Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator presents one of the most demanding real-time workloads in PC gaming, and the measured data for this AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile combination shows a system that is consistently capable but requires deliberate settings choices. The 12 measured data points across three resolutions and four quality presets reveal a clear pattern: this configuration excels at maintaining playable frame rates at 1440p and can push into high-refresh territory at 1080p, while 4K remains a stretch that demands compromises. The benchmark results indicate a balanced pairing where neither component is a complete bottleneck, but the GPU becomes the primary constraint as resolution climbs.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows provide a clear hierarchy for optimizing the experience. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 119 avg FPS, which is the only measured result that approaches the 120 Hz threshold. However, the Medium preset at 93 avg FPS with a minimum of 79 FPS offers a far more visually substantial experience while still maintaining smooth motion. The jump from Medium to High at 1080p costs 23 FPS (from 93 to 70), which is a significant 24.7% reduction for what is typically a modest visual gain in this title. Ultra at 1080p drops to 66 avg FPS, which is still playable but begins to show the GPU's limits.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset stands as the sweet spot. The 75 avg FPS with a 64 FPS minimum ensures that even dense scenery or complex aircraft systems do not cause stutter. High at 1440p drops to 56 avg FPS, while Ultra falls to 54 avg FPS. The delta between High and Ultra at 1440p is only 2 FPS (56 vs 54), suggesting that Ultra is effectively a free upgrade over High at this resolution if visual fidelity is the priority. Low at 1440p produces 96 avg FPS, but the visual degradation in a simulator where reading cockpit instruments and spotting terrain features is critical makes this preset less practical.

For 3840x2160, the data is less forgiving. Medium yields 55 avg FPS with a 47 FPS minimum, which is borderline for a flight simulator where smooth panning is essential. High drops to 42 avg FPS, and Ultra falls to 40 avg FPS. Low at 4K produces 71 avg FPS, which is the only 4K preset that clears the 60 FPS bar. The recommendation from the measured rows is to prioritize 1440p Medium for the best balance, or 1440p Ultra if visual fidelity outweighs the 19 FPS delta from Medium to Ultra (75 vs 54). For users who insist on 4K, Medium is the only preset that maintains a minimum above 45 FPS, but Low is the only preset that avoids sub-60 average performance.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 brings substantial processing resources to this title. The 16 cores and 32 threads, based on the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, provide a strong foundation for the simulation's complex physics and AI calculations. The base clock of 3.00 GHz and boost clock of 5.10 GHz indicate a wide frequency range that allows the processor to scale up for single-threaded tasks and spread across all cores for multi-threaded workloads. The 64 MB of shared L3 cache is particularly relevant for a simulator that streams large amounts of terrain and aircraft data.

Benchmark data places this CPU in the 95th percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 77740. The nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX at 76513 (1.6% ahead), the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P at 76492 (1.6% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX at 76212 (2.0% ahead). The Intel Core i9-14900K at 79097 is 1.7% ahead of the Ryzen AI Max+ 395. In multi-threaded workloads, the Cinebench R23 score of 35314 and Geekbench multi-core score of 20992 demonstrate that this CPU can handle the parallel processing demands of flight simulation. The single-core performance, as reflected by the Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2044 and Geekbench single-core score of 2464, is also robust, which matters for the primary render thread that often limits frame rates.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator specifically, the data shows that this CPU is not the limiting factor at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 119 avg FPS, which suggests the CPU can feed the GPU sufficiently for high frame rates. The fact that the frame rate scales down as resolution increases (from 119 at 1080p Low to 71 at 4K Low) indicates that the GPU becomes the bottleneck at higher resolutions. However, the CPU's strong single-thread performance ensures that even the most complex scenery areas with heavy AI traffic do not cause catastrophic frame drops, as evidenced by the 79 FPS minimum at 1080p Medium.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile is the graphics engine here, built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm TSMC process. The 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which matches the CPU's memory bandwidth exactly. The GPU features 4608 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output units. The boost clock of 1695 MHz (with a base of 1395 MHz) drives a FP32 compute throughput of 15.62 TFLOPS. The 36 ray tracing cores and 144 tensor cores support the DirectX 12 Ultimate feature set, which includes hardware-accelerated ray tracing that this simulator can leverage for shadows and reflections.

The GPU's benchmark percentile of 73 places it in the upper-middle tier. Its average benchmark score of 27435 puts it level with the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT (27425, 0% delta) and within 0.5% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 (27565). The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell is 1.1% behind at 27135, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 is 1.5% ahead at 27839. The PassMark G3D score of 19587 and Geekbench OpenCL score of 109197 confirm strong compute capabilities. The DirectX 12 PassMark score of 85 is notably lower than the DirectX 11 score of 179, which hints that this GPU may not fully excel in newer API workloads, but the measured game data shows it handles this title adequately.

In the measured FPS rows, the GPU's role becomes clearer. At 1080p, the performance gap between Low and Medium is 26 FPS (119 vs 93), and between Medium and High is 23 FPS (93 vs 70). This scaling indicates that the GPU is being pushed progressively harder as settings increase. At 1440p, the Medium to High drop is 19 FPS (75 vs 56), and High to Ultra is only 2 FPS (56 vs 54), suggesting that Ultra settings at 1440p are hitting a memory or bandwidth ceiling rather than a compute limit. At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiting component, as even Low preset only achieves 71 avg FPS, and the jump from Low to Medium costs 16 FPS (71 vs 55). The 8 GB VRAM capacity is likely a constraint at 4K Ultra, where texture data can exceed this allocation.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for smooth gameplay?

A: The measured data shows 1440p Medium as the optimal balance, delivering 75 avg FPS with a 64 FPS minimum. This is the only preset combination where the average exceeds 70 FPS while the minimum stays above 60 FPS. At 1080p, Medium provides 93 avg FPS, which is also excellent, but the higher resolution offers more visual detail for cockpit and terrain readability.

Q: How does this system perform at 4K resolution?

A: At 3840x2160, the system can only achieve 71 avg FPS on Low settings. Medium drops to 55 avg FPS with a 47 FPS minimum, High falls to 42 avg FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 40 avg FPS. None of the 4K presets except Low maintain an average above 60 FPS, making 4K a compromise-heavy experience.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 119 avg FPS, showing the CPU can drive high frame rates. The frame rate drops by 40.3% from 1080p Low to 4K Low (119 to 71), while the CPU's strong single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2044) suggests it is not the limiting factor in most scenarios.

Q: How does the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score of 77740 places it in the 95th percentile. It is 1.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX (76513) and 2.0% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX (76212). The Intel Core i9-14900K is 1.7% ahead at 79097, making the competition very close.

Q: What is the frame time consistency like for this configuration?

A: The minimum FPS data is only provided for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 79 FPS versus a 93 average (14 FPS spread). At 1440p Medium, the minimum is 64 FPS versus a 75 average (11 FPS spread). At 4K Medium, the minimum is 47 FPS versus a 55 average (8 FPS spread). This tighter spread at higher resolutions suggests the GPU workload is more uniform as it becomes the bottleneck.

Q: Is the RTX 4070 Mobile competitive with other GPUs in its class?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 27435 puts it exactly level with the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT (27425, 0% delta). It is within 0.5% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 (27565), which is notable given the 4070 Mobile's 115 W TDP versus the desktop-class 3090's much higher power draw. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell is 1.1% behind at 27135.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals how this system scales across resolutions, providing insight into the limiting component. Starting at 1080p Low with 119 avg FPS, moving to 1440p Low drops performance to 96 avg FPS (a 19.3% reduction). Moving from 1440p Low to 4K Low drops from 96 to 71 avg FPS (a 26.0% reduction). The total scaling from 1080p Low to 4K Low is a 40.3% reduction in average frame rate (119 to 71).

For the Medium preset, the scaling is more dramatic. 1080p Medium delivers 93 avg FPS, 1440p Medium drops to 75 avg FPS (19.4% reduction), and 4K Medium falls to 55 avg FPS (26.7% reduction from 1440p). The cumulative drop from 1080p Medium to 4K Medium is 40.9% (93 to 55). This consistent ~40% reduction from 1080p to 4K across both Low and Medium presets indicates that the GPU is scaling with the pixel count as expected, with the 4K resolution requiring roughly four times the pixel throughput of 1080p but only causing a 40% frame rate drop due to the CPU's continued contribution.

The High preset shows a steeper scaling curve. 1080p High delivers 70 avg FPS, 1440p High drops to 56 avg FPS (20.0% reduction), and 4K High falls to 42 avg FPS (25.0% reduction from 1440p). The total drop from 1080p High to 4K High is 40.0% (70 to 42). The Ultra preset follows a similar pattern: 1080p Ultra at 66 avg FPS, 1440p Ultra at 54 avg FPS (18.2% reduction), and 4K Ultra at 40 avg FPS (25.9% reduction from 1440p), for a total 39.4% drop (66 to 40).

This consistent ~40% reduction across all presets when moving from 1080p to 4K strongly suggests the GPU is the limiting component. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate would remain more constant as resolution increased, since the CPU workload is largely resolution-independent. The fact that higher resolutions consistently reduce FPS by nearly the same proportion indicates that the RTX 4070 Mobile's rendering throughput, not the Ryzen AI Max+ 395's processing power, is what caps performance as pixel count rises.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS table for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile is as follows:

At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 119 avg FPS with no minimum or maximum reported. The Medium preset delivers 93 avg FPS with a 79 FPS minimum and 107 FPS maximum. The High preset delivers 70 avg FPS with no minimum or maximum reported. The Ultra preset delivers 66 avg FPS with no minimum or maximum reported. This shows a 44.5% reduction from Low to Ultra at this resolution (119 to 66).

At 2560x1440, the Low preset delivers 96 avg FPS with no minimum or maximum reported. The Medium preset delivers 75 avg FPS with a 64 FPS minimum and 86 FPS maximum. The High preset delivers 56 avg FPS with no minimum or maximum reported. The Ultra preset delivers 54 avg FPS with no minimum or maximum reported. The reduction from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 43.8% (96 to 54).

At 3840x2160, the Low preset delivers 71 avg FPS with no minimum or maximum reported. The Medium preset delivers 55 avg FPS with a 47 FPS minimum and 63 FPS maximum. The High preset delivers 42 avg FPS with no minimum or maximum reported. The Ultra preset delivers 40 avg FPS with no minimum or maximum reported. The reduction from Low to Ultra at 4K is 43.7% (71 to 40).

The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data across all resolutions, allowing for frame time consistency analysis. At 1080p Medium, the spread from minimum to maximum is 28 FPS (79 to 107). At 1440p Medium, the spread narrows to 22 FPS (64 to 86). At 4K Medium, the spread narrows further to 16 FPS (47 to 63). This tightening spread at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU workload becomes more consistent as it becomes the bottleneck, reducing CPU-driven frame time spikes.

The overall combo rank for this configuration in Microsoft Flight Simulator is 1978 out of 3714 tested combinations, placing it in the 53rd percentile of all tested systems. This mid-pack ranking reflects the fact that while the CPU is in the 95th percentile and the GPU is in the 73rd percentile, the game's heavy demands mean this mobile configuration is outclassed by high-end desktop setups. The data confirms that this pairing is best suited for 1440p gaming, where it can maintain playable frame rates across all settings, and 1080p high-refresh gaming, where it approaches 120 FPS on low settings.