Microsoft Flight Simulator

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset for this CPU and GPU combo at 1080p in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers 91.3 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. Ultra is the most demanding preset that stays playable at this resolution.

Q: Can this system handle 4K at the High preset?

A: No. At 3840x2160 with High settings, the average FPS drops to 57.2, which is below the 60 FPS playable mark. The Medium preset at 76.7 FPS is the highest playable option at 4K.

Q: How much performance does the CPU gain when moving from 1080p Ultra to 1440p Ultra?

A: At 1920x1080 Ultra, the combo averages 91.3 FPS. At 2560x1440 Ultra, it averages 75.3 FPS. That is a 16 FPS drop, roughly 17.5% lower when increasing resolution by 1.78x the pixel count.

Q: Which component is more stressed at 4K Low compared to 4K Ultra?

A: The scaling from Low to Ultra at 4K shows a drop from 97.3 FPS to 50.3 FPS, a 47 FPS reduction. This large spread indicates the GPU workload dominates the frame rate at this resolution, since the CPU has less impact when pixel throughput rises.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested CPU+GPU pairings for this game?

A: The combo ranks 969 out of 3714 tested combinations, placing it in the upper portion of the database for Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU closer to its nearest rival in benchmark scores?

A: The CPU (Intel Core i5-11400F) sits within 0.6% of its nearest rivals, while the GPU (NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070) is within 1.3% of its nearest rivals. The GPU has slightly more margin to its competitors.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data for this Intel Core i5-11400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 combination reveals a clear shift in workload balance depending on resolution and preset. At 1080p, the frame rates across all presets are high enough that the CPU has ample headroom, but the GPU still dictates the ceiling. Moving from Low to Ultra at 1920x1080 drops the average from 155.3 FPS to 91.3 FPS, a 64 FPS gap that is almost entirely attributable to GPU rendering load. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, maintains the scene graph and simulation logic without becoming the primary limiter at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds but with a narrower margin. Low runs at 129.1 FPS, Medium at 101.8 FPS, High at 78 FPS, and Ultra at 75.3 FPS. The step from High to Ultra is only 2.7 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is nearing its saturation point for the most demanding settings at this pixel count. The CPU continues to provide sufficient throughput for the flight simulation's complex world streaming and physics calculations, as evidenced by the relatively small penalty when moving from 1080p Ultra to 1440p Ultra (91.3 to 75.3 FPS).

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the unequivocal bottleneck. The spread from Low (97.3 FPS) to Medium (76.7 FPS) to High (57.2 FPS) to Ultra (50.3 FPS) shows a steep decline, with each preset tier costing roughly 20 FPS. The CPU's role diminishes further at this resolution because the GPU's pixel and shader workload grows disproportionately. The fact that 4K Ultra only reaches 50.3 FPS while 4K Low nearly doubles that figure (97.3 FPS) confirms that the RTX 4070's 12 GB of GDDR6X memory and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth are the limiting factors, not the processor.

Across all three resolutions, the data indicates that the CPU is never the primary constraint. The Core i5-11400F's single-thread score of 868 in 3DMark and multi-thread score of 5652 in 3DMark max threads are sufficient for the simulation's demands. The GPU scaling from 1080p to 4K at the same preset shows a consistent degradation: at Medium, 129.8 FPS drops to 101.8 FPS then to 76.7 FPS. That is a 53 FPS difference from 1080p to 4K, which is the GPU's domain. The CPU's influence is visible in the fact that even at 4K Low, the system stays above 97 FPS, meaning the processor can feed the GPU fast enough at lower fidelity settings.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is the best playable option. The measured average FPS is 91.3, which is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold. This is the most demanding setting that still delivers smooth performance, and it leaves headroom for transient dips in dense urban areas or during weather effects.

At 2560x1440, Ultra is also the best choice. The average FPS at this preset is 75.3, which clears the playable mark by a solid margin. The High preset (78 FPS) is nearly identical in performance, but Ultra offers the highest visual fidelity without sacrificing the 60 FPS requirement. Given that the gap between High and Ultra is only 2.7 FPS, the Ultra preset is the clear pick.

At 3840x2160, the best playable preset is Medium, with an average of 76.7 FPS. High drops to 57.2 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold, and Ultra is even lower at 50.3 FPS. Medium provides the best balance of visual quality and frame rate at 4K, with enough margin to avoid frequent sub-60 dips. Low runs at 97.3 FPS but sacrifices too much visual detail for a flight simulator where terrain and cockpit readability matter.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals in the database show that the Core i5-11400F is closely matched with several other processors. The AMD EPYC 7H12 has an average score of 17120, which is 0.3% higher. The Intel Core i5-12450H scores 17239, 0.4% higher. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G scores 17278, 0.6% higher. The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U scores 17074, 0.6% lower. These deltas are all within 1%, meaning any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator when paired with the same GPU. The practical takeaway is that the i5-11400F's 6-core, 12-thread configuration with a 4.40 GHz boost clock is in a performance tier where slight variations in architecture do not translate to meaningful FPS differences in this title.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are similarly close. The NVIDIA Tesla P4 scores 37628, 0.1% higher than the RTX 4070's 37648 average. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 scores 37507, 0.4% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile scores 38135, 1.3% higher. The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 scores 37157, 1.3% lower. None of these deltas exceed 1.3%, so swapping the RTX 4070 for any of these alternatives would produce a nearly indistinguishable experience in this game. The RTX 4070's 5888 shading units and 46 RT cores place it in a performance band where the nearest competitors cluster tightly.

When considering a full system swap, the data suggests that combining the i5-11400F with any of its nearest CPU rivals and the RTX 4070 with any of its nearest GPU rivals would yield frame rates within a few percent of the measured values. This is useful for buyers who might find one of these alternative parts at a different availability level, though the database does not track pricing.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-11400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 ranks 969 out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the system in the top 26.1% of all tested configurations. The percentile rankings for the individual components support this position: the CPU sits at the 71st percentile among all CPUs, and the GPU sits at the 81st percentile among all GPUs. The combo rank is slightly lower than the GPU's percentile, which reflects that the CPU is a moderate limiting factor in some scenarios, particularly at lower resolutions where the CPU's single-thread performance becomes relatively more important.

The rank of 969 means there are 2745 tested combos that perform worse, but also 968 that perform better. The gap between this combo and the top performers is driven primarily by the GPU tier. The RTX 4070, while strong, is not in the highest echelon of GPUs in the database. The CPU's 71st percentile also indicates that there are many faster processors, but for a flight simulator that relies heavily on single-thread performance, the i5-11400F's 868 single-thread score in 3DMark is adequate for the measured frame rates.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, but the answer depends heavily on resolution and preset. At 1920x1080, every preset from Low to Ultra clears 60 FPS. The Ultra preset runs at 91.3 FPS, which is the recommended setting for the best visual experience without performance concerns. At 2560x1440, all four presets also clear 60 FPS, with Ultra at 75.3 FPS. This makes 1440p the sweet spot for this combo, as it delivers high fidelity with a comfortable margin above the playable threshold.

At 3840x2160, the system is partially playable. Medium settings run at 76.7 FPS, which is smooth and visually acceptable. High drops to 57.2 FPS, just below the 60 FPS mark, and Ultra falls to 50.3 FPS. For 4K users, the recommendation is to use Medium settings and accept the visual trade-offs. Alternatively, lowering to 1440p unlocks the full Ultra experience. The data shows that this combo is a strong 1080p and 1440p performer, and a capable 4K system when settings are moderated. The verdict by resolution is clear: 1080p and 1440p are fully playable at maximum settings, while 4K requires Medium to stay above 60 FPS.