Microsoft Flight Simulator

FAQ

Q: What is the overall performance ranking of this CPU and GPU combination in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The combo ranks 3376 out of 3714 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 9% of all tested systems for this game. This is a low ranking that reflects a significant hardware mismatch.

Q: How does the Ryzen 9 9950X3D compare to its closest rival CPUs?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score is 75779, which is only 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755 and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D, 0.3% ahead of the AMD EPYC 8224P, and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285. The differences are within a fraction of a percent, indicating near-identical compute performance among these top processors.

Q: What is the GPU's performance percentile relative to all GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 580 sits at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 12928 is within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, 0.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon 740M.

Q: What is the best FPS result recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS is 54, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next best is 43 FPS at 2560x1440 with Low settings, and 42 FPS at 1920x1080 with Medium settings.

Q: Is there any resolution where this combo achieves a playable average FPS at Ultra settings?

A: No. At Ultra settings, the maximum average FPS is 30 at 1920x1080, dropping to 24 at 2560x1440, and 18 at 3840x2160. None of these reach a commonly accepted playable threshold of 60 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU's multi-threaded performance compare to its single-threaded performance?

A: In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 42018 in multi-core and 2259 in single-core, showing a strong scaling ratio. In 3DMark, the max-thread score is 17184 versus a single-thread score of 1292, which indicates the processor scales well with additional threads.

How This Combo Ranks

The data places this combination at rank 3376 out of 3714 tested combos, which corresponds to roughly the 9th percentile of all systems evaluated in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This is a poor standing that signals the GPU is the dominant bottleneck in almost every scenario.

The CPU alone sits in the 95th percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 75779. This places it among the very best consumer CPUs available. The GPU, however, is in the 53rd percentile of all graphics cards, with an average score of 12928. The massive gap between the CPU's high percentile and the GPU's middling percentile explains why the overall combo ranking is so low.

The measured FPS results confirm this imbalance. At 1920x1080 Low, the combo achieves 54 FPS, which is the only setting and resolution pair that comes close to a smooth experience. At any higher quality preset or resolution, the frame rate falls below 43 FPS. This pattern is consistent with a system where the processor is capable of far more work than the graphics card can render.

The combo rank of 3376 out of 3714 means there are only 338 tested combinations that perform worse in this specific game. Given that the CPU is near the top of its class and the GPU is near the middle of its class, the low rank indicates that Microsoft Flight Simulator is heavily reliant on GPU performance for these settings. The CPU's strength cannot compensate for the GPU's limitations.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 580 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is 2000 MHz, which translates to 8 Gbps effective. These specifications are from the Polaris 20 chip on the GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process.

The GPU's compute capabilities include 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The pixel rate is 42.88 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 193.0 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 6.175 TFLOPS. These numbers describe a mid-range GPU from its era, with enough raw throughput for 1080p gaming but limited headroom for higher resolutions.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's role is critical because the game renders dense scenery, complex terrain, and detailed aircraft models. The measured FPS data shows that the RX 580 struggles as resolution increases. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 30 at Ultra to 54 at Low. At 2560x1440, the range drops to 24 at Ultra and 43 at Low. At 3840x2160, the range falls to 18 at Ultra and 32 at Low.

The 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but the GPU's compute power becomes the limiting factor at 4K. The 32 ROPs and 6.175 TFLOPS are not enough to maintain high frame rates at 3840x2160, where even Low settings only produce 32 FPS. The data suggests that the GPU is the primary constraint across all tested settings, with the CPU having ample headroom.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers an average of 54 FPS on Low settings, 42 FPS on Medium, 31 FPS on High, and 30 FPS on Ultra. The Medium setting has a recorded minimum of 36 FPS and maximum of 48 FPS, showing some frame time variance. The gap between Low and Medium is 12 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 1 FPS, indicating diminishing returns at the higher presets.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS drops to 43 on Low, 34 on Medium, 25 on High, and 24 on Ultra. The Medium setting shows a minimum of 29 FPS and maximum of 39 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium is 9 FPS, while High and Ultra are nearly identical at 25 and 24 FPS respectively. This suggests that beyond Medium, the GPU is saturated and further quality increases have minimal impact on frame rate.

At 3840x2160, the results are significantly lower: 32 FPS on Low, 25 FPS on Medium, 19 FPS on High, and 18 FPS on Ultra. The Medium setting has a minimum of 21 FPS and maximum of 29 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 7 FPS, and from Medium to High is 6 FPS, while High to Ultra is only 1 FPS. At 4K, even the lowest settings fail to reach 33 FPS, making the game barely playable in any configuration.

The data shows a consistent pattern: the FPS penalty from increasing settings is largest from Low to Medium, smaller from Medium to High, and negligible from High to Ultra. This is typical of a GPU-bound scenario where the pixel throughput and shading capacity are exhausted before the highest quality presets can be fully utilized.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the best experience is achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings, yielding an average of 54 FPS. This is the only configuration that approaches a smooth 60 FPS target. The Medium preset at 1080p produces 42 FPS, which is playable but with noticeable stutter potential, as indicated by the 36 FPS minimum.

For users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, the Medium preset at 1920x1080 offers a balanced compromise. The 42 FPS average is 28% lower than Low, but the visual improvements are substantial. High and Ultra at 1080p are not recommended, as they only deliver 31 and 30 FPS respectively, which is a marginal gain over Medium for a significant drop in smoothness.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset is the only viable option, with 43 FPS. Medium drops to 34 FPS, which may be acceptable for less demanding users, but the 29 FPS minimum could cause noticeable hitches. High and Ultra at 1440p are not advisable, as they fall to 25 and 24 FPS.

At 3840x2160, none of the settings are recommended for a smooth experience. The Low preset at 32 FPS is the best case, but even this is below the threshold for comfortable play. The data indicates that this combo is not suitable for 4K gaming in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

The overall recommendation is to run at 1920x1080 with Low or Medium settings. The Low preset provides the highest frame rate, while Medium offers a better visual experience at a moderate FPS cost. Users should avoid Ultra settings at any resolution, as the performance gain from High to Ultra is minimal and does not justify the FPS drop.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D features 16 cores and 32 threads, based on the Zen 5 architecture with the Granite Ridge codename. The base clock is 4.30 GHz with a boost clock of 5.70 GHz. The CPU has 128 MB of L3 cache, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 80 KB of L1 cache per core. This is a 4 nm processor from TSMC with 16,630 million transistors.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU demonstrates strong performance across the board. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 42018, and the single-core score is 2259. The Geekbench multi-core score is 26736, with a single-core score of 3064. The 3DMark scores show scaling from 1292 in single-thread to 17184 in max-thread, indicating excellent multi-threading capabilities.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is to handle game logic, physics, and AI calculations, while the GPU renders the scene. The data shows that this CPU is far more capable than the GPU can utilize. The combo rank of 3376 out of 3714 is not due to CPU limitations; rather, the GPU is the bottleneck.

The CPU's high single-thread performance, as evidenced by the 2259 Cinebench R23 score and 3064 Geekbench score, is beneficial for a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which often relies on strong single-thread performance. However, the measured FPS results show that even with this powerful CPU, the frame rates are limited by the GPU's rendering capacity.

The 128 MB L3 cache is a notable feature that can help with data-heavy workloads, but in this game, it does not compensate for the GPU's weaknesses. The CPU's percentile rank of 95 indicates it is among the top 5% of all processors, yet the overall combo performance is in the bottom 9%. This disparity underscores the GPU's dominance as the limiting factor.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drops from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 are significant across all settings. At Low settings, the average FPS decreases from 54 at 1080p to 43 at 1440p and 32 at 4K. This represents a 20% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 26% drop from 1440p to 4K. The total drop from 1080p to 4K is 41%.

At Medium settings, the average FPS goes from 42 at 1080p to 34 at 1440p and 25 at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 19%, and from 1440p to 4K is 26%. The total drop is 40%. At High settings, the FPS drops from 31 at 1080p to 25 at 1440p and 19 at 4K, a total decrease of 39%. At Ultra settings, the FPS drops from 30 at 1080p to 24 at 1440p and 18 at 4K, a total decrease of 40%.

The consistency of the percentage drops across settings suggests that the scaling is resolution-bound rather than setting-bound. The GPU's fill rate and bandwidth are the primary constraints as pixel count increases. The 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 42.88 GPixel/s pixel rate are insufficient for 4K workloads, leading to the observed frame rate collapse.

The resolution scaling analysis indicates that the GPU is the limiting component. A system with a more balanced GPU would show a smaller percentage drop from 1080p to 4K, as the CPU would become relatively more important at lower resolutions. Here, the FPS drops are nearly uniform across all settings, which is characteristic of a pure GPU bottleneck. The CPU's performance headroom is not being utilized, as evidenced by the fact that even at 1080p Low, the frame rate does not exceed 54 FPS, far below what the Ryzen 9 9950X3D could support with a more powerful graphics card.