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 9 9900X and AMD Radeon RX 9060 reveals a clear and consistent scaling pattern as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 111 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 89 FPS, a 19.8% reduction. At 4K Low, the average falls further to 66 FPS, which represents a 40.5% drop from the 1080p baseline. This steep decline as pixel count rises strongly suggests that the GPU is becoming the dominant constraint at higher resolutions.

The pattern persists across all quality settings. At High settings, the transition from 1080p (65 FPS) to 1440p (52 FPS) represents a 20% loss, and then to 4K (39 FPS) another 25% loss. Medium settings show a similar trajectory: 86 FPS at 1080p, 69 FPS at 1440p, and 51 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings follow suit with 62 FPS, 50 FPS, and 37 FPS respectively. The consistency of these percentage drops across different quality presets indicates that resolution scaling is the primary factor, not a settings-specific bottleneck.

What is particularly telling is the relationship between the 1080p and 1440p results versus the 1440p to 4K results. For Low settings, the 1080p to 1440p drop is 22 FPS, while 1440p to 4K is 23 FPS — nearly identical absolute losses. This linearity suggests that the GPU's rendering throughput, not CPU limitations, is the limiting factor across the entire resolution range. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see the FPS curve flatten at higher resolutions where the CPU has more time to prepare frames. Instead, the FPS continues to fall proportionally with pixel count, a classic sign of GPU-bound performance.

The data implies that this combination is well-balanced at 1080p but becomes increasingly GPU-limited as resolution climbs. At 4K Ultra, the 37 FPS average indicates that the RX 9060 is struggling to maintain playable frame rates at the highest settings, while the Ryzen 9 9900X's substantial processing power remains underutilized. The 4K Medium result of 51 FPS, with a minimum of 44 FPS, shows that even mid-range settings cannot fully escape the GPU constraint at this resolution. This suggests that users targeting 4K would need to rely on upscaling technologies or accept lower settings to achieve smoother performance, as the raw hardware combination cannot sustain high frame rates at native 4K.

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

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X brings substantial processing resources to this pairing. With 12 cores and 24 threads based on the Zen 5 architecture, this CPU offers a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The 64 MB of L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth provide a strong foundation for feeding the GPU. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32172 and a single-core score of 2253, with a Geekbench multi-core score of 22174 and single-core score of 3010.

However, the game's measured performance tells a more nuanced story. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 111 FPS, which is the highest average across all tested configurations. This is where the CPU's single-thread performance matters most, as lower resolutions and settings reduce GPU load, allowing the CPU to push frame rates higher. The 3DMark single-thread score of 1286 and the PassMark single-thread score of 4672 indicate strong per-core performance, which is crucial for a flight simulator that often relies on a few heavily loaded threads for flight dynamics and scenery processing.

The CPU's multi-threading capabilities are evident in its 3DMark max-thread score of 13929 and PassMark multithread score of 54643, but these do not translate into proportionally higher FPS in this game. At 1080p Ultra, the FPS drops to 62, which is 44% lower than the Low setting result. This suggests that even at the same resolution, the GPU becomes the limiting factor as settings increase, with the CPU's role diminishing. The 12-core, 24-thread configuration appears more than sufficient for this game's demands, as evidenced by the fact that performance scales almost entirely with resolution and settings rather than showing signs of CPU starvation.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 92 out of 100 versus all CPUs places it in the upper echelon of processors. Its nearest rivals in average benchmark score include the AMD EPYC 9015 (deltaPct -0.1%), AMD EPYC 7313 (deltaPct 0.2%), Intel Core i9-14900 (deltaPct -1.1%), and Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M (deltaPct -1.4%). These comparisons show that the Ryzen 9 9900X is essentially on par with these high-end server and desktop parts, reinforcing that CPU performance is not the bottleneck in this game. The data indicates that for Microsoft Flight Simulator, the Ryzen 9 9900X provides ample headroom, and any FPS limitations are attributable to the GPU or the game's engine rather than the processor.

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

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and AMD Radeon RX 9060 ranks 1712 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the pairing in the 57th percentile of all tested combinations, meaning roughly 43% of tested systems perform better in this game. Given that the CPU ranks in the 92nd percentile among all CPUs and the GPU ranks in the 59th percentile among all GPUs, this combo ranking is notably lower than the CPU's individual standing, confirming that the GPU drags the overall performance down.

The GPU's nearest rivals in average benchmark score provide context for this ranking. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti has an average score of 16129 with a deltaPct of -0.7%, making it nearly identical in performance to the RX 9060. The AMD Radeon R9 370X (avgScore 15862, deltaPct 1%) and AMD Radeon RX 7700 (avgScore 15852, deltaPct 1%) are also closely matched. This clustering around the 16000 mark suggests that the RX 9060 sits in a mid-range performance tier, which is consistent with its 59th percentile ranking and explains why the combo does not crack the top half of tested systems.

The gap between the CPU's high percentile and the combo's mid-pack ranking highlights a significant performance imbalance. A system with a Ryzen 9 9900X paired with a stronger GPU would likely rank much higher, as the CPU is clearly capable of supporting more demanding graphics hardware. Conversely, pairing the RX 9060 with a less powerful CPU might yield similar FPS results in this game, as the GPU appears to be the limiting factor across most resolutions and settings. The combo rank of 1712 out of 2996 indicates that while this is not a weak system, it is not optimized for maximum performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator, with the GPU representing the primary constraint.

# FAQ

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

A: The highest average FPS is 111, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K resolution with Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the combo produces an average FPS of 37, which is the lowest measured result across all configurations.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor. The FPS drops consistently with resolution increases, and the CPU's high percentile ranking (92nd) compared to the GPU's (59th) suggests the GPU cannot fully utilize the CPU's capabilities.

Q: What settings provide the best balance between quality and performance at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Medium settings deliver 69 FPS average with a minimum of 59 FPS, while High settings drop to 52 FPS. Medium appears to be the best balance, as it maintains above 60 FPS on average.

Q: How does the RX 9060 compare to the RTX 3060 Ti in average benchmark score?

A: The RX 9060 has an average benchmark score of 16014, while the RTX 3060 Ti has an average score of 16129, resulting in a deltaPct of -0.7% — meaning the RTX 3060 Ti is marginally faster in synthetic benchmarks.

Q: At which resolution and settings does the combo maintain 60 FPS or higher?

A: The combo maintains 60 FPS or higher at 1080p with Low (111 FPS), Medium (86 FPS), and High (65 FPS) settings, and at 1440p with Low (89 FPS) settings. All other configurations fall below 60 FPS average.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with the Navi 44 chip, manufactured on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. The GPU has a base clock of 1700 MHz, a boost clock of 2990 MHz, and a game clock of 2400 MHz. With 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, this GPU delivers a pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 334.9 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 21.43 TFLOPS.

The 8 GB VRAM capacity is a critical consideration for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This game is known for loading large amounts of scenery and terrain data, and at 4K resolution with high settings, the 8 GB frame buffer may become a limiting factor. The measured results support this: at 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 37, which could be partially attributable to VRAM capacity constraints causing texture swapping or reduced performance. The 128-bit memory bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, while adequate for 1080p, may struggle to keep up with the data demands of 4K rendering in a flight simulator with extensive draw distances.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 16014. Its PassMark G3D score is 17631, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 3322. These figures indicate a mid-range GPU that performs well at 1080p but shows limitations at higher resolutions. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 88183 and Vulkan score of 39476 further characterize its compute capabilities, which are sufficient for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 APIs but do not indicate high-end performance.

The GPU's role in this combo is clearly the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The 4K results show a steep decline from Low (66 FPS) to Medium (51 FPS) to High (39 FPS) to Ultra (37 FPS), with the gap between Medium and High being particularly pronounced (a 23.5% drop). This suggests that beyond Medium settings at 4K, the GPU's computational resources and memory bandwidth become insufficient. At 1080p, however, the GPU performs admirably, with even Ultra settings maintaining 62 FPS, indicating that the RX 9060 is well-suited for 1080p gaming in this title but struggles as resolution increases.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and the user's preference for frame rate versus visual quality. At 1080p, all settings presets produce playable results: Low (111 FPS), Medium (86 FPS), High (65 FPS), and Ultra (62 FPS). The jump from High to Ultra only costs 3 FPS on average, making Ultra the recommended choice for 1080p users who want maximum visual quality without sacrificing smoothness. The Medium preset at 1080p provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS, with a minimum of 73 FPS, making it a safe choice for those who prioritize consistent frame pacing.

At 1440p, the situation becomes more nuanced. Low settings deliver 89 FPS, which is excellent for high-refresh-rate monitors. Medium settings drop to 69 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS, which is still playable but occasionally dips below 60. High settings at 52 FPS and Ultra at 50 FPS are noticeably less smooth. For 1440p, Medium appears to be the recommended preset, as it offers a balance between visual fidelity and performance, with an average that stays above 60 FPS and a minimum that only occasionally dips below. Users who prioritize frame rate above all else could opt for Low, while those who accept lower FPS for better visuals might consider High, but the data suggests Medium is the sweet spot.

At 4K, no preset achieves 60 FPS. Low settings produce 66 FPS, which is the only configuration above 60 FPS at this resolution. Medium drops to 51 FPS (minimum 44 FPS), High to 39 FPS, and Ultra to 37 FPS. For 4K users, Low settings are the only option for smooth gameplay, while Medium offers a playable experience at the cost of some smoothness. High and Ultra are not recommended due to sub-40 FPS averages, which would be noticeable in a flight simulator where smooth camera panning and detailed scenery rendering are important. The data suggests that 4K gaming with this combo requires significant compromises, and users should either use Low settings or consider lowering resolution to 1440p for a better experience.

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

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 111 FPS average
• Medium: 86 FPS average, 73 FPS minimum, 99 FPS maximum
• High: 65 FPS average
• Ultra: 62 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 89 FPS average
• Medium: 69 FPS average, 59 FPS minimum, 80 FPS maximum
• High: 52 FPS average
• Ultra: 50 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 66 FPS average
• Medium: 51 FPS average, 44 FPS minimum, 59 FPS maximum
• High: 39 FPS average
• Ultra: 37 FPS average

The data reveals a consistent pattern across all resolutions: Low settings provide the highest FPS, followed by Medium, then High, and finally Ultra. The gap between Medium and Low is substantial, averaging about 25-30% across resolutions, while the gap between High and Ultra is relatively small, typically 3-5%. This suggests that the performance cost of moving from High to Ultra is minimal, while the cost of moving from Low to Medium is significant. The Medium setting is the only configuration with measured minimum and maximum FPS values, providing insight into frame pacing; the minimum-to-average ratio is approximately 85% at all resolutions, indicating reasonable frame time consistency.

The 4K results show the most dramatic drop-offs, with Ultra at 37 FPS representing only 33% of the 1080p Low performance. This steep decline underscores the GPU's limitations at high pixel counts. The overall pattern indicates that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming, where all settings are playable, and 1440p gaming with Medium or Low settings. At 4K, only Low settings provide a comfortable frame rate, and even then, the 66 FPS average is barely above the 60 FPS threshold. These measured results provide a clear picture of what users can expect from this hardware combination in Microsoft Flight Simulator, with the GPU acting as the primary constraint at higher resolutions and settings.