Microsoft Flight Simulator

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 1080p?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080, the system clears the 60 FPS threshold on Low and Medium presets, with average frame rates of 91.6 FPS and 68.3 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the highest preset that stays above 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: Low is the only playable preset at 2560x1440, delivering an average of 72 FPS. Medium drops to 59.8 FPS, just below the 60 FPS target.

Q: Is 4K playable with this combination?

A: No. At 3840x2160, even the Low preset only reaches 55.9 FPS, and Ultra falls to 28.6 FPS. The verdict data lists no playable settings at this resolution.

Q: How does the RTX 2060 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RTX 2060 has an average benchmark score of 15290. It sits within 0.8% of the AMD Radeon RX 7600 (15171) and within 0.6% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (15199). The GeForce GTX 580 (15283) and AMD Radeon 680M (15270) are effectively tied with it.

Q: Where does the Core i5-10400F rank among all CPUs?

A: The processor sits at the 68th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 14185. Its closest rival, the Intel Xeon 6756E, scores 14163, a difference of only 0.2%.

Q: What is the most demanding preset that maintains 60 FPS at 1080p?

A: Medium is the most demanding playable preset at 1080p, averaging 68.3 FPS. High falls to 55.9 FPS and Ultra to 54 FPS, both below the playable threshold.

CPU and GPU Roles

Microsoft Flight Simulator places heavy demands on both the processor and the graphics card, but the recorded frame rates show that the GPU becomes the dominant constraint as resolution increases. At 1920x1080, the system produces 91.6 FPS on Low, 68.3 FPS on Medium, 55.9 FPS on High, and 54 FPS on Ultra. The spread from Low to Ultra is 37.6 FPS, a substantial range that indicates the graphics card has significant headroom at lower presets but gets saturated as visual complexity rises.

Moving to 2560x1440, the same preset ladder shows 72 FPS on Low, 59.8 FPS on Medium, 40.6 FPS on High, and 43 FPS on Ultra. The drop from 1080p Low to 1440p Low is 19.6 FPS, a 21.4% reduction. This scaling pattern points to the RTX 2060 being the primary limiter, as the pixel count increase directly erodes performance. The CPU, a 6-core 12-thread Comet Lake part with a 4.30 GHz boost clock, has enough compute headroom to feed the GPU at these settings, but the Turing-based card cannot maintain high frame rates once pixel throughput demands rise.

At 3840x2160, the situation becomes more severe. Low preset produces 55.9 FPS, Medium drops to 42.8 FPS, High falls to 30.9 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 28.6 FPS. The gap between 1440p Low and 4K Low is 16.1 FPS, and the gap between 1440p Medium and 4K Medium is 17 FPS. These consistent losses across preset levels confirm that the GPU is the bottleneck at higher resolutions. The RTX 2060, with 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus and 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth, simply cannot sustain the fill rate and shading work required by 4K flight simulation.

The CPU's role is more visible at lower resolutions, where frame rates are higher and per-frame CPU work becomes a larger share of total latency. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 91.6 FPS, and at 1080p Medium it stays at 68.3 FPS, which suggests the processor can keep up with the rendering pipeline at these speeds. The Core i5-10400F scores 2541 in Passmark single-thread testing and 12115 in Passmark multithread, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 10283. Those results indicate a balanced desktop processor that is not the limiting factor in this pairing until the GPU is pushed to its limits.

For flight simulators specifically, the CPU handles world simulation, flight model physics, and scenery streaming logic. The recorded data shows that at 1440p Medium, the system lands at 59.8 FPS, just shy of the 60 FPS target, while at 1080p Medium it reaches 68.3 FPS. This suggests that the processor can handle the simulation workload at medium settings, but the GPU's rendering capacity determines whether the frame rate crosses the playable threshold. At 4K, no preset reaches 60 FPS, which is a clear indication that the GPU, not the CPU, is the wall.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, with an average of 68.3 FPS. Low runs faster at 91.6 FPS, but Medium provides the best visual quality while still clearing the playable threshold. High drops to 55.9 FPS and Ultra to 54 FPS, both below the 60 FPS target.

At 2560x1440, the only playable preset is Low, which averages 72 FPS. Medium falls to 59.8 FPS, missing the threshold by a narrow margin of 0.2 FPS. High and Ultra are not viable at 40.6 FPS and 43 FPS respectively.

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold. Low averages 55.9 FPS, Medium 42.8 FPS, High 30.9 FPS, and Ultra 28.6 FPS. The verdict data confirms that there are no playable settings at this resolution.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Core i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14185 and sits at the 68th percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Xeon 6756E, which scores 14163 (0.2% lower), the Intel Core 7 160UL at 14232 (0.3% higher), the AMD EPYC 7552 at 14115 (0.5% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C at 14277 (0.6% higher). All four of these processors are within a fraction of a percent of the i5-10400F's average score, meaning that in practical terms they would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator. A builder who already owns any of these CPUs could expect the same general performance profile when paired with an RTX 2060.

On the GPU side, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 has an average benchmark score of 15290 and sits at the 58th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 at 15283 (0.0% difference), the AMD Radeon 680M at 15270 (0.1% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM at 15199 (0.6% lower), and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 at 15171 (0.8% lower). The GTX 580 is a much older architecture, so its near-identical score is notable, but the database records it as a statistical tie. The RTX 3050 OEM and RX 7600 are both modern cards that would behave very similarly in this game, producing frame rates within about 1% of the RTX 2060. Any of these GPUs paired with a similarly performing CPU would land in the same playability envelope: solid 1080p Medium performance, marginal 1440p Low performance, and no viable 4K settings.

The Verdict

This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, but the experience depends heavily on resolution and preset selection. At 1920x1080, the system is comfortably playable on Low and Medium, with Medium being the best choice at 68.3 FPS. The High preset at 55.9 FPS and Ultra at 54 FPS are both below the 60 FPS playable threshold, so they are not recommended for a smooth experience.

At 2560x1440, the system is playable only on Low, which averages 72 FPS. Medium just misses the mark at 59.8 FPS, so players who want 1440p should stick with Low settings and accept the visual tradeoff. High and Ultra are not viable at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the system cannot reach 60 FPS on any preset. The best result is Low at 55.9 FPS, which is close but still below the threshold. Players targeting 4K should look at a stronger GPU or lower their expectations to 1440p.

The overall picture is that this combination is a capable 1080p machine for Microsoft Flight Simulator, a borderline 1440p machine on low settings, and not suitable for 4K. The RTX 2060's 6 GB VRAM and 192-bit memory bus are the limiting factors at higher resolutions, while the Core i5-10400F provides adequate processing power for the simulation workload.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this pairing of the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 ranks 2910 out of 3714 total combos. That places it in the lower portion of the field, roughly in the 22nd percentile of tested systems. The ranking reflects the fact that the RTX 2060, while a solid midrange card at launch, is now an older generation part that struggles with the demanding rendering workload of this flight simulator at high resolutions.

The rank is consistent with the measured frame rates: the system performs respectably at 1080p, where it clears the playable threshold on two presets, but it falls short at 1440p Medium and above. The 3714 combos in the database include many systems with newer GPUs and more powerful CPUs, which pushes this combination toward the lower end of the overall distribution. Still, for a 1080p player who prioritizes frame rate over maximum visual fidelity, the combination delivers a playable experience on Medium settings, and that is a meaningful result given the game's reputation for high system requirements.