Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator: AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 — Benchmark Analysis

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 delivers a robust Microsoft Flight Simulator experience, with measured frame rates ranging from 50 FPS at 4K Ultra to 151 FPS at 1080p Low. The data shows a system that scales predictably across resolutions and settings, with the CPU’s 16 Zen 5 cores and the GPU’s 16 GB of GDDR6X memory combining to handle the simulator’s demanding rendering workload. This combo ranks 917th out of 2,996 tested configurations, placing it in the upper third of all systems evaluated for this title.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of resolution-driven performance degradation. At 1080p High, the system produces 88 FPS average, which drops to 71 FPS at 1440p High (a 19.3% reduction) and further to 53 FPS at 4K High (a 39.8% reduction from the 1080p figure). This scaling profile indicates that the RTX 4080 becomes increasingly the limiting factor as pixel count rises, though the CPU still has headroom to feed the GPU even at 4K.

Looking at the Low preset, the scaling is steeper in absolute terms but similar in percentage: 151 FPS at 1080p, 122 FPS at 1440p (a 19.2% drop), and 90 FPS at 4K (a 40.4% drop from 1080p). The consistency of these percentage reductions across settings suggests the bottleneck shifts uniformly with resolution rather than being tied to specific graphical features. At 1080p Low, the 151 FPS result indicates the CPU can push well beyond typical display refresh rates, while the 4K Low figure of 90 FPS still provides a smooth experience for most users.

The Medium preset shows the only complete min/max data in the measured set. At 1080p Medium, the average is 118 FPS with a minimum of 100 FPS and maximum of 135 FPS, giving a 35 FPS spread. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 95 FPS with min/max of 81 and 109 FPS respectively (a 28 FPS spread). At 4K Medium, the average falls to 70 FPS with min/max of 59 and 80 FPS (a 21 FPS spread). The narrowing min-max range at higher resolutions indicates that frame time variance decreases as the GPU becomes more uniformly loaded — a typical sign that the rendering pipeline is saturated rather than stalling on CPU-side bottlenecks.

Ultra settings follow the same trend: 84 FPS at 1080p, 68 FPS at 1440p (a 19.0% drop), and 50 FPS at 4K (a 40.5% drop from 1080p). The 4K Ultra result of 50 FPS is the lowest measured figure and sits just below the 60 FPS threshold many simmers prefer, though it remains playable with adaptive sync or by dialing back specific effects. The overall scaling data suggests that this combo is best suited to 1440p and 1080p gaming, where it can maintain high frame rates across all presets.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 brings 16 cores and 32 threads based on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Strix Halo, fabricated on TSMC’s 4 nm process. Its base clock is 3.00 GHz with a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, and it carries 64 MB of shared L3 cache plus 1 MB L2 per core and 80 KB L1 per core. This CPU sits in the 95th percentile among all processors in the database, with an average benchmark score of 77,740.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarking show it trading blows with high-end desktop parts. It sits 1.6% above the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX and 1.6% above the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P, while trailing the Intel Core i9-14900K by 1.7% and leading the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX by 2.0%. For a mobile-oriented chip, this level of parity with flagship desktop silicon is notable, and it directly influences Flight Simulator’s CPU-bound scenes such as dense urban areas and complex weather systems.

In the measured FPS data, the CPU’s contribution is most evident at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the 151 FPS result is nearly identical to the 1440p Low figure of 122 FPS when adjusted for the GPU load difference, suggesting the CPU can sustain high frame generation even when the GPU is less taxed. The 5.10 GHz boost clock and 32 threads provide ample headroom for the simulator’s multi-threaded terrain streaming and flight physics calculations. The 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth from the quad-channel LPDDR5X configuration helps feed both the CPU and the integrated Radeon 8060S graphics, though the discrete RTX 4080 handles the primary rendering duties.

The Cinebench results reinforce the CPU’s capability: 35,314 in R23 multi-core and 2,044 in single-core, with Geekbench scores of 20,992 multi-core and 2,464 single-core. These figures place the chip well above the thresholds typically needed for smooth Flight Simulator performance, and the 64 MB L3 cache is particularly beneficial for the simulator’s large texture and geometry datasets. The 303 score in PassMark’s find prime numbers test is low, but that benchmark is not representative of gaming workloads; the 128,682 floating point math score and 200,665 integer math score are more relevant to simulation physics.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD103 chip, manufactured on TSMC’s 5 nm process with 45,900 million transistors. It features 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 716.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s base clock is 2205 MHz with a boost clock of 2505 MHz, and memory runs at 1400 MHz (22.4 Gbps effective). With 9,728 shading units, 304 TMUs, 112 ROPs, 76 RT cores, and 304 tensor cores, the RTX 4080 offers 48.74 TFLOPS of FP32 compute.

This GPU sits in the 86th percentile among all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 54,247. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: it is 0.1% above the RTX 4080 SUPER, 1.1% above the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X, 2.6% above the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB, and 2.7% above the AMD Radeon 8060S. The near-parity with the RTX 4080 SUPER suggests that Flight Simulator performance differences between these cards would be negligible in most scenarios.

In this game, the GPU’s 16 GB VRAM is a key asset. Flight Simulator is notorious for consuming large amounts of VRAM at high resolutions and detail levels, and the 16 GB capacity prevents texture thrashing or memory spills that could cause stutters. The 716.8 GB/s bandwidth ensures that terrain textures and aircraft models load quickly as the camera moves. At 4K Ultra, the 50 FPS result reflects the GPU being fully utilized, while the 90 FPS at 4K Low shows that even at reduced settings, the RTX 4080 can maintain high frame rates at 4K resolution.

The PassMark G3D score of 34,457 and GPU compute score of 20,671 place this card in a strong position for both rasterization and compute-heavy tasks. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 214,739 and Vulkan score of 263,779 further confirm its compute prowess. For Flight Simulator specifically, the RT cores may assist with any ray-traced effects, though the measured presets do not specify whether ray tracing is enabled. The 76 RT cores provide hardware acceleration that could be leveraged for shadows and reflections, but the simulator’s primary workload remains traditional rasterization.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: Based on the measured data, 1440p offers the best balance of quality and performance. At 1440p High, the system delivers 71 FPS average, while 1080p High reaches 88 FPS and 4K High drops to 53 FPS. The 1440p result stays above 60 FPS while providing significantly more detail than 1080p.

Q: Can this system handle 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 4K Ultra, the measured average FPS is 50. This is below the 60 FPS threshold but still playable. Dropping to 4K High improves the average to 53 FPS, while 4K Medium reaches 70 FPS. For smooth 4K gameplay, the Medium preset is the recommended choice.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has an average benchmark score of 77,740, which is 1.6% higher than the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX and 1.6% higher than the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P. It trails the Intel Core i9-14900K by 1.7% and leads the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX by 2.0%.

Q: What is the frame time consistency at different resolutions?

A: The only complete min/max data comes from Medium settings. At 1080p, the spread is 35 FPS (100-135). At 1440p, the spread narrows to 28 FPS (81-109). At 4K, the spread narrows further to 21 FPS (59-80). Higher resolutions produce more consistent frame times.

Q: How does this combo rank against other tested configurations?

A: This combination ranks 917th out of 2,996 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the 69th percentile of all tested systems, meaning roughly 31% of configurations perform better.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the limiting factor at 4K?

A: The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K (roughly 40% at every preset) indicates the RTX 4080 becomes the primary limiter at 4K. The CPU’s 5.10 GHz boost clock and 32 threads provide sufficient headroom, as evidenced by the 151 FPS at 1080p Low.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 combination ranks 917th out of 2,996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the upper third of all systems tested for this game, which is a strong result given the simulator’s reputation as one of the most demanding titles in the benchmark database.

The rank reflects the balance between the 16-core CPU and the 16 GB GPU. The CPU’s 95th percentile standing among all processors means it is not a bottleneck in most scenarios, while the GPU’s 86th percentile rank is slightly lower but still respectable. The delta between the two percentiles suggests that upgrading the GPU would yield more performance gains than upgrading the CPU in this specific game.

Comparing to other combos in the top 1,000, this system’s strength lies in its consistency across settings. The 4K Medium result of 70 FPS and 1440p Ultra result of 68 FPS show that users can achieve smooth gameplay at high resolutions without sacrificing all graphical fidelity. The 1080p Low result of 151 FPS indicates the system can drive high-refresh-rate displays at lower resolutions, useful for competitive or fast-paced flying scenarios.

The combo’s rank also benefits from the CPU’s 64 MB L3 cache, which helps with the simulator’s streaming terrain data. The GPU’s 16 GB VRAM is above the minimum needed for 4K texture packs, and the 716.8 GB/s bandwidth prevents memory bandwidth bottlenecks even in dense scenery areas. For users seeking to improve this rank, the data suggests focusing on GPU upgrades first, as the CPU already outperforms most desktop processors in aggregate benchmarks.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings balance depends on the user’s resolution and frame rate targets. At 1080p, all presets are playable, with Ultra delivering 84 FPS average and Low reaching 151 FPS. For 1080p users with 144 Hz displays, the Medium preset at 118 FPS offers the best combination of visual quality and refresh rate headroom, while High at 88 FPS is sufficient for 60-90 Hz displays.

At 1440p, the Medium preset at 95 FPS is the strongest recommendation. It provides a 14 FPS improvement over High (71 FPS) and a 27 FPS improvement over Ultra (68 FPS), with the min FPS of 81 ensuring no significant drops below 60 FPS. The Ultra preset at 68 FPS is also viable for users prioritizing visual quality, but the 81-109 FPS min-max range of Medium offers more consistent performance. The Low preset at 122 FPS is unnecessary unless chasing maximum frame rates.

At 4K, the Medium preset at 70 FPS is the clear winner. It delivers 17 FPS more than High (53 FPS) and 20 FPS more than Ultra (50 FPS), with a min FPS of 59 that just touches the 60 FPS threshold. The Low preset at 90 FPS is smooth but sacrifices too much visual detail for the simulator’s scenic value. For 4K users, Medium settings provide the best experience per the measured data, as the jump to High brings only marginal visual gains at a significant frame rate cost.

The overall recommendation is to use Medium settings at 1440p or 4K, depending on display resolution. At 1080p, High or Medium both work well, with Medium offering better frame time consistency (100-135 FPS range) compared to High’s unspecified min/max. The Ultra preset is only recommended for 1080p users who prioritize maximum visual fidelity and can tolerate frame rates in the 84 FPS range.