Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator with AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060

The benchmark data for Microsoft Flight Simulator reveals a system that balances a high-end mobile CPU with a mid-range GPU, producing a clear pattern where resolution scaling dictates playability. Across twelve measured configurations, the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 shows a predictable performance curve: frame rates drop substantially as resolution increases, with the gap between Low and Ultra settings widening at higher pixel counts. The combo ranks 1804th out of 2996 tested combinations, placing it in the lower-middle tier of all systems benchmarked for this flight simulator, which suggests that while the hardware is capable, it is not optimized for the most demanding visual presets at high resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The data shows a consistent and steep performance penalty as resolution climbs from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 106 FPS at 1080p to 86 FPS at 1440p, then to 63 FPS at 4K — a reduction of approximately 40% from 1080p to 4K. This scaling pattern indicates that the RTX 4060 becomes the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions, as the pixel count quadruples from 1080p to 4K while the CPU's workload remains relatively constant.

The Medium settings row provides the most complete picture, with minimum and maximum frame rates recorded at each resolution. At 1080p Medium, the system averages 83 FPS with a range of 70 to 95 FPS. Moving to 1440p Medium, the average drops to 67 FPS with a range of 57 to 77 FPS. At 4K Medium, the average falls to 49 FPS with a range of 42 to 57 FPS. This represents a 41% average frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K at Medium settings, which closely mirrors the Low settings scaling.

What is particularly revealing is the behavior at High and Ultra settings. At High, the system averages 62 FPS at 1080p, 50 FPS at 1440p, and 37 FPS at 4K. At Ultra, the numbers are 59 FPS, 48 FPS, and 35 FPS respectively. The difference between High and Ultra at each resolution is small — only 3 FPS at 1080p, 2 FPS at 1440p, and 2 FPS at 4K — which suggests that the Ultra preset adds visual features that have minimal performance impact relative to High, or that the GPU is already saturated and the additional settings overhead is negligible.

The frame rate drops from 1080p to 1440p are relatively modest across all settings — between 20% and 24% — while the drops from 1440p to 4K are steeper, ranging from 27% to 29%. This non-linear scaling points to memory bandwidth constraints on the 128-bit bus with 272.0 GB/s bandwidth, as the 4K resolution requires significantly more data throughput than the GPU can efficiently deliver. The 8 GB of GDDR6 memory may also become a limiting factor at 4K, particularly with High and Ultra textures.

FAQ

Q: What is the maximum average frame rate this combo achieves in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 106 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that exceeds 100 FPS average.

Q: How does the RTX 4060's performance compare to its nearest rivals in general benchmarks?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 17,639 is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon HD 7790 (17,666, which is 0.2% higher) and the AMD Radeon 780M (17,588, which is 0.3% lower). The Radeon Pro 560 and Pro 460 are 0.5% and 0.7% lower respectively.

Q: What is the playable frame rate threshold for this system at 4K?

A: At 4K, only the Low preset achieves an average above 60 FPS (63 FPS). Medium averages 49 FPS, High averages 37 FPS, and Ultra averages 35 FPS. For smooth gameplay above 60 FPS, 4K requires Low settings.

Q: How does the CPU's multi-core performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 9 8945HX has an average benchmark score of 76,212, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX (76,155) and 0.6% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D (75,779). It is 0.4% lower than both the EPYC Embedded 8224P (76,492) and Threadripper PRO 9945WX (76,513).

Q: What is the difference in average FPS between Medium and Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Medium averages 67 FPS while Ultra averages 48 FPS, a difference of 19 FPS (28% lower). The Medium preset also shows a minimum of 57 FPS and maximum of 77 FPS, while Ultra has no recorded min/max values.

Q: Does the combo rank higher or lower than the median for this game?

A: The combo ranks 1804th out of 2996 tested combinations, which places it in the 60th percentile of all tested systems. This means roughly 60% of tested combos perform better, while 40% perform worse.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 serves as the primary bottleneck in this configuration, particularly at higher resolutions. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 272.0 GB/s bandwidth is modest by modern standards, and the benchmark results reflect this constraint. The GPU's boost clock of 2460 MHz and base clock of 1830 MHz are competitive for the mobile segment, but the memory subsystem limits performance when resolution increases.

The GPU's percentile ranking of 61 against all GPUs places it just above the median, and its nearest rivals are all significantly older or lower-tier parts — the Radeon HD 7790 and Radeon 780M are within 0.3% of its average score. This indicates that the RTX 4060 is positioned as a mainstream performer rather than a high-end part. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, this translates to playable frame rates at 1080p across all settings, but only Low settings remain above 60 FPS at 4K.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,302 and Passmark G3D score of 19,545 suggest the GPU handles DirectX 12 workloads reasonably well, which is relevant since the game supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). However, the relatively low Passmark G2D score of 1,037 and DirectX 9 score of 236 indicate that the GPU's legacy performance is weaker, which may affect older game engines but is less relevant for this 2020 release.

The GPU's TDP of 115 W and suggested PSU of 300 W indicate it is designed for efficiency, but the 128-bit memory bus is a clear limiting factor for 4K gaming. The measured FPS data supports this: at 4K Ultra, the system achieves only 35 FPS average, while at 1080p Ultra it reaches 59 FPS. The 24 FPS drop from 1080p to 4K at Ultra represents a 41% reduction, which is substantial and directly attributable to the GPU's memory bandwidth and capacity constraints.

The RTX 4060's 24 RT cores and 96 tensor cores provide hardware support for ray tracing and DLSS, though the measured FPS data does not indicate whether these features were enabled. The GPU's FP32 throughput of 15.11 TFLOPS is reasonable for rasterization, but the pixel rate of 118.1 GPixel/s and texture rate of 236.2 GTexel/s suggest that fill-rate-bound scenes, common in flight simulators with dense terrain and cloud rendering, will stress this GPU.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best performance across all settings. Low settings average 106 FPS, making this the only preset that exceeds 100 FPS. Medium settings average 83 FPS with a range of 70 to 95 FPS, providing smooth gameplay with headroom for dips. High settings average 62 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS threshold for most displays. Ultra settings average 59 FPS, falling just below 60 FPS and potentially introducing minor stutter on 60 Hz displays.

At 2560x1440, performance drops noticeably. Low settings average 86 FPS, still comfortably above 60 FPS. Medium settings average 67 FPS with a range of 57 to 77 FPS, meaning the minimum frame rate can dip below 60 FPS in demanding scenes. High settings average 50 FPS, which may be acceptable for slower-paced flight simulation but is below the 60 FPS target. Ultra settings average 48 FPS, providing a playable but not perfectly smooth experience.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck. Low settings average 63 FPS, just barely above the 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings average 49 FPS with a range of 42 to 57 FPS, meaning frame rates will frequently fall below 50 FPS. High settings average 37 FPS, and Ultra settings average 35 FPS. Neither High nor Ultra at 4K provides a smooth experience, with frame rates below 40 FPS average.

The Medium settings row is the only one with complete min/max data across all three resolutions. At 1080p, the range is 70-95 FPS, a spread of 25 FPS. At 1440p, the range is 57-77 FPS, a spread of 20 FPS. At 4K, the range is 42-57 FPS, a spread of 15 FPS. This decreasing spread at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is becoming more consistently saturated, leaving less variance in frame times.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 1804th out of 2996 tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the 60th percentile. This means that 1,804 other system configurations outperformed this one, while 1,192 performed worse. Given that the CPU is a high-end mobile part (95th percentile among all CPUs), the ranking is dragged down by the GPU, which sits at the 61st percentile among all GPUs.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 76,212 places it in elite company, with its nearest rivals being the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX (0.1% higher), AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D (0.6% lower), and AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P (0.4% lower). This suggests the CPU is not the limiting factor in this game combo. The GPU's average score of 17,639, by contrast, is essentially tied with the Radeon HD 7790 from a previous generation, indicating the GPU is the weak link.

The 60th percentile ranking for this combo suggests that while it can run the game, it does so at lower settings or resolutions compared to the majority of tested systems. The disparity between the CPU's 95th percentile and the GPU's 61st percentile creates an imbalanced system where the CPU has significant headroom that the GPU cannot utilize in this game. In a flight simulator that is known for CPU-heavy simulation logic, this imbalance may be less impactful than in other genres, but the GPU still becomes the constraint at higher resolutions.

The ranking data implies that users with this combo should expect to play at 1080p with Medium or High settings to achieve smooth frame rates, or sacrifice visual quality at higher resolutions. The 59 FPS average at 1080p Ultra suggests that even at the lowest resolution, the Ultra preset is not fully playable on a 60 Hz display, and users may need to dial back to High settings for a locked 60 FPS experience.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and frame rate preference. At 1920x1080, Medium settings offer the best balance of visual quality and performance, with an average of 83 FPS and a minimum of 70 FPS ensuring smooth gameplay even in demanding scenes. High settings at 1080p average 62 FPS, which is playable but leaves little headroom for frame drops. Ultra at 1080p averages 59 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold and may cause noticeable stutter on standard displays.

At 2560x1440, Medium settings are the recommended choice, averaging 67 FPS with a minimum of 57 FPS. While the minimum falls below 60 FPS, the overall experience is still smooth for a flight simulator where camera movements are often slower. High settings at 1440p average 50 FPS, which is acceptable for immersive play but may feel less responsive. Low settings at 1440p average 86 FPS, but the visual quality reduction is significant enough that most users would prefer Medium.

At 3840x2160, Low settings are the only option that maintains an average above 60 FPS (63 FPS). Medium settings at 4K average 49 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. High and Ultra at 4K average 37 and 35 FPS respectively, which will likely result in a choppy experience. For users with 4K displays, the recommendation is to use Low settings for smooth performance or Medium settings for better visuals at the cost of some smoothness.

The data suggests that Medium settings across all resolutions provide the most consistent experience, with the smallest variance between minimum and maximum frame rates. The complete min/max data for Medium settings allows users to anticipate the worst-case frame rates, which is valuable for a game where sudden dips can occur when flying over dense terrain or through complex weather systems.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on Zen 4 architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. Its base clock of 2.50 GHz and boost clock of 5.40 GHz are strong for a mobile part, and its 95th percentile ranking among all CPUs confirms its high performance. The CPU's L3 cache of 64 MB and DDR5 memory support with dual-channel bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s provide ample memory bandwidth for simulation workloads.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is to handle flight physics, weather simulation, and AI traffic, which are heavily threaded workloads. The 16 cores and 32 threads are well-suited for these tasks, and the CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,713 and Passmark multithread score of 51,405 indicate strong parallel performance. The single-core performance, measured at 6,030 in Cinebench R23 and 3,907 in Passmark single-thread, is also competitive, which matters for the game's main thread.

However, the measured FPS data suggests that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this combo. The frame rates scale consistently with resolution, which is characteristic of GPU-bound scenarios. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar frame rates across resolutions, but instead we see a 40% drop from 1080p to 4K. This indicates that the CPU has sufficient headroom to feed the GPU at all settings, and the GPU's performance ceiling is what determines the final frame rates.

The CPU's nearest rivals in benchmarks are all desktop or high-end mobile parts, with the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX being 0.1% faster and the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D being 0.6% slower. This places the 8945HX in elite company, and its performance is more than adequate for this game. The 55 W TDP suggests it is a power-efficient part, which is relevant for mobile systems where thermal management can impact sustained performance.

The Passmark data compression score of 677,755 and integer math score of 195,180 indicate strong general-purpose computing power, while the extended instructions score of 49,823 shows good support for modern instruction sets. These metrics are less directly relevant to gaming but confirm the CPU's overall capability. For this game, the CPU's 64 MB L3 cache likely helps with the large world data that Microsoft Flight Simulator streams, reducing the need for memory access that could cause stutters.