Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator presents one of the most demanding rendering workloads in modern PC gaming, and the pairing of the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER produces a revealing dataset. The measured frames per second across resolutions and presets show a system where the graphics card is the clear limiting factor, while the processor’s substantial cache and high clock speeds ensure that frame pacing remains consistent. This analysis walks through the resolution scaling, CPU and GPU roles, and provides specific settings recommendations based solely on the measured data.

Resolution Scaling

The progression from 1080p to 4K shows a steep and consistent performance drop, indicating a GPU-bound scenario at every preset. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 101 at 1920x1080 to 81.9 at 2560x1440, a reduction of 19.1 FPS, and then to 56 at 3840x2160, which is 45 FPS below the 1080p result. This pattern confirms that pixel throughput is the dominant constraint; the RTX 2060 SUPER’s 7.181 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 448.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth are being saturated as resolution increases.

The scaling becomes more severe at higher presets. At Ultra settings, the average FPS drops from 55.8 at 1080p to 46.6 at 1440p, and finally to 30.5 at 4K. The percentage loss from 1080p to 4K at Ultra is roughly 45%, while at Low settings the loss is approximately 44.5%. This similarity across presets suggests that resolution scaling is independent of the quality level; the GPU’s fillrate and memory subsystem are the bottlenecks regardless of whether the scene complexity is minimal or maximum. The data shows that 4K gaming is only viable at Low settings, where the 56 average FPS approaches playability, while 1080p remains the only resolution where Ultra settings exceed 55 FPS.

The fact that the 1440p Ultra result (46.6 FPS) is closer to the 4K Low result (56 FPS) than to the 1080p Ultra result (55.8 FPS) indicates that the GPU’s compute resources scale nearly linearly with pixel count. There is no evidence of a CPU-induced plateau at lower resolutions, as the 1080p Low score of 101 FPS is the highest in the entire dataset, demonstrating that the Ryzen 7 9800X3D can feed the GPU well beyond its limits.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this combo?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 101, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only configuration in the dataset that breaks the 100 FPS barrier, indicating that the RTX 2060 SUPER is the limiting factor for higher frame rates.

Q: Can this system run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, where the average FPS is 56. At Medium settings, the average drops to 44.9, and at High it falls to 35.2. Ultra at 4K produces an average of 30.5 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth simulation gameplay.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 1440p at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 59.2 at 1920x1080 to 49 at 2560x1440, a reduction of 10.2 FPS or approximately 17%. This loss is consistent with the GPU being the primary bottleneck, as the CPU has ample headroom with its 96 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which preset provides the best balance of visual quality and frame rate at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Medium settings yield an average of 63.8 FPS, while High produces 49 FPS. The Medium preset offers a 14.8 FPS advantage over High, making it the recommended choice for maintaining playable frame rates without sacrificing all visual fidelity.

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 9800X3D holding back the RTX 2060 SUPER?

A: The data suggests no CPU bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 101 FPS, which is far above the GPU’s capability at higher settings. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 34004 and single-core score of 4800 indicate it can handle the simulation’s physics and AI workloads without limiting the GPU.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings average 101 FPS, while Ultra averages 55.8 FPS. This represents a 45.2 FPS difference, or roughly 81% higher performance at Low. The gap narrows at higher resolutions, reinforcing that the GPU is the performance ceiling.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is a desktop processor with 8 cores and 16 threads, based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge). It operates at a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, with a 120 W TDP. For a flight simulator like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which relies heavily on single-thread performance for physics and flight dynamics, the CPU’s 3DMark single-thread score of 1212 and Passmark single-thread score of 4430 are critical. The measured FPS data shows no signs of CPU limitation; even at 1080p Low, where the GPU is least stressed, the system achieves 101 FPS, indicating the processor can maintain high instruction throughput.

The processor’s 96 MB of shared L3 cache is particularly relevant for this game, as flight simulators often stream large amounts of terrain and scenery data. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 10081 and max-thread score of 10067 show strong multi-core scaling, which helps with the game’s background tasks like weather simulation and AI traffic. Compared to its nearest rivals, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D has an average benchmark score of 37780, placing it just 0.1% behind the Intel Xeon 6353P (37811) and 0.1% behind the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 (37831), while being 0.6% behind the Intel Core i9-13900HK (38020) and 0.7% behind the Intel Core i5-13600KF (38028). These small deltas confirm that the CPU is not the differentiator in this GPU-bound scenario.

The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5 interface is sufficient for feeding the RTX 2060 SUPER, as evidenced by the consistent FPS scaling across resolutions. The processor’s 90th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 37780, further underscores its capability. In this specific game, the CPU’s role is to ensure that frame times are stable, which the data supports: the minimum FPS values are not reported, but the average FPS at 1080p Low (101) is not far from the GPU’s theoretical maximum, suggesting no CPU-induced stuttering.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full range of presets is playable. Low settings produce an average of 101 FPS, Medium drops to 77.6, High falls to 59.2, and Ultra bottoms out at 55.8. The step from Low to Medium is a 23.4 FPS reduction, while the step from Medium to High is 18.4 FPS, and from High to Ultra is only 3.4 FPS. This diminishing return suggests that Ultra at 1080p is not worth the performance cost over High, as the visual uplift is minimal relative to the frame rate loss.

At 2560x1440, the results shift downward. Low averages 81.9 FPS, Medium 63.8, High 49, and Ultra 46.6. The gap between High and Ultra narrows to just 2.4 FPS, making High the more sensible choice for 1440p gaming. The 1440p Low result of 81.9 FPS is still smooth, but the Medium preset at 63.8 FPS offers a better balance for users with 144Hz monitors who want some visual enhancements.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is heavily strained. Low averages 56 FPS, Medium 44.9, High 35.2, and Ultra 30.5. Even at Low, the frame rate is below the 60 FPS target, indicating that 4K is only viable for users who prioritize resolution over smoothness. The difference between Medium and High is 9.7 FPS, while the difference between High and Ultra is 4.7 FPS. The data clearly shows that the RTX 2060 SUPER is not designed for 4K simulation, as its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 256-bit bus are insufficient for the high-resolution textures required by the game.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is a Turing architecture GPU with 2176 shading units and 64 ROPs. It has a base clock of 1470 MHz and a boost clock of 1650 MHz, with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU’s role is to render vast landscapes, complex lighting, and volumetric clouds. The measured FPS data shows that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at all resolutions above 1080p Low.

The GPU’s Passmark G3D score of 16462 places it at the 63rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19774. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070, scores 19680, which is 0.5% lower, while the GTX TITAN scores 19706, 0.3% lower. These small deltas confirm that the RTX 2060 SUPER is positioned at the lower end of the 20-series stack, which explains its struggle at 4K. The GPU’s FP32 performance of 7.181 TFLOPS is modest by modern standards, and the 14.36 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) rate does not help in this game, which does not leverage FP16 for rendering.

The VRAM capacity of 8 GB is a limiting factor at 4K Ultra, where the average FPS of 30.5 suggests that texture streaming is causing the GPU to spill over its memory pool. The 448.0 GB/s bandwidth is also insufficient for 4K resolution, as the pixel rate of 105.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 224.4 GTexel/s are being taxed heavily. The data indicates that the RTX 2060 SUPER is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it can maintain playable frame rates at medium-to-high settings, but it lacks the headroom for 4K simulation without significant compromises.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience depends on the user’s display resolution and frame rate preference. For 1920x1080, the High preset at 59.2 FPS is the best choice for visual fidelity, as it provides a smooth experience close to 60 FPS. Users with 144Hz monitors may prefer Medium at 77.6 FPS, which sacrifices some shadows and texture detail but offers a 31% frame rate boost. Ultra at 1080p (55.8 FPS) is not recommended, as the 3.4 FPS gain over High is negligible.

For 2560x1440, the Medium preset at 63.8 FPS is the standout recommendation. It provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS while maintaining decent visual quality. The High preset at 49 FPS is acceptable for users who prioritize graphics over smoothness, but the 14.8 FPS difference is substantial. Low at 81.9 FPS is only advisable for competitive or high-refresh-rate play, where frame rate is paramount.

For 3840x2160, the only viable option is Low at 56 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS threshold. Medium at 44.9 FPS is playable but noticeably less fluid, while High and Ultra are too demanding. Users with 4K displays should consider lowering the resolution to 1440p and using Medium settings for a better balance, as the 4K Low result is not significantly better than 1440p Medium (63.8 FPS) in terms of overall experience. The data strongly suggests that 1080p Medium or High is the sweet spot for this hardware combination, offering the best trade-off between visual quality and performance.