Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator: AMD Ryzen 9 5900X + AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT

This analysis examines measured performance data for Microsoft Flight Simulator using the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X processor paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT graphics card. The dataset includes average FPS readings across three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four quality presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra), providing a comprehensive view of how this combination handles the demanding flight simulator. The combo ranks 604 out of 1795 tested combinations, placing it comfortably above the median for this title.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, though the magnitude of the drop varies significantly by quality preset. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 153.3 at 1080p to 124.9 at 1440p, a reduction of 18.5%, and then to 90.6 at 4K, representing a further 27.5% drop from the 1440p figure. This translates to a total decline of 40.9% from 1080p to 4K at Low settings.

The scaling behavior shifts at Medium settings. Here, 1080p delivers 117.8 FPS, dropping to 92.3 at 1440p (a 21.6% decrease) and then to 70.6 at 4K (a 23.5% decrease from 1440p). The total reduction from 1080p to 4K at Medium is 40.1%, nearly identical to the Low preset's overall scaling.

High settings show a steeper progression. The 1080p result of 89.9 FPS falls to 72.8 at 1440p (a 19.0% drop) and then to 50.2 at 4K (a 31.0% drop from 1440p). The cumulative decline from 1080p to 4K reaches 44.2%, indicating that the GPU becomes more of a limiting factor as visual complexity increases.

Ultra settings exhibit the most pronounced resolution sensitivity. Starting at 87.4 FPS in 1080p, the average drops to 68.8 at 1440p (a 21.3% reduction) and then to 50.8 at 4K (a 26.2% reduction from 1440p). The total 1080p-to-4K decline is 41.9%. Notably, the gap between High and Ultra at 4K is minimal — 50.2 versus 50.8 FPS — suggesting that the Ultra preset's additional demands are nearly offset by the GPU's capabilities at this resolution.

The data indicates that at 1080p, the CPU's strong single-thread performance allows even the Ultra preset to exceed 87 FPS, while at 4K, all presets converge toward the 50-90 FPS range, demonstrating that resolution scaling progressively shifts the bottleneck toward the GPU.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, based on the Navi 21 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, provides the graphics processing for this combination. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus delivers 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which proves sufficient for the high-resolution textures and detailed terrain data that Microsoft Flight Simulator streams. The GPU's boost clock reaches 2250 MHz, with a game clock of 2015 MHz and base clock of 1825 MHz.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it at the 87th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 49982. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Arc A550M at 49737 (0.5% lower), the NVIDIA RTX A1000 at 50826 (1.7% higher), the NVIDIA CMP 50HX at 49071 (1.9% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER at 48704 (2.6% lower). This positioning indicates that the RX 6800 XT performs competitively against these alternatives in synthetic workloads.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator specifically, the GPU's role becomes increasingly dominant as resolution rises. At 4K Ultra, the 50.8 FPS average suggests the GPU is heavily loaded, yet the close proximity to the 4K High result (50.2 FPS) implies that the GPU can handle the additional Ultra settings without catastrophic frame rate loss. The 4K Low result of 90.6 FPS demonstrates that when graphical load is reduced, the GPU has substantial headroom — this figure is 78.3% higher than the 4K Ultra result.

The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) aligns with the game's modern rendering requirements, and its 72 ray tracing cores suggest capability for advanced lighting effects, though the measured data does not isolate ray tracing performance.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 5900X provides 12 cores and 24 threads based on the Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer codename), manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process. Its base clock of 3.70 GHz boosts to 4.80 GHz, and the processor's 64 MB of L3 cache helps maintain smooth frame pacing in simulation workloads that involve complex flight models and dynamic weather systems.

The CPU's benchmark performance is strong across both single-threaded and multi-threaded tests. In Cinebench R23, it scores 4680 in single-core and 33150 in multi-core. The 3DMark tests show scaling from 941 in single-thread to 10075 at max threads, while the 2-thread score of 1852 and 4-thread score of 3588 indicate efficient multi-threading scaling. The PassMark multi-thread score of 39002 and single-thread score of 3469 further reinforce this processor's balanced capabilities.

At the 90th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 39453, the Ryzen 9 5900X sits close to several rivals: the AMD EPYC 4245P at 39383 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS at 39747 (0.7% lower), the Intel Core i7-13700F at 39095 (0.9% higher), and the Intel Core i7-13700 at 39857 (1.0% lower). These margins are narrow, suggesting the 5900X remains competitive with newer processor generations in general benchmarks.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's single-thread performance is crucial, as the simulation engine relies heavily on individual core performance for physics calculations and AI traffic. The 1080p Low result of 153.3 FPS indicates that the CPU can feed the GPU effectively at lower resolutions, while the 1080p Ultra result of 87.4 FPS shows that even at high settings, the CPU does not become a severe bottleneck at this resolution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete matrix of performance across all tested configurations. At 1920x1080, the averages range from 153.3 FPS at Low to 117.8 at Medium, 89.9 at High, and 87.4 at Ultra. The gap between Medium and High is 27.9 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 2.5 FPS, indicating diminishing returns at the top end.

At 2560x1440, the results scale down proportionally: Low delivers 124.9 FPS, Medium 92.3, High 72.8, and Ultra 68.8. The difference between High and Ultra narrows further to 4.0 FPS. The Medium-to-High gap of 19.5 FPS remains the largest single-step drop among the presets.

At 3840x2160, the averages are 90.6 FPS at Low, 70.6 at Medium, 50.2 at High, and 50.8 at Ultra. Interestingly, the Ultra preset actually scores slightly higher than High at this resolution (50.8 versus 50.2), a 1.2% difference that falls within typical measurement variance. The Medium-to-High drop of 20.4 FPS is the largest step at 4K.

Comparing across resolutions, the 1080p Low result exceeds the 4K Low result by 62.7 FPS, while the 1080p Ultra result exceeds 4K Ultra by 36.6 FPS. The data shows that Low settings at 4K (90.6 FPS) outperform High settings at 1080p (89.9 FPS) by a marginal 0.7 FPS, suggesting that resolution can be traded against quality settings to achieve similar frame rates.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded in this dataset?

A: The highest average FPS is 153.3, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the 4K Ultra performance compare to 1080p Ultra?

A: The 4K Ultra average is 50.8 FPS, while 1080p Ultra achieves 87.4 FPS, representing a 41.9% reduction when moving from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings.

Q: Which preset shows the smallest difference between High and Ultra at the same resolution?

A: At 3840x2160, High delivers 50.2 FPS and Ultra delivers 50.8 FPS, a difference of only 0.6 FPS. This is the smallest gap between these two presets across all resolutions.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: The CPU's strong single-thread performance (4680 in Cinebench R23 single-core) allows the 1080p Low preset to reach 153.3 FPS, suggesting the CPU can handle high frame rates. The relatively small gap between High (89.9 FPS) and Ultra (87.4 FPS) at 1080p indicates the GPU begins to limit performance as settings increase.

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

A: The combination ranks 604 out of 1795 total tested combos, placing it in the upper third of all configurations.

Q: What is the largest single-step FPS drop between consecutive presets?

A: The largest drop occurs at 3840x2160 between Medium (70.6 FPS) and High (50.2 FPS), a decrease of 20.4 FPS. At 2560x1440, the Medium-to-High drop is 19.5 FPS, and at 1920x1080 it is 27.9 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal preset depends on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For players prioritizing smooth performance at 1920x1080, the Medium preset at 117.8 FPS offers a strong balance, delivering more than double the 60 FPS threshold while maintaining reasonable visual quality. The High preset at 89.9 FPS remains viable for those who prefer enhanced visuals, though the Ultra preset's 87.4 FPS result shows that the additional visual fidelity comes at a modest 2.5 FPS cost.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset at 92.3 FPS provides the best experience for high-refresh-rate monitors, while High at 72.8 FPS suits standard 60 Hz displays with improved graphics. The Ultra preset at 68.8 FPS remains playable and offers the highest visual quality at this resolution, with a 3.5% reduction from High.

For 3840x2160, the data reveals an interesting anomaly: the High preset at 50.2 FPS and Ultra at 50.8 FPS are statistically equivalent. Given this near-identical performance, selecting Ultra at 4K provides the superior visual experience without sacrificing frame rate. Players who cannot accept sub-60 FPS at 4K should consider the Medium preset at 70.6 FPS, which offers a 40.6% improvement over Ultra while still maintaining respectable detail levels. The Low preset at 90.6 FPS serves as a fallback for those prioritizing frame rate above all else.

Across all resolutions, the measurements indicate that the step from Medium to High produces the most significant FPS penalty, averaging a 20.4 FPS drop at 4K, 19.5 FPS at 1440p, and 27.9 FPS at 1080p. Consequently, players seeking maximum frame rates should first reduce from High to Medium, as this adjustment yields the greatest performance gain per visual quality lost. Conversely, the High-to-Ultra transition costs only 2.5 FPS at 1080p, 4.0 FPS at 1440p, and 0.6 FPS at 4K, making Ultra a nearly free upgrade when the system can already handle High settings.