Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the Intel Core i7-13700K and AMD Radeon RX 7600 reveals a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces 101 FPS average. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same preset, the average drops to 81 FPS — a 20 FPS decline. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls further to 60 FPS, representing roughly a 40% reduction from the 1080p figure.

The Medium preset tells a similar story with slightly different magnitudes. At 1080p Medium, the average is 79 FPS. At 1440p Medium, it drops to 63 FPS. At 4K Medium, the average reaches 47 FPS with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 54 FPS. This progression — 79 to 63 to 47 — shows a steady erosion of performance as pixel count climbs, with each step consuming roughly 20% of the remaining headroom.

High settings follow the same trend but with lower absolute values. The 1080p High average is 59 FPS, 1440p High yields 48 FPS, and 4K High produces 35 FPS. The gap between 1080p and 1440p on High is 11 FPS, while the gap between 1440p and 4K is 13 FPS, indicating that the resolution penalty becomes slightly more severe at the higher end of the settings spectrum.

Ultra settings represent the most demanding configuration tested. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 56 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, it drops to 45 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the average falls to 33 FPS. The delta from 1080p to 4K at Ultra is 23 FPS, which is proportionally similar to the other presets but lands the system below playable thresholds at 4K.

The scaling behavior suggests that the limiting component shifts with resolution. At 1080p, the data shows the CPU has enough headroom to push the GPU to 101 FPS on Low, but the GPU begins to struggle as settings increase. At 4K, even Low settings only produce 60 FPS, indicating the GPU is the primary bottleneck at this resolution. The Radeon RX 7600 with its 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 128-bit bus appears to be the constraining factor at higher resolutions, while the Core i7-13700K's 16 cores and 24 threads provide ample processing power across all tested configurations.

# Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 79 FPS average with a minimum of 67 FPS and a maximum of 90 FPS. This provides a smooth experience comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold. The High preset at 1080p yields 59 FPS, which is marginally below 60 FPS but still playable for a flight simulator where precise frame timing is less critical than in fast-paced genres.

For 2560x1440, the Medium preset produces 63 FPS average with a minimum of 54 FPS and a maximum of 73 FPS. This is the sweet spot for this resolution, as the High preset drops to 48 FPS and Ultra falls to 45 FPS. The Low preset at 1440p reaches 81 FPS, but the visual quality trade-off is substantial for a game that relies heavily on scenery detail.

At 3840x2160, the measured data shows no configuration achieves 60 FPS. The best option is Low settings at 60 FPS average, but this sacrifices nearly all visual fidelity. Medium at 4K produces 47 FPS with a minimum of 40 FPS, which may be acceptable for slower flight phases but could stutter during dense scenery or weather effects. High at 4K yields 35 FPS and Ultra drops to 33 FPS, both below comfortable playability.

The data indicates that Medium settings provide the best balance of visual quality and performance across all resolutions. At 1080p, Medium offers a 25% improvement over High in average FPS (79 vs 59). At 1440p, the gap widens to 31% (63 vs 48). At 4K, Medium is 34% faster than High (47 vs 35). This consistent advantage makes Medium the recommended preset for users prioritizing smooth frame rates.

For users with higher refresh rate displays at 1080p, Low settings at 101 FPS provide the only measured configuration exceeding 100 FPS. However, the jump from Low to Medium costs 22 FPS (101 to 79), which is a significant penalty for moderate visual gains. Given the genre's slower pacing, the Medium preset remains the better overall choice.

# FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS achieved by this combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 101 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next highest is 81 FPS at 2560x1440 Low, followed by 79 FPS at 1920x1080 Medium.

Q: Can this system run the game at 4K with playable frame rates?

A: At 3840x2160, the only preset achieving 60 FPS average is Low. Medium produces 47 FPS, High produces 35 FPS, and Ultra produces 33 FPS. The minimum FPS at 4K Medium is 40 FPS, indicating occasional dips below smooth playability.

Q: How does the CPU's 16-core configuration influence performance in this flight simulator?

A: The Intel Core i7-13700K with 16 cores and 24 threads scores 30745 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 12412 in 3DMark max threads. These scores indicate strong multi-threaded capability, which supports the game's simulation workload. The CPU ranks in the 89th percentile versus all CPUs, suggesting it is not the limiting factor in most tested configurations.

Q: What is the performance difference between Medium and Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Medium averages 63 FPS while Ultra averages 45 FPS. This represents a 28% performance drop for the highest preset. The Medium preset also has a reported minimum of 54 FPS, whereas Ultra has no reported minimum in the data.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations for this game?

A: The combo ranks 2527 out of 3714 tested combinations. This places it in the lower third of tested systems, consistent with the GPU's 57th percentile ranking among all GPUs and the CPU's 89th percentile ranking among all CPUs.

Q: Is there a measurable difference between 1080p High and 1080p Ultra?

A: At 1920x1080, High averages 59 FPS while Ultra averages 56 FPS. The difference is only 3 FPS, making the Ultra preset a marginal upgrade in visual quality for a negligible performance cost. Both settings fall slightly below the 60 FPS threshold.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 60 FPS average
• Medium: 47 FPS average, 40 FPS minimum, 54 FPS maximum
• High: 35 FPS average
• Ultra: 33 FPS average

The 4K resolution shows the most compressed performance range, with only 27 FPS separating Low from Ultra. The Medium preset's minimum of 40 FPS indicates that frame pacing can become inconsistent during demanding scenes. The gap between Low and Medium is 13 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 2 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the top of the settings stack.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 81 FPS average
• Medium: 63 FPS average, 54 FPS minimum, 73 FPS maximum
• High: 48 FPS average
• Ultra: 45 FPS average

At 1440p, the performance spread widens to 36 FPS between Low and Ultra. The Medium preset maintains a respectable 54 FPS minimum, which keeps the experience above most stutter thresholds. High and Ultra are closely matched at 48 and 45 FPS respectively, with only a 3 FPS difference. The Low preset at 81 FPS provides the only 1440p configuration exceeding 80 FPS.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 101 FPS average
• Medium: 79 FPS average, 67 FPS minimum, 90 FPS maximum
• High: 59 FPS average
• Ultra: 56 FPS average

The 1080p resolution delivers the widest performance range, spanning 45 FPS from Low to Ultra. The Low preset is the only configuration to exceed 100 FPS. Medium maintains a 67 FPS minimum, ensuring consistent frame delivery. The transition from Medium to High costs 20 FPS, which is the largest single-preset drop in the entire dataset. High and Ultra are separated by only 3 FPS, similar to the pattern seen at 1440p.

# How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i7-13700K and AMD Radeon RX 7600 combination ranks 2527 out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the system in the 32nd percentile of tested configurations, meaning roughly two-thirds of tested systems perform better in this specific title.

This ranking is notably lower than what the individual component percentiles might suggest. The CPU ranks in the 89th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 57th percentile among all GPUs. The discrepancy between the CPU's strong standing and the combo's middling rank indicates that the GPU is the dominant factor in determining this game's performance ceiling.

The GPU's nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM, which scores 15199 on average with a delta of -0.2% from the RX 7600's 15171 average benchmark score. The AMD Radeon 680M scores 15270 with a delta of -0.7%, and the AMD Radeon Pro 560X scores 15082 with a delta of 0.6%. These close margins suggest that the RX 7600 sits in a crowded performance tier where small differences in game optimization can shift relative standings.

The CPU's nearest rivals provide context for its strong showing. The AMD Ryzen 9 5900 scores 46971 with a delta of -0.2% against the i7-13700K's 46881 average benchmark score. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 scores 47022 with a delta of -0.3%, while the AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX scores 46654 with a delta of 0.5%. These near-identical scores confirm that the i7-13700K is well within the top tier of CPU performance.

The gap between the combo's rank and the CPU's percentile highlights a common bottleneck scenario: a high-end CPU paired with a mid-range GPU. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for demanding both CPU and GPU resources, the RX 7600's 8 GB VRAM and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth appear insufficient to fully leverage the i7-13700K's computational headroom at higher resolutions and settings.

# CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-13700K brings substantial processing power to this combo. With 16 cores and 24 threads, it offers a hybrid configuration typical of Raptor Lake architecture. The base clock of 3.40 GHz boosts up to 5.40 GHz, providing strong single-thread performance when needed. The 30 MB shared L3 cache and 2 MB per-core L2 cache support the game's streaming and simulation workloads.

Benchmark data confirms the CPU's capability. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 30745 places it among high-end desktop processors. The single-core score of 2116 in the same test indicates strong per-thread performance, which matters for flight simulators that often have a primary simulation thread. The Geekbench multi-core score of 19429 and single-core score of 2529 reinforce this pattern. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 10717 and max-thread score of 12412 show good scaling across the core count.

The CPU's 89th percentile ranking among all CPUs suggests it provides more than enough processing power for this game. The measured FPS data supports this interpretation: at 1080p Low, the system reaches 101 FPS, indicating the CPU can feed the GPU efficiently at lower graphical loads. Even at 4K Ultra, the 33 FPS result is more likely limited by the GPU's rendering capacity than by the CPU's simulation throughput.

The i7-13700K's nearest CPU rivals all score within 0.5% of its average benchmark score, confirming it operates at the top of its performance tier. The AMD Ryzen 9 5900, AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX, and Intel Xeon w3-2535 all cluster around the 46653 to 47022 score range, making the i7-13700K's 46881 score statistically indistinguishable from its competitors. This tight grouping means that CPU choice among these models would have minimal impact on Microsoft Flight Simulator performance.

# GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 is the more constrained component in this pairing. Built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, it features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), while the base clock of 1720 MHz boosts to 2655 MHz. The GPU includes 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 32 ray tracing cores.

The GPU's benchmark scores indicate mid-range positioning. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2310 and PassMark G3D score of 16634 place it in the 57th percentile among all GPUs. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 88051 and Vulkan score of 34401 provide additional reference points. The PassMark DirectX 12 score of 58 is notably low, suggesting potential driver or architecture inefficiencies in certain DX12 workloads.

The RX 7600's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM, which scores 15199 with a -0.2% delta, and the AMD Radeon Pro 560X, which scores 15082 with a 0.6% delta. This clustering around the 15063 to 15270 range means the RX 7600's performance is effectively tied with these competitors. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti and AMD Radeon 680M also fall within this narrow band.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator specifically, the GPU's limitations become evident at higher resolutions. The 4K Medium preset's 47 FPS average and 40 FPS minimum suggest the 8 GB VRAM buffer is being stressed by the game's detailed scenery textures. The 128-bit memory bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth may struggle to feed the rendering pipeline at 4K, particularly when flying over densely populated areas with high-resolution terrain data.

The performance gap between the GPU's 57th percentile and the CPU's 89th percentile creates an imbalanced system for this title. While the i7-13700K has ample headroom, the RX 7600 becomes the bottleneck at 1440p and above. The measured data shows this clearly: at 1080p Low, the system achieves 101 FPS, but at 4K Low, it drops to 60 FPS — a 41% reduction that aligns with the GPU's rendering capabilities rather than the CPU's processing power.