Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is one of the most demanding titles in the benchmark database, and the pairing of the Intel Core i3-12100F with the AMD Radeon RX 7700 produces a combo that lands in the 1324th position out of 2996 tested combinations. That places this setup in the upper-middle portion of the field, above more than half of all recorded combos, but it is not a top-tier configuration. The data shows a system that can handle the game at playable frame rates across most settings, though the CPU’s four physical cores and the GPU’s position relative to its nearest rivals define clear limits at higher resolutions and quality presets.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 1324 out of 2996 tested combos places this pairing at roughly the 44th percentile of all recorded systems for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This is a solid mid-pack result, indicating that the Intel Core i3-12100F and AMD Radeon RX 7700 together deliver a playable experience without reaching the upper echelons of performance. The ranking reflects the balance between the CPU and GPU, and the measured FPS data confirms that this is not a bottleneck-heavy setup at most settings, though the CPU does become more influential at lower resolutions.

The CPU itself sits at the 68th percentile among all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 13494. Its nearest rivals in synthetic testing are the Intel Core 3 N355 with an average score of 13492 and a delta of 0 percent, the Intel Core i5-9500 at 13452 with a 0.3 percent delta, the Intel Core 5 120UL at 13594 with a -0.7 percent delta, and the Intel Core i7-1250U at 13351 with a 1.1 percent delta. These deltas are tiny, meaning the i3-12100F performs nearly identically to those chips in general compute tasks. For Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known to be sensitive to single-thread performance, the i3-12100F’s single-thread score of 893 in 3DMark and 1674 in Cinebench R23 suggests it can drive the game’s simulation logic adequately, but the four-core design will limit multi-threaded scaling.

The GPU, Radeon RX 7700, ranks at the 58th percentile among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 15852. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R9 370X at 15862 with a -0.1 percent delta, the AMD Radeon RX 9060 at 16014 with a -1 percent delta, the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 at 15679 with a 1.1 percent delta, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti at 16129 with a -1.7 percent delta. These small deltas indicate that the RX 7700 performs within a few percent of those cards in general GPU benchmarks, which translates to competitive frame rates in Flight Simulator. The combination of a 68th-percentile CPU and a 58th-percentile GPU yields a 44th-percentile combo ranking, showing that the pairing is slightly less than the sum of its parts, likely due to the CPU limiting at lower resolutions.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 32 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It packs 28,100 million transistors into a 346 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 81.2 million per square millimeter. The GPU has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth. This large memory pool is particularly relevant for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which streams vast amounts of terrain and scenery data; 16 GB ensures that even at 4K with high-resolution textures, the GPU will not run out of memory, though the measured FPS data shows that raw compute power, not memory capacity, is the limiting factor at higher settings.

The GPU’s clocks are set with a base of 1900 MHz, a game clock of 2041 MHz, and a boost clock of 2459 MHz. The memory runs at 2438 MHz, which translates to 19.5 Gbps effective. These clock speeds, combined with 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units, deliver a pixel rate of 236.1 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 393.4 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 25.18 TFLOPS, which is a strong figure for rasterization-heavy workloads like Flight Simulator. The GPU also has 40 ray tracing cores, but the game does not heavily rely on ray tracing, so the rasterization throughput is what drives the measured results.

In the context of this game, the RX 7700’s role is to render the complex cockpit interiors, terrain mesh, and atmospheric effects. The measured FPS at 1080p Low is 126 FPS, which shows the GPU is more than capable at lower settings. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 42 FPS, indicating that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at that resolution and preset. The 16 GB memory buffer means there are no texture swapping issues, but the compute units are simply not enough to maintain high frame rates at 4K Ultra without additional upscaling, which is not part of the measured data. The GPU’s performance relative to its nearest rivals—within 1.7 percent of the RTX 3060 Ti—means it should trade blows with that card in this title, and the measured FPS reflects that mid-range positioning.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals how this combo scales across resolutions. At 1080p with Low settings, the average FPS is 126, which drops to 102 at 1440p and 75 at 4K. That is a 19 percent drop from 1080p to 1440p and a further 26 percent drop from 1440p to 4K. These reductions are substantial and indicate that the GPU is becoming more of a limiting factor as resolution increases. At Low settings, the CPU has less geometry and shadow work to do, so the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth dominate, and the RX 7700’s 624.1 GB/s bandwidth is tested at 4K.

At Medium settings, the scaling is similar but with a slightly different pattern. The 1080p average is 98 FPS, 1440p is 79 FPS, and 4K is 59 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 19 percent, and from 1440p to 4K is 25 percent. The minimum FPS at 1440p Medium is 67, and at 4K Medium it is 50, showing that even the lows remain playable at these settings. The Medium preset includes the only measured min/max values in the entire dataset, with 1080p Medium ranging from 84 to 113 FPS, 1440p Medium from 67 to 91 FPS, and 4K Medium from 50 to 67 FPS. These ranges suggest consistent frame pacing rather than sudden spikes.

At High settings, the scaling becomes more pronounced. The 1080p average is 74 FPS, 1440p is 60 FPS, and 4K is 44 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 19 percent, but from 1440p to 4K is 27 percent. At Ultra settings, the averages are 70 FPS at 1080p, 57 FPS at 1440p, and 42 FPS at 4K. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is 19 percent, and from 1440p to 4K is 26 percent. The fact that the percentage drops are relatively consistent across settings suggests that the GPU is the main scaling factor, but the absolute FPS values reveal that the CPU is also involved. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 70 FPS, which is only 4 FPS higher than at 4K High, indicating that the CPU is starting to limit at lower resolutions with high settings.

The limiting component shifts depending on the resolution. At 1080p with Low settings, the 126 FPS average is likely CPU-bound in parts of the flight sim, given the i3-12100F’s four cores. At 4K Ultra, the 42 FPS average is clearly GPU-bound, as the RX 7700’s 25.18 TFLOPS is insufficient for the pixel load. The sweet spot is around 1440p Medium, where the GPU and CPU are more balanced, resulting in a 79 FPS average that feels smooth without overtaxing either component.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience for this combo is the Medium preset at 1440p. The average FPS at 1440p Medium is 79, with a minimum of 67 and a maximum of 91. That minimum is above the 60 FPS threshold that most players consider playable, and the average provides headroom for complex scenes like dense city flyovers or stormy weather. At 1080p, Medium delivers 98 FPS average with a minimum of 84, which is excellent for high-refresh-rate monitors, but the visual fidelity of Medium is a compromise compared to High or Ultra.

For players with a 4K display, the Low preset at 4K yields 75 FPS average, which is surprisingly good given the resolution, but Low settings in Flight Simulator cut many visual features that define the experience, such as detailed terrain shadows and high-quality aircraft models. The Medium preset at 4K gives 59 FPS average with a minimum of 50, which is borderline playable but may stutter in heavy scenarios. The High preset at 4K drops to 44 FPS, and Ultra to 42 FPS, both of which are below the smoothness threshold.

The data suggests that High settings are not worth the FPS cost at any resolution. At 1080p, High gives 74 FPS, which is 24 FPS less than Medium, and the visual difference between Medium and High in Flight Simulator is noticeable but not transformative. At 1440p, High gives 60 FPS, which is exactly at the playable threshold, but the 79 FPS of Medium is a safer choice. At 4K, High’s 44 FPS is poor, so Low or Medium is preferable. The Ultra preset is the worst value in the measured data, with 70 FPS at 1080p, 57 FPS at 1440p, and 42 FPS at 4K—each only slightly below High, but the extra load on the GPU is not justified by the marginal visual gains.

The recommendation is to run Medium at 1440p as the primary target. If the display is 1080p, Medium at 98 FPS is the best balance of smoothness and visual quality. For 4K, Low at 75 FPS is the only preset that maintains playability, though players who prioritize visuals over frame rate could accept Medium at 59 FPS. The measured data does not include any upscaling technologies, so these numbers represent native rendering; enabling upscaling would likely improve FPS at higher settings, but that is outside the measured scope.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of this combo’s performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 126 FPS, which is the highest measured value for this combo. The Medium preset at 1080p drops to 98 FPS average, with a minimum of 84 and a maximum of 113. The High preset at 1080p averages 74 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 70 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 28 FPS, which is large, but the gap between High and Ultra is only 4 FPS, indicating diminishing returns at the top end.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 102 FPS, which is a 19 percent drop from 1080p Low. The Medium preset at 1440p averages 79 FPS, with a minimum of 67 and a maximum of 91. The High preset at 1440p averages 60 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 57 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 1440p is only 3 FPS, suggesting that Ultra adds little beyond High at this resolution. The 1440p Medium minimum of 67 FPS is the key number here, as it shows the combo can hold above 60 FPS even in demanding scenes.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 75 FPS, which is surprising for 4K and indicates that the GPU’s 16 GB memory and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for low-detail rendering. The Medium preset at 4K averages 59 FPS, with a minimum of 50 and a maximum of 67. The High preset at 4K averages 44 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 42 FPS. The drop from Medium to High at 4K is 15 FPS, which is the largest single-setting drop in the dataset, showing that High settings at 4K push the GPU beyond its comfort zone.

Comparing settings across resolutions, the Low preset at 4K (75 FPS) outperforms the High preset at 1440p (60 FPS) and matches the Ultra preset at 1080p (70 FPS is close but not equal). This indicates that resolution has a larger impact on FPS than settings at the lower end of the quality spectrum, but at higher settings, resolution scaling becomes more severe. The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data across all resolutions, and those values show consistent frame times: 84-113 FPS at 1080p, 67-91 FPS at 1440p, and 50-67 FPS at 4K. The spread between min and max is roughly 25-30 percent of the average, which is typical for a flight sim where camera movement and terrain loading cause variability.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 1440p Medium as the optimal balance, with an average of 79 FPS and a minimum of 67 FPS. At 1080p Medium, the average is 98 FPS, but 1440p provides a better visual experience without dropping below playable frame rates. At 4K, only the Low preset maintains an average above 75 FPS, so 1440p is the recommended target.

Q: How does the RX 7700 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in this game?

A: The RX 7700’s average benchmark score of 15852 is within 1.7 percent of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (16129) and within 1 percent of the AMD Radeon RX 9060 (16014). It is 1.1 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (15679) and 0.1 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 370X (15862). These small deltas suggest similar frame rates in Flight Simulator, though the measured FPS is specific to this combo.

Q: Is the Intel Core i3-12100F a bottleneck for the RX 7700 in this game?

A: The CPU has a 68th percentile ranking among all processors, with a single-thread score of 893 in 3DMark and 1674 in Cinebench R23. At 1080p Low, the 126 FPS average suggests the CPU is not limiting, but at 1080p Ultra, the 70 FPS average is only 4 FPS higher than at 4K High (44 FPS), indicating that the CPU’s four cores limit performance at lower resolutions with high settings. At 4K, the GPU is the clear bottleneck.

Q: What are the FPS differences between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution?

A: At 1080p, Low averages 126 FPS and Ultra averages 70 FPS, a difference of 56 FPS. At 1440p, Low averages 102 FPS and Ultra averages 57 FPS, a difference of 45 FPS. At 4K, Low averages 75 FPS and Ultra averages 42 FPS, a difference of 33 FPS. The gap narrows as resolution increases, confirming that the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher pixel counts.

Q: Does the 16 GB VRAM on the RX 7700 provide any advantage in Flight Simulator?

A: The 16 GB GDDR6 memory with 624.1 GB/s bandwidth ensures that texture loading and terrain streaming do not cause stutters due to memory exhaustion. The measured FPS data shows consistent minimum values at Medium settings—84 FPS at 1080p, 67 FPS at 1440p, and 50 FPS at 4K—which indicates the memory buffer is sufficient even at 4K. However, the GPU’s compute performance, not VRAM capacity, is what limits high settings at 4K.

Q: What is the combo’s overall ranking among all tested systems?

A: The combo ranks 1324 out of 2996 tested combinations, placing it in the 44th percentile. This is a mid-pack result, meaning it outperforms more than half of all recorded systems but is far from top-tier. The CPU’s 68th percentile and GPU’s 58th percentile individually are higher than the combo rank, suggesting the pairing does not scale perfectly in this specific game due to the CPU’s four-core limitation in certain scenarios.