Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is an exceptionally demanding title, and the combination of the Intel Core i3-12100F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 produces a fascinating set of results that hinge heavily on resolution and quality preset. The data shows a system that is capable of delivering a smooth experience at lower resolutions and settings, but which begins to strain under the load of 4K Ultra. The measured FPS values reveal a clear narrative: this is a pairing that prioritizes high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, while 4K requires careful settings management to stay within playable territory.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The benchmark data provides average FPS figures for three resolutions and four quality presets, painting a detailed picture of performance scaling. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers strong results across the board. With Low settings, the average frame rate hits 137 FPS, which is an exceptional figure that indicates a significant amount of headroom. Moving to Medium settings, the average drops to 104.5 FPS, still a very comfortable level for smooth gameplay. High settings at 1080p yield an average of 76.8 FPS, while the Ultra preset, the most demanding, still manages an average of 77.8 FPS. The similarity between the High and Ultra figures is interesting, suggesting that the flight simulator's engine is not entirely bound by the GPU at this resolution.

Stepping up to 2560x1440, the performance profile shifts. The Low preset produces an average of 107.9 FPS, which remains exceptionally high. Medium settings follow at 83.4 FPS, and High settings at 62.6 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1440p averages 60.6 FPS, which is a marginal pass of the 60 FPS threshold. This indicates that at this resolution, the system is nearing its limits on the highest quality setting, but it can still technically clear the playable bar.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes dramatically. The Low preset averages 80.4 FPS, which is still playable, but the Medium preset drops to 62.2 FPS. High settings at 4K result in an average of 43.8 FPS, and the Ultra preset pulls the average down to 42.6 FPS. These latter two figures fall well short of the 60 FPS playable threshold, indicating a substantial performance penalty when moving to 4K with higher quality settings. The scaling from 1440p to 4K is severe, particularly on the High and Ultra presets, where the average frame rates drop by roughly 30-20 FPS respectively.

How This Combo Ranks

In the broader context of tested hardware combinations, this specific pairing of the Intel Core i3-12100F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 holds a respectable position. The combo rank in game is 1629 out of 3714 tested combos. This places it in the 44th percentile of all tested systems, meaning it outperforms a slight majority of the other combinations in the database but is bested by a significant number of more powerful setups. This ranking is a useful summary of its overall standing, but the per-resolution data provides a more nuanced view.

The rank suggests that while this is not a top-tier enthusiast configuration, it is far from a low-end one. The system's performance is likely held back by the CPU in certain scenarios, given that the RTX 3070 is a capable GPU. However, the benchmark results indicate the pair works well together to deliver solid frame rates at mainstream resolutions. The fact that it falls in the middle of the pack reflects the demanding nature of Microsoft Flight Simulator, which can challenge even high-end hardware.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals an interesting dynamic between the CPU and GPU across different resolutions. At 1920x1080, the performance gap between Low and Ultra settings is relatively narrow, with a difference of about 59 FPS between the average of 137 FPS on Low and 77.8 FPS on Ultra. This suggests that at this resolution, the CPU is a significant factor. The GPU has enough headroom to render frames quickly, but the processor may be limiting the maximum achievable frame rate, especially on lower settings where the GPU load is lighter.

As the resolution increases to 2560x1440, the GPU begins to take on a more dominant role. The performance drop from Low to Ultra is more pronounced, with a 47.3 FPS difference between the 107.9 FPS average on Low and the 60.6 FPS on Ultra. This widening gap indicates that the GPU is becoming the primary bottleneck, as the increased pixel count places more strain on the graphics card.

This trend is even more evident at 3840x2160. The difference between the Low and Ultra presets is 37.8 FPS, but the absolute values are much lower. The system struggles to maintain high frame rates at this resolution, with even the Low preset averaging 80.4 FPS. The GPU is clearly the limiting factor at 4K, as the RTX 3070's memory bandwidth and processing power are insufficient to handle the load of the higher quality settings. The CPU's role diminishes as the resolution increases, with the GPU becoming the dominant performance limiter.

The Verdict

The question of whether this PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator is answered with a qualified yes, depending on the resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, the system is fully capable, clearing the 60 FPS threshold on all presets. The Ultra preset averages 77.8 FPS, providing a smooth and visually rich experience. At 2560x1440, the system also manages to run the game at playable frame rates across all settings, with the Ultra preset just barely clearing the bar at 60.6 FPS.

The situation is more complex at 3840x2160. The verdict data indicates that only Low and Medium settings are playable at this resolution. The Low preset averages 80.4 FPS, and the Medium preset averages 62.2 FPS, both of which exceed the 60 FPS threshold. However, the High and Ultra presets fail to hit this mark, with averages of 43.8 FPS and 42.6 FPS respectively. Therefore, the system can run the game at 4K, but only if the user is willing to compromise on visual quality. The best playable setting at this resolution is Medium, which delivers an average of 62.2 FPS.

FAQ

Q: Can this system achieve 60 FPS at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, at 4K with Low settings the average FPS is 80.4, and with Medium settings it is 62.2. However, High and Ultra presets fall below the threshold, averaging 43.8 FPS and 42.6 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the best quality preset for 1440p gaming?

A: The Ultra preset is the most demanding option that remains playable, with an average FPS of 60.6 at 2560x1440.

Q: How does the performance at 1080p Ultra compare to 1440p Ultra?

A: At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 77.8. At 2560x1440 with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 60.6.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more of a bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the CPU is a significant factor at 1080p, as the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings is relatively small, indicating the processor may limit peak performance.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded for this system?

A: The lowest average FPS recorded is 42.6, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with the Ultra preset.

Q: Does the system perform better on High or Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: The average FPS for High settings is 76.8, while for Ultra settings it is 77.8. The Ultra preset is slightly faster in this specific test.

Best Settings per Resolution

For each resolution, there is a clear "best" settings configuration that balances visual quality with the ability to maintain a playable frame rate. At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, which yields an average of 62.2 FPS. Pushing to High or Ultra would drop the average below the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the system can handle the highest quality preset. The Ultra settings deliver an average of 60.6 FPS, which just clears the 60 FPS bar. This makes Ultra the best choice for 1440p, as it provides the highest visual fidelity while remaining playable.

At 1920x1080, the system has enough performance headroom to run the Ultra preset comfortably. The average FPS at Ultra is 77.8, which is well above the playable threshold. This makes Ultra the best setting for 1080p, offering the best visual experience without sacrificing smoothness.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for both the CPU and GPU provides insight into what other hardware would behave similarly. The Intel Core i3-12100F's closest competitor in terms of average benchmark score is the Intel Core 3 N355, with a deltaPct of 0. This means they perform nearly identically in synthetic benchmarks. Other close rivals include the Intel Core i5-9500, which is 0.3% faster, and the Intel Core 5 120UL, which is 0.7% slower. The Intel Core i7-1250U is 1.1% slower than the i3-12100F.

For the GPU, the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is the closest rival, with an average score that is 0.7% higher than the RTX 3070. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 is 1% faster, and the AMD Radeon HD 7970M is 1.1% faster. On the lower end, the NVIDIA Tesla K40c is 1.5% slower. These alternatives suggest that a system with a similarly performing CPU and GPU would produce comparable results in Microsoft Flight Simulator, with the overall ranking and FPS figures being very close to what is observed with the i3-12100F and RTX 3070 combination.