Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i7-13700K paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT lands at rank 653 out of 1,795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the upper third of all configurations analyzed. This is a strong result for a flight simulator, which is notoriously demanding on both CPU and GPU due to its complex scenery rendering and physics calculations. The combo’s position suggests it outperforms the majority of systems, though it is not at the very top tier where extreme hardware dominates. The ranking reflects a balanced pairing where neither component is a glaring bottleneck, but the data indicates there is headroom for improvement if users seek higher frame rates at maximum settings.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 653 out of 1,795 places it in the 64th percentile of all tested configurations for this game. This is a respectable standing, but it is not exceptional—there are 1,142 combos that score higher, which suggests that the hardware is capable but not optimized for the absolute highest performance envelope. The CPU itself, the Intel Core i7-13700K, holds a 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs in general benchmarks, showing it is a top-tier processor. However, in this specific game, the pairing’s overall rank is dragged down by the GPU, which sits at a 76th percentile among all GPUs. This indicates that while the CPU is elite, the GPU is merely above average, creating a scenario where the graphics card is likely the limiting factor in achieving higher frame rates at demanding settings.

When compared to its nearest rivals, the i7-13700K is essentially tied with the Intel Core i7-13700KF, which scores 0.1% higher in average benchmark scores. The AMD EPYC 4364P and Intel Core i9-12900F are also close, with the EPYC trailing by 0.3% and the i9-12900F trailing by 0.4%. The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 is the only rival that leads by a notable margin, scoring 0.5% higher. These tiny deltas mean the CPU choice is almost irrelevant in this combo—any of these processors would yield nearly identical results in Microsoft Flight Simulator, reinforcing that the GPU is the primary driver of the combo’s rank.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of how the combo scales across presets and resolutions, and the optimal setting depends heavily on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers 82.6 FPS, which is playable but not silky smooth for a flight sim where precise control is key. Dropping to High raises this to 84.1 FPS, a negligible gain, while Medium jumps to 112.8 FPS and Low reaches 146.1 FPS. For 1080p users, the Medium preset offers the best balance, providing a comfortable margin above 60 FPS with a 112.8 FPS average, which allows for smooth panning and camera movements without the visual degradation of Low.

At 2560x1440, the story shifts. The Ultra preset yields 67.2 FPS, which is still above the 60 FPS threshold but leaves little headroom for complex scenes with dense clouds or cityscapes. High improves this to 70.6 FPS, while Medium jumps to 92.2 FPS—a substantial leap that makes the experience noticeably smoother. Low hits 118.2 FPS, but the visual quality loss is severe for a sim that relies on visual fidelity for navigation. For 1440p, the High preset is the recommended choice, as it maintains the visual detail needed for reading instruments and terrain while staying comfortably above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the combo struggles to maintain high frame rates. The Ultra preset drops to 48.1 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target and will feel stuttery. High is slightly better at 49.4 FPS, still under 60. Medium reaches 70.1 FPS, which is playable, and Low hits 87.3 FPS. For 4K users, the Medium preset is the only viable option for a smooth experience, as it provides a 70.1 FPS average without sacrificing all visual quality. The data clearly shows that this combo is not suited for Ultra settings at 4K, but it can handle Medium well.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is the primary determinant of the combo’s performance in this game, and its specifications explain the measured results. The GPU features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 624.1 GB/s. This is ample for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which loads large textures for terrain and aircraft, but the game’s engine is not heavily memory-bound at the tested settings. The GPU’s boost clock is 2430 MHz, with a game clock of 2124 MHz, and its 3840 shading units handle the rendering workload. The raw compute power is 37.32 TFLOPS, which is substantial, yet the 4K Ultra results of 48.1 FPS show that the GPU’s rasterization capabilities are stretched thin at maximum settings.

The GPU’s 76th percentile ranking among all GPUs is reflected in its performance relative to rivals. The NVIDIA P104-100 scores 0.4% higher, while the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 trails by 0.2% and the NVIDIA T600 Mobile trails by 0.7%. These are all within a fraction of a percent, meaning the RX 7800 XT’s performance in general benchmarks is tightly clustered with these cards. However, in Microsoft Flight Simulator specifically, the GPU’s 16 GB of VRAM is a boon—the game can easily exceed 8 GB at high resolutions, and the 624.1 GB/s bandwidth prevents texture streaming bottlenecks. The data suggests the GPU is well-suited for 1440p and 1080p gaming, but at 4K, its limits are exposed, with the gap between Low and Ultra settings being only 39.2 FPS (87.3 vs 48.1), indicating that the GPU’s compute units are saturated at higher presets.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates. The Low preset averages 146.1 FPS, which is exceptionally smooth and ideal for competitive or fast-paced flying. Medium drops to 112.8 FPS, still well above 60 FPS. High yields 84.1 FPS, and Ultra falls to 82.6 FPS—a surprisingly small difference between High and Ultra, suggesting that the CPU is not the limiting factor at this resolution, but rather the GPU’s shader workload. The scaling from Low to Ultra is 63.5 FPS, showing a steep drop as visual effects like shadows and reflections are increased.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates are lower but still playable. Low averages 118.2 FPS, Medium 92.2 FPS, High 70.6 FPS, and Ultra 67.2 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra narrows to just 3.4 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset’s additional settings (likely anti-aliasing and draw distance) have minimal impact at this resolution, but the drop from Medium to High is 21.6 FPS, which is significant. This suggests that High is the sweet spot where the GPU’s resources are efficiently used, while Ultra adds strain without proportional visual gains.

At 3840x2160, performance drops sharply. Low averages 87.3 FPS, Medium 70.1 FPS, High 49.4 FPS, and Ultra 48.1 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra is just 1.3 FPS, while the gap from Medium to High is 20.7 FPS. This pattern mirrors the 1440p results, confirming that the GPU’s pixel throughput becomes the bottleneck at 4K, and the Ultra preset offers no tangible benefit over High. Across all resolutions, the data shows that the combo’s performance is highly scalable, with Low settings providing roughly double the frame rate of Ultra at 1080p (146.1 vs 82.6) and nearly double at 4K (87.3 vs 48.1).

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-13700K is a 16-core, 24-thread processor with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, and it plays a supporting role in this combo’s performance. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the game’s engine is known to be single-threaded for many tasks, and the CPU’s single-thread performance is strong—its 3DMark single-thread score is 1136, and its Geekbench single-core score is 2850. This ensures that the flight simulation’s physics and AI calculations do not bottleneck the GPU at lower resolutions, as evidenced by the 1080p Low results of 146.1 FPS, which is a high enough frame rate to keep the GPU busy.

The CPU’s multi-threaded capabilities are also robust, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,000 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 17,731. This helps with background tasks and scenery generation, but the game’s main thread is more critical. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs is well above the GPU’s 76th percentile, which means the CPU is not the limiting factor in this combo. The measured FPS data supports this: at 1080p, the frame rate drops by 63.5 FPS from Low to Ultra, but at 4K, the drop is only 39.2 FPS. This indicates that at 4K, the GPU is fully saturated, and the CPU has headroom to spare, whereas at 1080p, the GPU is still the constraint at higher settings.

The CPU’s 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB per-core L2 cache provide fast access to frequently used data, which is beneficial for the game’s streaming of terrain tiles. The processor’s 125W TDP and 10nm process node ensure it runs efficiently, but the data shows that in this game, the CPU’s performance is more than adequate. The nearest rival CPUs, such as the i7-13700KF and Ryzen 9 PRO 5945, all score within 0.5% of the i7-13700K, so swapping the CPU would not change the combo’s rank or FPS meaningfully. The CPU’s role is to enable the GPU to do its work, and in this pairing, it does so without creating a bottleneck at any tested resolution.