Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 delivers exceptional performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator, with benchmark data showing this combination ranks 115th out of 3714 tested combos. Measured frame rates indicate that this system clears the 60 FPS playability threshold at every tested resolution and preset, making it a top-tier option for this flight simulator.

FAQ

Q: What is the combo rank for this CPU and GPU pairing in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 combination ranks 115th out of 3714 tested combos, placing it in the top 3.1% of all tested systems for this game.

Q: Can this system run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, at 3840x2160 resolution, all four tested presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) exceed the 60 FPS playability threshold, with the Ultra preset averaging 76.1 FPS.

Q: What is the highest playable preset at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset achieves an average of 107.1 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold, making it the best settings option at this resolution.

Q: How does the CPU benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has an average benchmark score of 25005, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (24964) and 0.3% higher than the Intel Core i7-11850H (24935).

Q: What is the GPU's benchmark percentile ranking?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 sits in the 92nd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 79842.

Q: Does the system maintain 60 FPS at 1080p with maximum settings?

A: Yes, at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the system averages 132.3 FPS, which is more than double the 60 FPS playability threshold.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 combination achieves a rank of 115 out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the system firmly in the upper echelon of tested configurations, with only approximately 3% of tested combos performing better. The ranking reflects the strong synergy between the Zen 4-based CPU and the Blackwell architecture GPU.

The CPU itself holds a 77th percentile ranking among all processors, while the GPU sits in the 92nd percentile among all graphics cards. The combination of a high-percentile CPU and an even higher-percentile GPU results in a system that excels in this flight simulator, which is known for being demanding on both processing and graphics resources.

The measured FPS data supports this strong ranking. Even at the most demanding configuration tested — 4K resolution with Ultra settings — the system maintains an average of 76.1 FPS. This performance headroom above the 60 FPS threshold suggests the combo rank could potentially be even higher if more demanding settings or higher resolutions were tested.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four preset levels, providing a comprehensive view of performance scaling. At 1920x1080, the system delivers frame rates ranging from 132.3 FPS on Ultra to 192.3 FPS on Low. The Medium preset achieves 178.1 FPS, while High settings produce 143.1 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance remains exceptionally strong. The Ultra preset averages 107.1 FPS, High settings reach 111.5 FPS, Medium delivers 147.8 FPS, and Low settings hit 182 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p shows a moderate performance drop, with the Ultra preset losing approximately 25 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the system still comfortably exceeds the 60 FPS threshold across all presets. Ultra settings average 76.1 FPS, High settings achieve 82.4 FPS, Medium delivers 109.5 FPS, and Low settings reach 142.9 FPS. The transition from 1440p to 4K results in a further performance reduction, with the Ultra preset dropping from 107.1 FPS to 76.1 FPS.

The performance gap between Low and Ultra settings widens as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 60 FPS (192.3 versus 132.3). At 1440p, this gap narrows to 74.9 FPS (182 versus 107.1). At 4K, the difference becomes 66.8 FPS (142.9 versus 76.1).

The Verdict

This system can definitively run Microsoft Flight Simulator at playable frame rates across all tested configurations. The verdict by resolution confirms that every preset at every resolution clears the 60 FPS playability threshold. At 3840x2160, the best playable settings are Ultra with an average of 76.1 FPS. At 2560x1440, Ultra settings achieve 107.1 FPS. At 1920x1080, Ultra settings deliver 132.3 FPS.

The data indicates that this combination provides substantial performance headroom at all resolutions. Even at 4K with maximum settings, the system maintains a 16.1 FPS buffer above the playability threshold. This suggests that users could potentially enable additional graphical enhancements or use higher display refresh rates without dropping below playable frame rates.

For users with 4K displays, the Ultra preset is fully viable with an average of 76.1 FPS. Those with 1440p monitors can enjoy Ultra settings at 107.1 FPS, and 1080p users will see Ultra settings run at 132.3 FPS. The system demonstrates consistent playability across the entire tested spectrum.

CPU and GPU Roles

The performance scaling between resolutions and presets reveals how the CPU and GPU each contribute to Microsoft Flight Simulator's performance. At 1920x1080, the system achieves 192.3 FPS on Low settings, indicating that the CPU has sufficient headroom to feed the GPU at lower graphical loads. The Ryzen 5 8400F's 6 cores and 12 threads, combined with its 4.70 GHz boost clock, provide strong single-thread performance that flight simulators often require.

As resolution increases to 2560x1440 and then 3840x2160, the performance drop follows a pattern consistent with GPU-bound rendering. At 4K Ultra, the system produces 76.1 FPS, compared to 132.3 FPS at 1080p Ultra. This 42.7% performance reduction aligns with the increased pixel count and the GPU becoming the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions.

The RTX 5090's massive 32 GB of GDDR7 memory and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth prove adequate for the high-resolution textures and detailed scenery that Microsoft Flight Simulator renders. The GPU's 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 170 RT cores handle the simulation's graphical demands effectively, as evidenced by the 76.1 FPS at 4K Ultra.

The CPU's role becomes more apparent at lower resolutions and settings. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 192.3 FPS, approaching the limits of what the CPU can process. The Ryzen 5 8400F's 3DMark single-thread score of 951 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2943 indicate strong single-thread capability, which is crucial for the simulation's physics and AI calculations.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that maintains at least 60 FPS is Ultra, which averages 76.1 FPS. This provides a 16.1 FPS buffer above the playability threshold. Users prioritizing maximum visual fidelity at 4K can confidently select Ultra settings.

For 2560x1440, the Ultra preset is also the best choice, delivering 107.1 FPS. This represents a 47.1 FPS buffer above the threshold, offering excellent visual quality with substantial performance headroom. The High preset at this resolution achieves 111.5 FPS, but Ultra provides better visual quality with only a 4.4 FPS penalty.

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset averages 132.3 FPS, making it the optimal choice. The system has more than double the required frame rate at this resolution, allowing for maximum settings without any concerns about playability. The High preset at 143.1 FPS offers slightly higher frame rates, but the visual quality improvement from Ultra outweighs the 10.8 FPS difference for most users.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score include the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, which scores 24964 and is 0.2% slower. The Intel Core i7-11850H achieves 24935, representing a 0.3% performance difference. The Intel Core i7-13620H scores 24911, which is 0.4% slower than the Ryzen 5 8400F. On the higher end, the AMD EPYC 9474F scores 25103, outperforming the 8400F by 0.4%.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB with a score of 79605, which is 0.3% slower. The NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB scores 79396, representing a 0.6% performance gap. The AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT achieves 78940, which is 1.1% slower. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X scores 80959, outperforming the RTX 5090 by 1.4%.

These close benchmark scores suggest that systems using these alternative components would deliver very similar performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The performance differences of less than 1.5% would translate to negligible frame rate variations in real-world gameplay, meaning users with these comparable components can expect nearly identical playability outcomes across all resolutions and settings tested.