Microsoft Flight Simulator

The benchmark data for Microsoft Flight Simulator, using the Intel Core i7-12700KF and AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT, reveals a system that is heavily influenced by graphics settings and resolution scaling. The measured frames per second (FPS) across twelve different configurations provide a clear picture of where this combination excels and where it begins to strain.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 produces a predictable but significant performance penalty across all settings. At the Low preset, the average frame rate drops from 146.6 FPS at 1080p to 83.9 FPS at 4K, representing a reduction of approximately 43%. This scaling pattern indicates that the system remains capable of delivering playable performance even at the highest resolution, though the margin for high refresh rate displays narrows considerably.

The Medium preset shows a similar relative decline, moving from 115.6 FPS at 1080p to 70 FPS at 4K, a drop of roughly 39%. The High preset follows suit, with 83.3 FPS at 1080p falling to 50.2 FPS at 4K, a decrease of about 40%. Interestingly, the Ultra preset demonstrates the smallest absolute drop from 81 FPS at 1080p to 48.2 FPS at 4K, a decline of approximately 40.5%, but this is because the baseline at 1080p is already constrained.

The data suggests that at 1080p, the CPU is likely the limiting factor, as the frame rates across Medium, High, and Ultra presets cluster relatively closely—115.6, 83.3, and 81 FPS respectively. The jump from Low to Medium is substantial (146.6 to 115.6 FPS), but the subsequent steps are smaller, implying that the graphics card is not yet saturated. At 4K, however, the gap between Low and Ultra widens significantly (83.9 to 48.2 FPS), indicating that the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck as pixel count increases. This behavior is characteristic of a balanced system where neither component is severely mismatched, but the GPU takes on more responsibility at higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of tested combinations, this specific pairing of the Intel Core i7-12700KF and AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT achieves a rank of 660 out of 1795 total combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the upper-middle tier of all tested configurations, meaning it outperforms roughly 63% of the systems evaluated for this title.

The percentile standing for the CPU alone is 89, indicating that the i7-12700KF is a strong performer relative to all other processors in the database. Its average benchmark score of 35355 places it nearly identical to its nearest rivals: the Intel Core i5-14400 (35336, deltaPct 0.1), the Intel Core i7-13800H (35416, deltaPct -0.2), and the Intel Core i9-12900HX (35289, deltaPct 0.2). These extremely close margins, all within 0.3% of each other, suggest that CPU performance is not a differentiating factor at this level.

The GPU, meanwhile, holds a percentile of 76 against all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 32619. Its closest competitors are less mainstream parts, including the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 (32540, deltaPct 0.2) and the NVIDIA P104-100 (32747, deltaPct -0.4). The combination's overall rank of 660 suggests that while each component is individually strong, the pairing does not produce a top-tier result specifically for this simulation, likely due to the game's demanding single-threaded and GPU-heavy workload characteristics.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture using a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 346 mm² housing 28,100 million transistors. Its memory configuration includes 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 624.1 GB/s. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 2430 MHz, with a game clock of 2124 MHz.

In the context of Microsoft Flight Simulator, the 16 GB VRAM capacity is ample for the highest resolution textures and settings tested here. The memory bandwidth of 624.1 GB/s supports the heavy data streaming required for terrain and scenery rendering. The GPU's compute capabilities, rated at 37.32 TFLOPS for FP32 operations, provide sufficient raw power for the simulation's complex shaders.

The data indicates that the GPU's performance scales as expected with resolution. At 1080p Ultra, the system achieves 81 FPS, which rises to 83.3 FPS at High and 115.6 FPS at Medium. The relatively small difference between Ultra and High suggests that the GPU is handling the extra graphical features without major frame rate penalties at this resolution. At 4K, however, the Ultra preset drops to 48.2 FPS, while High manages 50.2 FPS, indicating that the GPU is approaching its limits with the most demanding settings. The Low preset at 4K still yields 83.9 FPS, demonstrating that the card retains significant headroom when graphical effects are reduced.

Measured FPS Breakdown

Examining the data resolution by resolution provides a comprehensive view of performance. At 1920x1080, the system delivers 146.6 FPS on Low, 115.6 FPS on Medium, 83.3 FPS on High, and 81 FPS on Ultra. The 1080p results show a clear trend where the Low preset provides a substantial frame rate advantage, while the gap between High and Ultra is minimal at just 2.3 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates adjust to 120.4 FPS on Low, 90.7 FPS on Medium, 71.7 FPS on High, and 64.3 FPS on Ultra. The 1440p results maintain a similar pattern, with the difference between High and Ultra growing to 7.4 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is beginning to feel the pressure of higher pixel counts.

At 3840x2160, the performance profile shifts more dramatically: 83.9 FPS on Low, 70 FPS on Medium, 50.2 FPS on High, and 48.2 FPS on Ultra. The 4K data reveals that the High and Ultra presets converge closely, with only a 2 FPS difference, while the Medium preset offers a significant improvement of nearly 20 FPS over High. This suggests that at 4K, the difference between High and Ultra settings is nearly imperceptible in terms of frame rate, but the step down to Medium provides meaningful gains.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-12700KF is a 12-core, 20-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process. It features a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a TDP of 125 W. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 25 MB of L3 cache.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's single-thread performance is critical, and the benchmark results reflect this. The processor achieves a single-thread score of 1043 in 3DMark, which is a strong result, and a multi-thread score of 9983 at maximum threads. In Cinebench R23, the single-core score is 4091, while the multi-core score reaches 28979, indicating robust performance in both lightly and heavily threaded workloads.

The data suggests that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck in most tested configurations. At 1080p Low, the frame rate of 146.6 FPS is likely near the CPU's practical limit for this game's simulation logic. The relatively small frame rate differences between High and Ultra at 1080p (83.3 vs 81 FPS) indicate that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU adequately, and the GPU becomes the limiting factor as settings increase. At 4K, the CPU's role diminishes further, as the GPU workload dominates and frame rates become more dependent on the graphics card's capabilities.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset at 81 FPS provides a smooth experience on a standard 60 Hz monitor, while the High preset at 83.3 FPS offers nearly identical performance with a slight reduction in visual fidelity. For users with high refresh rate displays, the Medium preset at 115.6 FPS or Low at 146.6 FPS are viable options, though the visual trade-offs may be noticeable.

At 2560x1440, the High preset at 71.7 FPS strikes a good balance between visual quality and smoothness, while the Medium preset at 90.7 FPS provides a more comfortable margin for frame rate fluctuations. The Ultra preset at 64.3 FPS is still playable but may experience occasional dips below 60 FPS during complex scenes. For 1440p gaming, the Medium preset appears to be the sweet spot, offering a 26% improvement over High while maintaining good image quality.

At 3840x2160, the data recommends the Medium preset at 70 FPS, which provides a substantial improvement over High (50.2 FPS) and Ultra (48.2 FPS). The 20 FPS difference between Medium and High is significant for smoothness, and the visual quality trade-off is acceptable given the resolution's inherent sharpness. The Low preset at 83.9 FPS is also viable for users prioritizing frame rate above all else, but the Medium preset offers a better balance of visual fidelity and performance. The Ultra preset at 4K should be avoided unless the user is willing to accept frame rates below 50 FPS, which may detract from the simulation experience.