Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i5-10400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 delivers a playable experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator, but the margin for error depends heavily on your target resolution. At 1080p, this combo has headroom to spare, allowing you to max out the settings. At 1440p, you can still hit smooth frame rates, but you must be selective with the preset. At 4K, the system is strictly limited to the lowest settings to maintain a consistent 60 FPS. The data shows a classic resolution scaling curve where the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck as pixel count rises.

Best Settings per Resolution

The database records the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at each resolution, based on average frame rates. The playable threshold is defined as 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the best playable setting is Low. The recorded average FPS at this setting is 71. The Medium preset drops to an average of 55 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold. High and Ultra presets are further behind, with averages of 42 FPS and 40 FPS respectively. This resolution is clearly GPU-bound, and the RTX 4060 simply does not have the raw throughput to handle higher presets at 4K.

At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is Medium. The recorded average FPS is 75. This is a solid result, providing a significant visual upgrade over Low while maintaining a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS target. The High preset at 1440p averages 56 FPS, which is just under the threshold, and Ultra averages 54 FPS. For a flight simulator where smooth panning is critical, the Medium preset is the recommended choice here.

At 1920x1080, the best playable setting is Ultra. The recorded average FPS is 66. This is the only resolution where the system can run the game at maximum settings and still clear the 60 FPS bar. The High preset averages 70 FPS, Medium averages 93 FPS, and Low averages 119 FPS. With 1080p, the CPU and GPU combination has enough performance to handle the most demanding visual configuration without compromising frame rate.

CPU and GPU Roles

The performance scaling across resolutions and presets reveals which component matters more for this game. At 1080p, the system shows its strongest performance. The jump from Low to Ultra at this resolution is substantial, from 119 FPS down to 66 FPS, a drop of 53 FPS. This indicates that the GPU is still doing significant work at 1080p, but the CPU is able to feed it adequately, as evidenced by the high frame rates even at Low settings.

At 1440p, the GPU begins to take on a more dominant role. The Low preset averages 96 FPS, while Ultra drops to 54 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 42 FPS. The Medium preset at 75 FPS is the sweet spot, showing that the GPU can handle a moderate workload well, but the higher presets start to tax the rendering pipeline.

At 4K, the GPU is unequivocally the limiting factor. The Low preset averages 71 FPS, but Medium drops to 55 FPS, and both High and Ultra fall into the 40 to 42 FPS range. The CPU has less influence at 4K because the sheer number of pixels being rendered overwhelms the GPU, regardless of how fast the CPU can prepare frames. The scaling pattern, where frame rates collapse quickly as settings increase at 4K, points directly at the RTX 4060's 8 GB memory and 128-bit bus as the constraints.

The Intel Core i5-10400F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, provides a stable foundation at all resolutions. The data shows that at 1080p and 1440p, the CPU is not the primary bottleneck, as frame rates remain high even at lower presets. At 4K, the CPU is effectively waiting on the GPU, so its performance characteristics become less relevant to the final frame rate. The benchmark results indicate that for this game, the RTX 4060 is the component to watch when adjusting settings, especially at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The database provides exact average, minimum, and maximum frame rates for select settings. For many entries, only the average is recorded.

At 3840x2160, the measured results are as follows:

• Low: average 71 FPS
• Medium: average 55 FPS, minimum 47 FPS, maximum 64 FPS
• High: average 42 FPS
• Ultra: average 40 FPS

The Medium preset at 4K shows the only recorded minimum and maximum values for this resolution. The 47 FPS minimum is well below the playable threshold, reinforcing that Medium is not suitable for 4K gaming.

At 2560x1440, the measured results are:

• Low: average 96 FPS
• Medium: average 75 FPS, minimum 64 FPS, maximum 86 FPS
• High: average 56 FPS
• Ultra: average 54 FPS

The Medium preset at 1440p has a minimum of 64 FPS, which stays above the 60 FPS threshold. This is a strong indicator that the average of 75 FPS is not misleading, and the experience remains smooth even in demanding scenes.

At 1920x1080, the measured results are:

• Low: average 119 FPS
• Medium: average 93 FPS, minimum 79 FPS, maximum 107 FPS
• High: average 70 FPS
• Ultra: average 66 FPS

The Medium preset at 1080p shows a minimum of 79 FPS, which is comfortably above the threshold. The Ultra preset, with an average of 66 FPS, is the only playable Ultra configuration across all resolutions. The minimum for Ultra is not recorded, but the average suggests that frame drops would still keep the experience playable, given the margin is only 6 FPS above the threshold.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for the CPU and GPU provides context for what other hardware would behave similarly in this system.

For the Intel Core i5-10400F, the nearest rivals in the database are close in average benchmark score. The Intel Xeon 6756E has an average score of 14163, which is 0.2% lower than the i5-10400F. The Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232, putting it 0.3% higher. The AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115, which is 0.5% lower, and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14277, which is 0.6% higher. These deltas are minimal, meaning any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator when paired with the same GPU. The i5-10400F sits in the 68th percentile of all CPUs, and its rivals occupy a similar performance tier.

For the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060, the nearest rivals show a similar pattern. The AMD Radeon HD 7790 has an average score of 17666, which is 0.2% higher than the RTX 4060. The AMD Radeon 780M scores 17588, which is 0.3% lower. The AMD Radeon Pro 560 scores 17551, which is 0.5% lower, and the AMD Radeon Pro 460 scores 17509, which is 0.7% lower. The RTX 4060 sits in the 61st percentile of all GPUs. These rival GPUs would produce very similar performance in this game, so users with any of these cards can expect comparable results at each resolution and preset.

How This Combo Ranks

The combined performance of the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 places this system at rank 1978 out of 3714 tested combos in the database for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This puts the combo in the middle of the pack, which is consistent with the measured frame rates. The system is neither a high-end powerhouse nor a low-end entry, it sits squarely in the mid-range tier.

The rank reflects the balanced nature of this pairing. The CPU is strong enough to avoid bottlenecking the GPU at most settings, and the GPU is capable of handling the game at 1080p and 1440p with appropriate settings. The rank also accounts for the fact that the system struggles at 4K, which drags down its overall standing compared to combos with more powerful GPUs.

For a flight simulator that is known for being demanding on both CPU and GPU, this rank is reasonable. The system does not have the extreme performance of top-tier combos, but it also does not fall into the bottom quartile. Users with this setup should expect a dependable mid-range experience, with the understanding that 4K is not a realistic target.

The Verdict

The database verdict by resolution is clear. This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, but the quality of the experience depends on the target resolution.

At 3840x2160, the only playable setting is Low, with an average FPS of 71. This clears the 60 FPS threshold, but the visual quality will be noticeably reduced. The Medium preset at 55 FPS and the High and Ultra presets at 42 FPS and 40 FPS are not playable. For 4K users, the recommendation is to stick with Low settings.

At 2560x1440, the playable settings are Low and Medium. The best playable setting is Medium, with an average FPS of 75. This provides a good balance of visual fidelity and performance. The High and Ultra presets, at 56 FPS and 54 FPS, fall short of the threshold. For 1440p users, Medium is the recommended choice.

At 1920x1080, all settings are playable: Low at 119 FPS, Medium at 93 FPS, High at 70 FPS, and Ultra at 66 FPS. The best playable setting is Ultra, which means 1080p users can enjoy the game at maximum visual quality while maintaining a playable frame rate.

In summary, this combo is a capable 1080p and 1440p machine for Microsoft Flight Simulator. It can handle Ultra settings at 1080p and Medium settings at 1440p. At 4K, it is limited to Low settings. The system is a solid mid-range option, with the understanding that 4K gaming requires a more powerful GPU.