Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator presents a unique challenge for the Intel Core i3-12100F and AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT combination. The benchmark data shows a configuration that is capable of delivering high frame rates, but the scaling patterns across resolutions and settings reveal a system where the CPU and GPU roles are clearly defined. The measured results, taken from actual hardware, place this combo in the 352nd position out of 1795 tested combinations, indicating a strong overall performer that still has identifiable bottlenecks at specific quality levels.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression from 1080p to 4K demonstrates how the performance burden shifts between the processor and graphics card. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system produces 175.9 FPS, which drops to 141.6 FPS at 2560x1440, and further to 101.7 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 42.2% reduction from 1080p to 4K, a relatively modest decline for a flight simulator known for its complex scenery rendering. The moderate scaling suggests that at lower resolutions and settings, the Intel Core i3-12100F is holding the system back, preventing the RX 7900 XT from reaching even higher frame rates.

When moving to Ultra settings, the scaling pattern changes significantly. The 1080p Ultra result of 102.2 FPS falls to 82.0 FPS at 1440p, and then to 56.1 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 4K here is 45.1%, which is steeper than the Low preset. This indicates that as settings increase, the GPU becomes more of a limiting factor, though the CPU still exerts influence. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 45.6 FPS (101.7 vs 56.1), while at 1080p that same gap is 73.7 FPS (175.9 vs 102.2). The shrinking delta at higher resolutions confirms that the RX 7900 XT, with its 20 GB of GDDR6 memory and 800.0 GB/s bandwidth, is being tasked more heavily, but the i3-12100F's four cores and eight threads still cap performance in lighter scenes.

The data shows that at Medium settings, the system achieves 138.3 FPS at 1080p, 111.1 FPS at 1440p, and 79.5 FPS at 4K. This consistent scaling—roughly 20% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and another 28% from 1440p to 4K—suggests a balanced workload where neither component is fully saturated. The CPU benchmarks support this interpretation: the i3-12100F scores 11912 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 1681 in single-core, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, scores nearly identically at 13534 (a -0.1% delta), which is remarkable for a 4-core part against a workstation-class processor. This strong single-threaded performance is critical for Flight Simulator's main thread, but the scaling shows it is not enough to push past 175.9 FPS even at the lowest settings.

FAQ

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

A: The maximum measured average FPS is 175.9, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that breaks the 170 FPS barrier, with the next closest being 141.6 FPS at 1440p Low.

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

A: The Intel Core i3-12100F posts an average benchmark score of 13516, which is 0.4% higher than the Intel Core i7-1250U (13462) and 0.6% higher than the Intel Core i3-10105 (13430). It trails the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX by only 0.1%, with that rival scoring 13534.

Q: Does the RX 7900 XT maintain playable frame rates at 4K Ultra?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 56.1. This is above the 50 FPS threshold but below the 60 FPS mark that many users prefer. The High preset at 4K achieves 57.9 FPS, showing that even dropping one setting level does not significantly improve performance at this resolution.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset yields 141.6 FPS, while Ultra delivers 82.0 FPS. This represents a 59.6 FPS difference, or a 42.1% reduction in performance when moving to maximum quality settings.

Q: How does the GPU's benchmark score position it against competitors?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT has an average benchmark score of 38358, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs. It matches the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile exactly (0% delta), and sits between the NVIDIA CMP 70HX (38225, +0.3%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (38135, +0.6%).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for frame rate drops at higher settings?

A: The data indicates the CPU is the primary limiter at lower resolutions and settings. Evidence for this is the relatively small FPS gain from 1440p to 1080p at Low settings (141.6 to 175.9, a 24.2% increase) compared to the larger gain at Ultra settings (82.0 to 102.2, a 24.6% increase). At 4K, the GPU takes over as the bottleneck, as shown by the modest 45.6 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at that resolution.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 31 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. Its 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die provide substantial compute resources, including 5376 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 192 raster operation units. The card operates at a base clock of 1387 MHz, a game clock of 2025 MHz, and a boost clock of 2394 MHz, with 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus providing 800.0 GB/s of bandwidth. These specifications translate to a pixel rate of 459.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 804.4 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 51.48 TFLOPS.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's role becomes more pronounced at higher resolutions and quality settings. The 4K Ultra result of 56.1 FPS shows a card that is being heavily tasked, but the 20 GB frame buffer ensures that texture streaming and scenery detail do not cause memory-related stutters. The memory clock of 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective) provides ample bandwidth for the high-resolution textures used in the simulator's global scenery. The 84 ray tracing cores are present but not heavily utilized in this title, as the benchmark data does not include ray tracing-specific results.

The GPU's benchmark results show strong compute performance, with a Geekbench OpenCL score of 169834 and a Vulkan score of 160119. The Passmark G3D score of 29009 places it in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile (38349, 0% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (38135, +0.6%). The card's 300 W TDP and dual-slot design require a 700 W power supply, which is reasonable for this performance class. The 2x 8-pin power connectors provide the necessary power delivery for sustained boost clocks during extended flight sessions.

The relationship between the GPU and CPU is evident in the measured FPS data. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 175.9 FPS, which is likely near the CPU's maximum output for this scene. The GPU is underutilized at this point, as evidenced by the relatively small FPS jump from Medium (138.3) to Low (175.9) compared to the jump from High (104.3) to Medium (138.3). This suggests that the i3-12100F's four cores are the limiting factor in lighter scenes, while the RX 7900 XT takes over as the primary bottleneck at 4K Ultra, where the 56.1 FPS result reflects the GPU's compute limits rather than any CPU constraint.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The benchmark data provides a complete matrix of results across three resolutions and four settings levels. At 1920x1080, the system achieves 175.9 FPS on Low, 138.3 FPS on Medium, 104.3 FPS on High, and 102.2 FPS on Ultra. The progression from Low to Medium shows a 37.6 FPS drop, while Medium to High drops another 34.0 FPS. Interestingly, the High to Ultra transition is minimal, with only a 2.1 FPS reduction. This suggests that the Ultra preset adds visual features that are not computationally expensive for the RX 7900 XT at this resolution, or that the CPU is already saturated at High settings.

At 2560x1440, the results are 141.6 FPS on Low, 111.1 FPS on Medium, 85.7 FPS on High, and 82.0 FPS on Ultra. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p shows a 19.5% reduction at Low settings (175.9 to 141.6), a 19.7% reduction at Medium (138.3 to 111.1), a 17.8% reduction at High (104.3 to 85.7), and a 19.8% reduction at Ultra (102.2 to 82.0). This consistent ~20% scaling across all settings indicates that the resolution increase is being handled uniformly by the GPU, with no unexpected bottlenecks emerging at 1440p.

The 4K results show 101.7 FPS on Low, 79.5 FPS on Medium, 57.9 FPS on High, and 56.1 FPS on Ultra. The scaling from 1440p to 4K is more pronounced, with reductions of 28.2% at Low (141.6 to 101.7), 28.5% at Medium (111.1 to 79.5), 32.4% at High (85.7 to 57.9), and 31.6% at Ultra (82.0 to 56.1). The larger drops at High and Ultra settings confirm that the GPU is becoming the limiting factor at this resolution. The difference between High and Ultra at 4K is only 1.8 FPS, which is well within the margin of error and suggests that the Ultra preset's additional effects are negligible at this resolution.

The full picture shows that the system maintains playable frame rates (above 60 FPS) at 1080p and 1440p for all settings except High and Ultra at 1440p, which stay above 80 FPS. At 4K, only the Low and Medium presets achieve 60+ FPS, with High and Ultra falling just below that threshold at 57.9 and 56.1 FPS respectively. The data indicates that this combo is best suited for high-refresh-rate 1080p or 1440p gaming, with 4K being viable only at reduced settings.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured frame rates, the optimal experience depends on the user's resolution and refresh rate priorities. For 1080p displays with a 144 Hz refresh rate, the Medium preset at 138.3 FPS provides a smooth experience with significant visual improvements over Low. The High preset at 104.3 FPS is also viable for 100 Hz displays, but Ultra at 102.2 FPS offers virtually no performance penalty (only 2.1 FPS less than High) and should be selected if the display supports it. The Ultra preset at 1080p appears to be an efficient choice, as the data shows minimal performance loss over High while presumably offering additional visual quality.

For 1440p users, the Medium preset at 111.1 FPS is the best balance for high-refresh-rate displays, providing a 59.6 FPS advantage over Ultra while maintaining smooth gameplay. High at 85.7 FPS is acceptable for 60 Hz displays but may not fully utilize a 144 Hz panel. The Ultra preset at 82.0 FPS is only 3.7 FPS slower than High, so users prioritizing visual fidelity on a 60-75 Hz display should opt for Ultra. The Low preset at 141.6 FPS is ideal for competitive or fast-paced flight scenarios, though the visual quality reduction may detract from the simulation experience.

At 4K, the choices are more constrained. The Medium preset at 79.5 FPS is the only setting that provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS, making it the recommended choice for most users with 4K displays. The Low preset at 101.7 FPS is suitable for users who prioritize frame rate over visuals, while High (57.9 FPS) and Ultra (56.1 FPS) are marginal for 60 Hz displays. Given the 1.8 FPS difference between High and Ultra at this resolution, users who can tolerate frame rates just below 60 FPS should select Ultra for the best visual quality. However, the data suggests that Medium provides the best overall experience at 4K, with a 21.6 FPS advantage over High and a 23.4 FPS advantage over Ultra, which is substantial for maintaining smooth flight simulation.

The CPU and GPU combination shows that the i3-12100F, with its 12 MB of shared L3 cache and 4.30 GHz boost clock, is adequate for this title but not exceptional. Its performance in the 72nd percentile of CPUs, with a single-thread score of 1681 in Cinebench R23, indicates that users on higher refresh rate displays may benefit from a CPU upgrade to unlock the RX 7900 XT's full potential at lower settings. However, for the majority of users targeting 60 FPS or 144 FPS at Medium or High settings, this combo provides a stable and enjoyable experience across all tested resolutions.