Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 delivers strong frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator across all tested resolutions, with every preset at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K clearing the 60 FPS playable threshold. The data shows a combination capable of handling the simulator’s demanding rendering workload, though the margin of headroom shrinks as resolution increases.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combination produces its highest frame rates. On the Low preset, the average FPS reaches 195. Moving to Medium, the average drops to 164, with a minimum of 139 and a maximum of 188. The High preset yields an average of 123 FPS. The Ultra preset, the most demanding setting tested at this resolution, still holds an average of 117 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 78 FPS, indicating that the GPU has ample headroom at 1080p.

At 2560x1440, performance scales downward but remains robust. The Low preset averages 170 FPS. Medium delivers an average of 132 FPS, with a minimum of 112 and a maximum of 152. High comes in at 99 FPS average. Ultra, the heaviest load, produces an average of 95 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra here is 75 FPS, nearly identical to the 1080p delta, suggesting the scaling penalty from resolution is consistent across presets.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates tighten considerably. The Low preset still averages 125 FPS. Medium averages 97 FPS, with a minimum of 83 and a maximum of 112. High drops to 73 FPS average. Ultra falls to 70 FPS average. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 55 FPS, narrower than at lower resolutions, which indicates the GPU is becoming the limiting factor as pixel count rises.

The only settings with min/max data are Medium at each resolution. At 1080p Medium, the range from 139 to 188 shows a 49 FPS spread. At 1440p Medium, the range is 112 to 152, a 40 FPS spread. At 4K Medium, the range is 83 to 112, a 29 FPS spread. This tightening of the min-max window at higher resolutions points to more consistent frame pacing under heavier GPU load.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear shift in component responsibility as resolution increases. At 1920x1080, the CPU plays a more prominent role in determining frame rates. The jump from Low to Medium at 1080p costs 31 FPS, while the jump from High to Ultra costs only 6 FPS. This non-linear scaling suggests that at lower resolutions, the CPU can feed frames faster than the GPU can render them, particularly on lighter presets.

At 2560x1440, the balance begins to tip toward the GPU. The Low-to-Medium step costs 38 FPS, while High-to-Ultra costs only 4 FPS. The smaller penalty for the Ultra step indicates that the GPU is starting to saturate, as the additional shading work from Ultra settings produces diminishing returns relative to the already heavy load.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the dominant constraint. The Low-to-Medium step costs 28 FPS, and High-to-Ultra costs only 3 FPS. The 4K Ultra average of 70 FPS sits just 10 FPS above the playable threshold, while 4K Low achieves 125 FPS. The scaling between resolutions on the same preset reinforces this: 1080p Low scores 195 FPS, 1440p Low scores 170 FPS, and 4K Low scores 125 FPS. The 70 FPS drop from 1080p to 4K on Low is larger than the 75 FPS drop from Low to Ultra at 1440p, confirming that pixel count is the primary stressor.

The CPU’s influence is most visible at 1080p, where the 8400F’s six Zen 4 cores and 12 threads can keep the RTX 4080 fed even on the Low preset. At 4K, the GPU’s 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and 716.8 GB/s bandwidth become the bottleneck, as the frame rate differences between presets narrow.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K Ultra settings?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 Ultra is 70, which exceeds the 60 FPS playable threshold. The verdict data lists Ultra as the best settings at this resolution, with an average of 70 FPS.

Q: What is the largest FPS drop between presets at 1440p?

A: The largest single-step drop at 2560x1440 is from Low (170 FPS) to Medium (132 FPS), a loss of 38 FPS. The High preset averages 99 FPS, and Ultra averages 95 FPS.

Q: Does the RTX 4080 bottleneck the Ryzen 5 8400F at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the opposite. At 1920x1080, the Low preset reaches 195 FPS, and Ultra stays at 117 FPS. The 78 FPS spread across presets indicates the CPU can deliver frames faster than the GPU can process them at lower resolutions.

Q: How does the minimum FPS on Medium settings compare across resolutions?

A: At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 139 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the minimum is 112 FPS. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 83 FPS. All minimums remain well above 60 FPS.

Q: Is the 4K High preset significantly slower than 4K Medium?

A: Yes, there is a 24 FPS difference. 4K Medium averages 97 FPS, while 4K High averages 73 FPS. The min/max data for Medium shows 83 to 112 FPS, while High has no recorded min/max.

Q: Which resolution shows the smallest gap between High and Ultra settings?

A: The 4K resolution shows the smallest gap, with High at 73 FPS and Ultra at 70 FPS, a difference of only 3 FPS. At 1440p, the gap is 4 FPS, and at 1080p, it is 6 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Ryzen 5 8400F and RTX 4080 ranks 273rd out of 3,714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the top 7.4% of all configurations in the database. The percentile standing for the CPU alone is 77, meaning it outperforms 77% of all tested CPUs. The GPU stands at the 86th percentile, outperforming 86% of all tested GPUs.

The rank of 273 is a strong result given the game’s reputation for heavy simulation overhead. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 25,005 and the GPU’s average benchmark score of 54,247 both contribute to this placement. The CPU’s nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F with a delta of 0.2% and the Intel Core i7-11850H with a delta of 0.3%, indicating the 8400F sits in a tight performance cluster. The GPU’s nearest rival is the RTX 4080 SUPER with a delta of 0.1%, meaning the two cards are virtually identical in average score.

The combination’s rank reflects the balance between a mid-range CPU and a high-end GPU. While the GPU is the stronger component, the CPU does not hold it back enough to drop the combo out of the top percentile. The 273rd rank out of 3,714 combos is consistent with the measured FPS data, which shows playable performance at every tested setting.

The Verdict

Benchmark results indicate this PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator with full playability across all resolutions and presets tested. The playable threshold is 60 FPS, and every configuration in the measured data exceeds it.

At 3840x2160, all four presets are playable. The Ultra preset averages 70 FPS, High averages 73 FPS, Medium averages 97 FPS, and Low averages 125 FPS. The best settings at 4K are Ultra, with an average of 70 FPS.

At 2560x1440, all presets also clear 60 FPS. Ultra averages 95 FPS, High averages 99 FPS, Medium averages 132 FPS, and Low averages 170 FPS. The best settings at 1440p are Ultra, with an average of 95 FPS.

At 1920x1080, performance is even stronger. Ultra averages 117 FPS, High averages 123 FPS, Medium averages 164 FPS, and Low averages 195 FPS. The best settings at 1080p are Ultra, with an average of 117 FPS.

The verdict data confirms that no resolution or preset in the test matrix falls below the 60 FPS threshold. The weakest point is 4K Ultra at 70 FPS, which still provides a 10 FPS margin. This makes the system suitable for high-fidelity flight simulation without requiring settings compromises.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which achieves an average of 70 FPS. This is the highest playable setting at 4K, and the margin above the threshold is 10 FPS.

At 2560x1440, Ultra is also the best playable setting, with an average of 95 FPS. The margin above 60 FPS is 35 FPS, providing comfortable headroom for complex scenes such as dense cityscapes or stormy weather.

At 1920x1080, Ultra remains the top playable preset, averaging 117 FPS. The margin above the threshold is 57 FPS, which means the system can handle significant additional load from add-ons or extended draw distances without dropping below 60 FPS.

In all three resolutions, the Ultra preset is the recommended choice because it delivers the highest visual quality while still meeting the playability standard. The data shows no scenario where a lower preset is required to maintain 60 FPS.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU’s nearest rivals provide context for what other processors would behave similarly. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F has an average score of 24,964, which is 0.2% lower than the 8400F’s 25,005. The Intel Core i7-11850H scores 24,935, a 0.3% deficit. The Intel Core i7-13620H scores 24,911, a 0.4% deficit. On the other side, the AMD EPYC 9474F scores 25,103, which is 0.4% higher. These deltas are all within 1%, meaning any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in this game when paired with the RTX 4080.

The GPU’s nearest rivals show a similar tight cluster. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER scores 54,209, just 0.1% below the RTX 4080’s 54,247. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54,828, which is 1.1% higher. The AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 55,698, a 2.6% advantage. The AMD Radeon 8060S scores 55,757, a 2.7% edge. The closest match is the RTX 4080 SUPER, which would deliver virtually identical performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

For a system builder, swapping the 8400F for a Ryzen 5 7500F would change nothing in practice, as the 0.2% delta is negligible. Similarly, choosing an RTX 4080 SUPER over the RTX 4080 would yield nearly identical FPS. The data suggests that the tested combination sits in a performance plateau where adjacent hardware options produce indistinguishable results in this title.