Microsoft Flight Simulator

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-10400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 ranks 1829 out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places this configuration in the 49th percentile of all recorded system pairings, meaning roughly half of the tested combinations deliver higher average frame rates and half deliver lower ones. The ranking reflects a mid-pack position, not a top-tier result, but the measured data shows the combo remains capable of clearing the 60 FPS threshold at most settings below 4K.

The CPU itself sits at the 68th percentile among all tested processors, while the GPU rests at the 72nd percentile among all tested graphics cards. Both components land in the upper-middle portion of their respective distributions, which aligns with the combined system ranking. The CPU's average benchmark score of 14185 places it within 0.6% of several nearby rivals, including the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C at 14277 and the Intel Core 7 160UL at 14232. The GPU's average score of 26331 similarly clusters close to the AMD Radeon 860M at 26401 and the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 at 26421. These narrow margins indicate that the combo's overall rank is not driven by an unusually strong or weak single component, but rather by the balanced, mid-tier nature of both parts.

CPU and GPU Roles

Microsoft Flight Simulator is known for heavy CPU demands, particularly in scenarios involving complex scenery, weather simulation, and AI traffic. The recorded data across resolutions and presets reveals how the balance shifts between the two components. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces 128.6 FPS, which is the highest figure in the entire dataset. Dropping from Low to Medium reduces the average to 96.6 FPS, a 24.9% decrease, while moving to High yields 76.1 FPS, and Ultra settles at 69.4 FPS. The relatively small gap between High and Ultra at 1080p suggests the GPU is beginning to saturate, but the CPU still has headroom to drive the simulation logic.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts. Low settings produce 98.4 FPS, Medium drops to 77.4 FPS, High falls to 59.4 FPS, and Ultra reaches 55.2 FPS. The step from Low to Medium at 1440p is a 21.3% reduction, while the step from Medium to High is a 23.3% reduction. This indicates that as resolution increases, the GPU becomes more influential, because each pixel requires more shading work. The CPU's role remains significant, but the rendering load grows faster than the simulation load.

At 3840x2160, the GPU clearly dominates the performance profile. Low settings average 71.9 FPS, Medium drops to 55.3 FPS, High falls to 42.7 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 40 FPS. The transition from Low to Medium at 4K is a 23.1% reduction, and from Medium to High a further 22.8% reduction. These consistent percentage drops across settings at 4K point to a GPU-bound scenario, where the RTX 5060's 8 GB of GDDR7 memory and 128-bit bus width become the limiting factor. The CPU's contribution is still present, but the pixel throughput demand at 4K overwhelms the graphics pipeline before the processor becomes the bottleneck.

Comparing across resolutions at the same preset reinforces this interpretation. At Low settings, moving from 1080p to 1440p reduces FPS from 128.6 to 98.4, a 23.5% drop, and moving from 1440p to 4K reduces it further to 71.9, a 26.9% drop. At Ultra settings, the same resolution steps produce 69.4 to 55.2 to 40 FPS, drops of 20.5% and 27.5% respectively. The growing percentage loss at higher resolutions for the same preset indicates that the GPU's rendering capacity scales poorly with pixel count, while the CPU's simulation workload remains relatively constant. In practical terms, players targeting 1080p or 1440p will find the CPU and GPU share the load more evenly, while 4K users will see the GPU as the clear performance ceiling.

FAQ

Q: Can this system maintain 60 FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings?

A: Yes. The measured average at 1080p Ultra is 69.4 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold by 9.4 FPS. This is the most demanding preset that remains playable at this resolution.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 2560x1440?

A: Medium is the highest preset that stays at or above 60 FPS, with an average of 77.4 FPS. High settings fall to 59.4 FPS, just below the threshold, and Ultra reaches 55.2 FPS.

Q: Is 4K playable with this combo?

A: Only at Low settings. The 4K Low preset averages 71.9 FPS, while Medium drops to 55.3 FPS, High to 42.7 FPS, and Ultra to 40 FPS. None of the higher presets reach the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in overall benchmark scores?

A: The i5-10400F scores 14185 on average, which is 0.2% higher than the Intel Xeon 0.2% and 0.5% higher than the AMD EPYC 7552, but 0.3% lower than the Intel Core 7 160UL and 0.6% lower than the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C. These differences are negligible in real-world terms.

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

A: The RTX 5060 averages 26331, which is 1.2% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT and 0.3% higher than both the AMD Radeon 860M and NVIDIA GeForce MX550. It trails the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary by 0.8%, again a minor margin.

Q: What is the largest FPS gap between presets in the recorded data?

A: The largest single-step gap occurs at 1080p between Low and Medium, where the average drops from 128.6 to 96.6 FPS, a 32 FPS difference. The smallest gap is at 4K between High and Ultra, where the average falls from 42.7 to 40 FPS, only 2.7 FPS apart.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows that this PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at playable frame rates across all tested resolutions, but with important caveats regarding preset selection. At 1920x1080, every preset from Low to Ultra clears the 60 FPS threshold. The best playable setting is Ultra, which averages 69.4 FPS, leaving a modest buffer above the playable line. High settings at 1080p produce 76.1 FPS, Medium reaches 96.6 FPS, and Low tops out at 128.6 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the system remains playable but with a narrower range of options. Low settings deliver 98.4 FPS, and Medium delivers 77.4 FPS, both comfortably above 60 FPS. High settings fall slightly short at 59.4 FPS, and Ultra drops to 55.2 FPS. Players with 1440p displays should stick to Medium for a stable experience, as the 0.6 FPS shortfall at High is marginal but still below the threshold.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes dramatically. Only Low settings are playable, with an average of 71.9 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below 60 FPS, with averages of 55.3, 42.7, and 40 FPS respectively. The verdict is clear: this combo handles 1080p effortlessly, manages 1440p with preset restrictions, and requires a significant downgrade to Low at 4K to maintain playability. For users prioritizing visual fidelity at 4K, a stronger GPU would be necessary, but for typical 1080p or 1440p gameplay, this system delivers a solid experience.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals in the database provide a useful reference for what a user might expect from a similar processor. The Intel Xeon 6756E scores 14163, a 0.2% difference from the i5-10400F, meaning the two would perform nearly identically in CPU-bound scenarios. The AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115, 0.5% lower, again a negligible gap. On the other side, the Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232, 0.3% higher, and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14277, 0.6% higher. None of these rivals would meaningfully change the in-game frame rates, as the differences are all well within run-to-run variance.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals show a similar clustering. The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT scores 26011, 1.2% lower than the RTX 5060, while the AMD Radeon 860M and NVIDIA GeForce MX550 both score 26401 and 26421 respectively, 0.3% lower. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary scores 26553, 0.8% higher. These four cards would produce frame rates within roughly one to two percent of the RTX 5060 in Microsoft Flight Simulator, meaning a user swapping to any of them would see virtually identical performance at the same settings and resolution.

It is worth remembering the nearest rivals for both components are drawn from the database's overall benchmark averages, not specifically from gaming tests. The in-game performance could differ slightly due to driver optimizations, memory bandwidth characteristics, or architecture-specific features, but the recorded data suggests the differences would remain small.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 69.4 FPS. This is the highest quality option available in the dataset, and it maintains a 9.4 FPS margin above the playable threshold. Players seeking maximum fidelity at 1080p can use Ultra without concern.

At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is Medium, averaging 77.4 FPS. High settings drop to 59.4 FPS, just under the 60 FPS line, so Medium represents the optimal balance between visual quality and smoothness. The 77.4 FPS average provides a comfortable 17.4 FPS cushion.

At 3840x2160, the only playable preset is Low, with an average of 71.9 FPS. All other presets fall below 60 FPS, with Medium at 55.3, High at 42.7, and Ultra at 40. Users at 4K must accept Low settings to maintain playability, yielding an 11.9 FPS buffer above the threshold.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The full dataset of measured average frame rates is presented below, organized by resolution and settings preset. Minimum and maximum frame rates were not recorded, so only averages are available.

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset averages 40 FPS, the High preset averages 42.7 FPS, the Medium preset averages 55.3 FPS, and the Low preset averages 71.9 FPS. The spread from lowest to highest is 31.9 FPS, and the gap between Ultra and High is only 2.7 FPS, indicating that the GPU is heavily saturated at this resolution even at the lowest settings.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset averages 55.2 FPS, the High preset averages 59.4 FPS, the Medium preset averages 77.4 FPS, and the Low preset averages 98.4 FPS. The spread is 43.2 FPS, with High and Ultra both falling below the 60 FPS threshold. The 4.2 FPS difference between High and Ultra is the second-smallest gap in the dataset, again pointing to GPU limitations at the upper end.

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset averages 69.4 FPS, the High preset averages 76.1 FPS, the Medium preset averages 96.6 FPS, and the Low preset averages 128.6 FPS. The spread is 59.2 FPS, the largest of any resolution, and all presets exceed the 60 FPS threshold. The 32 FPS drop from Low to Medium is the single largest step in the entire dataset, suggesting that Medium introduces significant rendering workload increases at 1080p.

Across all twelve recorded configurations, the highest average FPS is 128.6 at 1080p Low, and the lowest is 40 at 4K Ultra. The data consistently shows that resolution scaling affects the GPU more than the CPU, while preset scaling at a fixed resolution affects both components in varying proportions depending on the pixel count.