29 FPS. This indicates that the GPU is already near its limits at 4K Low, leaving little additional headroom for higher graphical fidelity. The data suggests that for 4K gaming, users should expect sub-60 FPS performance across all settings, with only Low presets approaching playable frame rates.

The 1440p results offer a more balanced picture. Medium settings at 1440p yield 69 FPS average with a minimum of 59 FPS and maximum of 80 FPS, suggesting that this resolution provides the best compromise between visual quality and smoothness. The 4K Medium results (51 FPS average, 44-59 FPS range) are borderline for smooth flight simulation, where consistent frame pacing matters more than peak performance.

# FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU-GPU combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: Based on the measured data, 2560x1440 offers the most playable experience. At 1440p Medium, the combo achieves 69 FPS average with a 59-80 FPS range, while 4K Ultra drops to 37 FPS and 1080p Ultra reaches 62 FPS. The 1440p resolution balances visual fidelity with smoothness, avoiding the sub-60 FPS territory seen at 4K.

Q: How does the RX 9060 perform relative to its closest GPU rivals?

A: The RX 9060 has an average benchmark score of 16014, placing it 0.7% below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (16129) and 1% above both the AMD Radeon R9 370X (15862) and AMD Radeon RX 7700 (15852). It sits 2.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (15679). In this game, the RX 9060’s 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth handle the flight simulator’s textures adequately at 1080p and 1440p.

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 9700X a bottleneck for the RX 9060 in this game?

A: No, the data indicates the opposite. The Ryzen 7 9700X scores 20485 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 2211 in single-core, with a 3DMark max threads score of 9771. The FPS scaling pattern—where performance drops proportionally with resolution—points to the GPU as the limiting factor. The CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads provide sufficient headroom for flight simulation’s single-threaded rendering plus multi-threaded physics.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1080p Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the combo achieves an average of 62 FPS. This is slightly below the 65 FPS at High settings and 86 FPS at Medium, but still above the 60 FPS threshold that most flight simulation enthusiasts consider acceptable for smooth gameplay.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X + AMD Radeon RX 9060 combination ranks 1712 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the 43rd percentile. This means roughly 57% of tested combos perform better, reflecting the RX 9060’s mid-range positioning (59th percentile among all GPUs) rather than CPU limitations.

Q: Does the RX 9060’s 8 GB VRAM cause issues at 4K?

A: The measured data shows significant performance drops at 4K—from 66 FPS at Low to 37 FPS at Ultra—but does not indicate VRAM-related stalls. The 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth appears sufficient for the tested settings, as the FPS decline follows a consistent pattern across resolution steps rather than showing anomalous crashes or stutters.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 9060’s specifications directly explain its performance profile in Microsoft Flight Simulator. With 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus delivering 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, the card has enough memory throughput for the game’s terrain streaming and photogrammetry data at 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K results suggest bandwidth pressure. The GPU’s 64 ROPs and 112 TMUs process pixel and texture data at rates of 191.4 GPixel/s and 334.9 GTexel/s respectively, which are moderate figures that align with the observed 4K performance ceiling of 66 FPS at Low settings.

The clock behavior of the RX 9060 is noteworthy. With a base clock of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2990 MHz, the card has a wide dynamic range. In flight simulation—where scenes alternate between dense cityscapes and open skies—the GPU can boost to higher clocks during less demanding moments, but sustained workloads at 4K Ultra (37 FPS) likely hold clocks near the game clock rather than the boost maximum. The 21.43 TFLOPS FP32 compute throughput provides adequate shader processing for the game’s lighting and shadow effects, but the 4K Ultra result of 37 FPS indicates that this compute capacity is insufficient for maximum settings at high resolution.

The RDNA 4.0 architecture, built on TSMC’s 4 nm process with 29,700 million transistors across a 199 mm² die, offers efficient performance-per-watt. The card’s 132 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU requirement are modest, and the dual-slot design with a single 8-pin connector keeps installation straightforward. The 28 RT cores support ray-traced effects, though the measured FPS data does not include ray tracing scenarios, so their impact on flight simulation remains untested in this dataset.

The GPU’s benchmark scores contextualize its gaming performance. A Passmark G3D score of 17631 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3322 indicate mid-range positioning, consistent with the 59th percentile among all GPUs. The nearest rivals—RTX 3060 Ti (0.7% higher avg score) and RX 7700 (1% lower)—suggest that the RX 9060 competes with last-generation mid-range offerings. In Microsoft Flight Simulator specifically, the measured FPS aligns with this positioning: the card delivers playable 1080p performance (62-111 FPS) and acceptable 1440p performance (50-89 FPS), but struggles at 4K where even Low settings dip to 66 FPS.

# Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS dataset provides a comprehensive view of how this combo performs across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the results are consistently playable. Low settings deliver 111 FPS average, Medium achieves 86 FPS (with a 73-99 FPS range), High reaches 65 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 62 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 49 FPS, representing a 44% performance penalty for maximum visual quality at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance drops are proportional but still manageable. Low settings yield 89 FPS, Medium delivers 69 FPS (59-80 FPS range), High reaches 52 FPS, and Ultra achieves 50 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 39 FPS, or a 44% reduction—the same percentage as 1080p, confirming the GPU-bound scaling. Notably, the 1440p Medium result of 69 FPS offers a better experience than 1080p Ultra’s 62 FPS, suggesting that resolution scaling is more impactful than settings tweaks for this card.

At 3840x2160, the results reveal the card’s limitations. Low settings produce 66 FPS, which is only 6 FPS above the 60 FPS threshold. Medium drops to 51 FPS (44-59 FPS range), High falls to 39 FPS, and Ultra reaches just 37 FPS. The 4K Low to Ultra spread is 29 FPS, again a 44% reduction. This consistency across resolutions—44% penalty from Low to Ultra at every resolution—strongly indicates that the GPU’s shader and ROP throughput scale linearly with workload, with no unexpected bottlenecks or thermal throttling in the data.

The Medium settings rows include minimum and maximum FPS values, offering insight into frame pacing. At 1080p Medium, the 73-99 FPS range shows a 26 FPS variance, which is 30% of the average—indicating noticeable frame time fluctuations during complex scenes. At 1440p Medium, the 59-80 FPS range shows a 21 FPS variance (30% of average), while 4K Medium’s 44-59 FPS range shows a 15 FPS variance (29% of average). This consistent ~30% variance suggests that flight simulation’s unpredictable scenery loads cause frame drops regardless of resolution, a characteristic of the game engine rather than the hardware.

# How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X + AMD Radeon RX 9060 combination ranks 1712 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the 57th percentile (i.e., 43% of combos are faster). This ranking reflects the GPU’s mid-range position more than the CPU’s capabilities. The Ryzen 7 9700X itself ranks in the 86th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 37943, placing it 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i9-14901E (37911), 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (37904), 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core 5 211E (37829), and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 (37804). This CPU performance is clearly not the limiting factor.

The GPU, however, sits in the 59th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 16014. Its nearest rivals—the RTX 3060 Ti (16129, 0.7% higher), R9 370X (15862, 1% lower), RX 7700 (15852, 1% lower), and Pro W5500 (15679, 2.1% lower)—all fall within a narrow 3% performance band. This clustering indicates that the RX 9060 is firmly in the mid-range segment, and its in-game rank of 1712/2996 aligns with this positioning.

The rank suggests that in Microsoft Flight Simulator, the combo outperforms lower-tier GPUs that might struggle with the game’s heavy draw calls and streaming data, but it falls behind high-end cards that can maintain 4K Ultra frame rates. The 57th percentile ranking in-game, combined with the CPU’s 86th percentile and GPU’s 59th percentile, confirms that the RX 9060 is the bottleneck for this pairing. Upgrading the GPU would yield significant FPS gains, while upgrading the CPU would provide minimal benefit in this title.

# Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1080p users, Medium settings (86 FPS average, 73-99 FPS range) offer the best balance of visual quality and performance. The jump from Medium to High costs 21 FPS (from 86 to 65), while High to Ultra costs only 3 FPS (from 65 to 62). This suggests that High settings may not provide enough visual improvement over Medium to justify the 24% performance loss, but Ultra’s marginal additional cost over High makes it viable for users prioritizing image quality.

At 1440p, Medium settings (69 FPS average, 59-80 FPS range) are the clear recommendation. The 59 FPS minimum ensures that even during the most demanding scenes, the frame rate remains near the 60 FPS target. High settings (52 FPS) and Ultra (50 FPS) both dip below 60 FPS, which can cause noticeable stuttering in a game where smooth panning is critical. Low settings (89 FPS) offer excellent fluidity but sacrifice significant visual fidelity. For users with FreeSync or VRR displays, the 1440p High preset’s 52 FPS could be acceptable, but Medium is the safest choice.

At 4K, no settings preset provides a fully smooth experience. Low (66 FPS) barely exceeds 60 FPS, while Medium (51 FPS), High (39 FPS), and Ultra (37 FPS) all fall short. The 4K Medium result (44-59 FPS range) is borderline, with the minimum dipping below 45 FPS. For 4K users, Low settings are the only option for near-60 FPS gameplay, but the visual compromise is severe. Alternatively, users should consider dropping to 1440p Medium for a significantly better experience, as the 69 FPS average at 1440p Medium is 35% higher than 4K High’s 39 FPS.

The data supports a tiered recommendation: 1080p Medium for maximum smoothness, 1440p Medium as the best overall choice, and 1080p Ultra (62 FPS) for users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate stability. The 1440p Ultra preset (50 FPS) is not recommended, as it provides similar visuals to 1080p Ultra but at 19% lower performance.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X’s specifications and benchmark scores explain why it is not the bottleneck in Microsoft Flight Simulator. With 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge codename), the CPU provides substantial multi-threaded throughput for the game’s simulation logic, AI traffic, and weather systems. The base clock of 3.80 GHz and boost clock of 5.50 GHz ensure strong single-threaded performance, which is critical for flight simulation’s rendering thread. The 32 MB shared L3 cache and 1 MB per-core L2 cache reduce memory latency, while the dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth prevents data starvation for the GPU.

The CPU’s benchmark scores reinforce its capability. A Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20485 and single-core score of 2211 place it among the top desktop processors. The 3DMark scores show scaling from 1280 (single-thread) to 9824 (16 threads), indicating efficient multi-threading. The Geekbench multicore score of 17906 and single-core score of 3023 further confirm its strong performance. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, where the CPU must handle complex flight physics, terrain loading, and AI aircraft, the Ryzen 7 9700X has ample headroom—the observed FPS scaling with resolution proves that the GPU is the limiting component.

The CPU’s 86th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 37943, places it just 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i9-14901E and AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370. This tight competition indicates that the 9700X is at the top of its performance class. The 65 W TDP and 4 nm process (TSMC) allow sustained boost clocks without thermal throttling, which is essential for maintaining consistent frame times in a simulation game that can run for hours. The PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes provides ample bandwidth for the RX 9060’s PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, ensuring no data transfer bottlenecks between CPU and GPU.

The lack of 3D V-Cache on this chip does not appear to hurt performance in this game, as the FPS data does not show anomalous drops that would indicate cache misses during terrain streaming. The 8,315 million transistors on a 70.6 mm² die represent a dense design that delivers high IPC, and the 3DMark 16-thread score of 9824 versus max-threads score of 9771 shows that the chip scales efficiently with thread count. For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the Ryzen 7 9700X provides a solid foundation that allows the RX 9060 to operate without CPU-induced frame drops, as evidenced by the consistent FPS deltas across resolution changes.