Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 combination delivers a wide range of performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator, scaling from a comfortable 123.9 FPS at 1080p Low to a demanding 42.7 FPS at 4K High. The data indicates this system is highly capable at standard resolutions, with the playability threshold of 60 FPS determining which presets are viable at each level.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system demonstrates strong headroom across all tested presets. The Low preset achieves an average of 123.9 FPS, which is a substantial margin above the 60 FPS playability threshold. Medium settings produce 99.8 FPS, while High settings yield 76.1 FPS. Even the most demanding Ultra preset stays comfortably above 60 FPS with an average of 67.3 FPS, making 1080p the only resolution where every preset is playable.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance remains solid but the gap between presets widens. The Low preset delivers 102.4 FPS, which is a 21.5 FPS drop from the 1080p Low result. Medium settings achieve 81.7 FPS, while High settings land at 60.7 FPS—just barely clearing the playability threshold. The Ultra preset falls short at 58.5 FPS, missing the 60 FPS target by a narrow 1.5 FPS margin.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles with higher presets. The Low preset is the only setting that clears 60 FPS, with an average of 73.7 FPS. Medium settings drop to 55.1 FPS, which is below the playability threshold. High and Ultra settings are nearly identical in performance, with 42.7 FPS and 43.8 FPS respectively. This represents a significant performance cliff between Low and Medium at 4K, with a 18.6 FPS difference.

The scaling pattern across resolutions shows predictable behavior. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 56.6 FPS. At 1440p, that gap narrows to 43.9 FPS. At 4K, the gap between Low and Ultra is 29.9 FPS. This compression at higher resolutions suggests the GPU becomes a more dominant bottleneck as pixel count increases, a typical pattern for a flight simulator with heavy rendering demands.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data reveals a clear shift in component responsibility as resolution increases. At 1920x1080, the CPU's role is more pronounced because the GPU can render frames faster than the processor can feed it data. The 123.9 FPS at Low settings indicates the CPU is keeping up with the GPU's output, but the drop to 67.3 FPS at Ultra shows the GPU's rendering load becoming more significant.

At 2560x1440, the balance tilts toward the GPU. The Low preset still achieves 102.4 FPS, suggesting the CPU has enough headroom to support high frame rates, but the Ultra preset's 58.5 FPS indicates the GPU is now the limiting factor. The 43.9 FPS spread between Low and Ultra at this resolution shows the GPU's performance scaling with preset complexity.

The 3840x2160 results make the GPU bottleneck unmistakable. The Low preset's 73.7 FPS is less than half the 1080p Low result, which points to the GPU being saturated by pixel throughput rather than CPU limitations. The narrow 29.9 FPS spread between Low and Ultra at 4K confirms that the GPU is the dominant constraint—even at the lowest settings, the render resolution itself is the limiting factor.

The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, provides sufficient compute for the simulation's logic and draw calls at lower resolutions. The 3dmark_16_threads score of 6091 and cinebench_r23_multicore score of 20851 indicate solid multi-threaded performance. However, the data shows that the RTX 5060's 8 GB of GDDR7 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth become the primary constraint at higher resolutions and presets.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals show extremely tight performance clustering. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F scores 24964 versus the 8400F's 25005, a delta of just 0.2%. This makes the 7500F a nearly identical performer for gaming workloads. The Intel Core i7-11850H scores 24935, within 0.3%, and the Intel Core i7-13620H scores 24911, within 0.4%. On the higher side, the AMD EPYC 9474F scores 25103, which is 0.4% ahead. Any of these CPUs would deliver effectively indistinguishable frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

On the GPU side, the RTX 5060's rivals are similarly close. The AMD Radeon 860M scores 26401, which is 0.3% higher than the RTX 5060's 26331. The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 scores 26421, also 0.3% higher. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary scores 26553, which is 0.8% ahead. The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT scores 26011, which is 1.2% behind. These delta values indicate that swapping to any of these GPUs would produce nearly identical results, with the RX 6750 XT being the only one that might show a measurable performance deficit.

For a system builder, this clustering means the choice between these components is unlikely to change the gaming experience. The 8400F and its rivals all sit in the 77th percentile of CPUs, while the RTX 5060 and its rivals occupy the 72nd percentile of GPUs. The performance envelope is well-defined and consistent across the alternatives.

The Verdict

This system can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 60 FPS or higher in specific configurations. At 1920x1080, all four tested presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—clear the 60 FPS threshold. The Ultra preset's 67.3 FPS average provides a comfortable margin, making 1080p the recommended resolution for maximum visual quality.

At 2560x1440, three presets are playable: Low at 102.4 FPS, Medium at 81.7 FPS, and High at 60.7 FPS. The Ultra preset's 58.5 FPS falls just short of the target, so users seeking 1440p Ultra will need to accept a slightly sub-60 FPS experience or adjust settings.

At 3840x2160, only the Low preset is playable, with an average of 73.7 FPS. Medium at 55.1 FPS, High at 42.7 FPS, and Ultra at 43.8 FPS all miss the 60 FPS threshold. The system is technically capable of 4K gaming, but only with significant visual compromises.

The overall rank of 1767 out of 3714 combinations places this system in the middle-to-upper tier of tested hardware. The data confirms that the RTX 5060's 8 GB memory capacity is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming but becomes a limiting factor at 4K with higher presets.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the best settings are Ultra, which achieves an average of 67.3 FPS. This is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS, and it provides the highest visual quality available at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are High, with an average of 60.7 FPS. While this clears the 60 FPS threshold, the margin is slim. Users who prefer a larger buffer above the threshold might choose Medium at 81.7 FPS, but High offers the best balance of quality and performance.

At 3840x2160, the best settings are Low, with an average of 73.7 FPS. This is the only preset that meets the 60 FPS requirement at 4K. The step up to Medium at 55.1 FPS is substantial in visual quality but comes with a significant performance cost that drops the system below the playable threshold.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 60 FPS on a 4K monitor?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings. The 4K Low preset averages 73.7 FPS. Medium settings fall to 55.1 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold, and High and Ultra are even lower at 42.7 FPS and 43.8 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the highest quality setting that maintains 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: The High preset averages 60.7 FPS at 2560x1440, which is the highest quality option that stays at or above 60 FPS. Ultra averages 58.5 FPS, just missing the threshold.

Q: How does the RTX 5060 compare to the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT in this game?

A: The RTX 5060 has an average benchmark score of 26331, while the RX 6750 XT scores 26011. This represents a 1.2% advantage for the RTX 5060, which would translate to a negligible difference in actual frame rates.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 8400F a bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The data does not indicate a CPU bottleneck at 1080p. The Low preset achieves 123.9 FPS, and the CPU's cinebench_r23 multicore score of 20851 suggests sufficient processing power. The GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher presets and resolutions.

Q: What performance difference exists between the 8400F and the Ryzen 5 7500F?

A: The 8400F averages 25005 in benchmark scores, while the 7500F averages 24964. This is a 0.2% difference, which is effectively identical for gaming performance.

Q: Can the system handle Ultra settings at any resolution?

A: Yes, at 1920x1080 the Ultra preset averages 67.3 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold. At 1440p Ultra averages 58.5 FPS, and at 4K Ultra averages 43.8 FPS, both below the threshold.