Microsoft Flight Simulator

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Intel Core i5-11400F sits in a tight cluster of comparable processors based on aggregate benchmark scores. The nearest rival is the AMD EPYC 7H12, which posts an average score of 17,120 against the i5-11400F's 17,177, a negligible 0.3% difference. The Intel Core i5-12450H scores 17,239, placing it 0.4% above the i5-11400F, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G reaches 17,278, a 0.6% advantage. On the lower side, the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U scores 17,074, which is 0.6% behind. In practical terms, any of these processors would deliver nearly identical frame pacing in CPU-bound scenarios within Microsoft Flight Simulator, as their aggregate performance deltas fall well within measurement noise.

For the GPU side, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 has an average benchmark score of 40,377. Its closest competitor is the AMD Radeon Pro 580 at 40,318, a 0.1% gap that is effectively indistinguishable. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 trails by 0.8% with a score of 40,063, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 leads by 1.2% at 40,870. The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile sits 2% behind with 39,568. When paired with the i5-11400F, swapping the RTX 5070 for any of these rivals would not meaningfully alter the average frame rates recorded in the database, since the GPU scores are all within a 2% band. However, note that the RTX 5070's percentile ranking among all GPUs is 82, while the i5-11400F ranks at the 71st percentile among all CPUs; the GPU is the stronger component in this pairing.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K with maximum settings?

A: Yes. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the recorded average FPS is exactly 60, which meets the playable threshold of 60 FPS. The database lists Ultra as the best settings at this resolution, with an average FPS at best of 60.

Q: What is the highest average frame rate this combo achieves at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system reaches an average of 157.7 FPS. This is the peak recorded value across all resolutions and settings in the measured data.

Q: How does the frame rate scale from 1080p to 1440p at High settings?

A: At 1920x1080 High, the average is 106.8 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 High drops the average to 85.9 FPS, a reduction of roughly 20% as pixel count increases by about 78%. The scaling is sub-linear, indicating that the GPU still has headroom at 1440p.

Q: Is the RTX 5070 or the i5-11400F the limiting factor at 4K Ultra?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary constraint. At 3840x2160, the average FPS drops from 102.8 at Low to 60 at Ultra, a 42.8 FPS reduction that closely tracks the increasing GPU load. The CPU's role is less pronounced at this resolution, as the frame rate differences between settings are driven by GPU-intensive effects.

Q: Does the system maintain 60 FPS at all settings in 1440p?

A: Yes. At 2560x1440, every preset exceeds 60 FPS: Low averages 145, Medium 108.5, High 85.9, and Ultra 76.9. The lowest recorded average at this resolution is still 16.9 FPS above the playable threshold.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: The gap is substantial. Low settings yield 157.7 FPS, while Ultra drops to 99.4 FPS. That is a 58.3 FPS difference, or about 37% lower performance at Ultra, which reflects the heavy load from advanced rendering features in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which records an average of 99.4 FPS. This leaves ample margin above the 60 FPS threshold, so users can confidently run maximum settings without concern.

At 2560x1440, Ultra also remains the best choice, with an average of 76.9 FPS. The system clears the 60 FPS line by 16.9 FPS, providing a comfortable buffer for complex scenes such as dense urban areas or heavy weather.

For 3840x2160, Ultra still averages exactly 60 FPS, which meets the playable threshold precisely. While this leaves no headroom for sudden frame drops, the recorded data shows that Ultra is playable. If a user prefers more margin, High settings at 4K provide 62.5 FPS, a modest 2.5 FPS increase over Ultra, which is a safer option for maintaining consistent performance in turbulent scenarios.

The Verdict

This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at all three tested resolutions with every setting preset clearing the 60 FPS playable threshold. At 1920x1080, the best settings are Ultra with an average of 99.4 FPS. At 2560x1440, Ultra again delivers the best experience at 76.9 FPS. At 3840x2160, Ultra is technically playable at exactly 60 FPS, which matches the threshold but provides no buffer. The verdict by resolution confirms that all playable settings lists include High, Low, Medium, and Ultra across every resolution. For 4K gaming, users should be aware that the 60 FPS average at Ultra is exact; any scene heavier than the test scenario could dip below playable. Choosing High at 4K, with an average of 62.5 FPS, would offer more stability, but the data does show Ultra as playable.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the recorded averages are as follows: Low settings produce 157.7 FPS, Medium 137.6 FPS, High 106.8 FPS, and Ultra 99.4 FPS. The step from Medium to High is the largest single drop at 30.8 FPS, while the drop from High to Ultra is smaller at 7.4 FPS. This indicates that the jump to High settings imposes a significant load, but the incremental cost of Ultra is comparatively minor.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 145 FPS, Medium 108.5 FPS, High 85.9 FPS, and Ultra 76.9 FPS. Here, the gap between Medium and High is 22.6 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 9 FPS. The pattern is similar to 1080p, but the absolute values are lower across the board.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 102.8 FPS, Medium 82.9 FPS, High 62.5 FPS, and Ultra 60 FPS. The drop from Medium to High is 20.4 FPS, and from High to Ultra is only 2.5 FPS. At 4K, the system is clearly nearing its limit, as the Ultra preset barely holds the 60 FPS line. The min and max FPS values are not recorded in the database, so the analysis relies solely on average frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this pairing of the Intel Core i5-11400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 holds a rank of 770 out of 3,714 total combos. This places it in the top 20.7% of all tested systems. The rank reflects the GPU's strong 82nd percentile standing among all GPUs, which compensates for the CPU's more modest 71st percentile. In a flight simulator that is heavily dependent on both single-thread CPU performance and GPU throughput, this combination lands in the upper quintile of tested hardware. The i5-11400F's single-thread score of 868 in 3dMark single-thread and 2,024 in Cinebench R23 single-core are respectable, but the RTX 5070's raw compute (30.87 TFLOPS FP32) and 12 GB of GDDR7 memory are what push this combo above most alternatives.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data shows a clear division of labor between the CPU and GPU at different resolutions. At 1920x1080, the frame rates are high enough (99.4 to 157.7 FPS) that the CPU's single-thread performance likely plays a more significant role, as lower resolution reduces GPU load. The i5-11400F's 3dmark single-thread score of 868 and its 71st percentile ranking among CPUs suggest it can feed frames quickly at 1080p. However, the scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p (a 58.3 FPS drop) indicates the GPU still has substantial influence.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts. The average FPS at Ultra drops to 76.9, a 22.5 FPS reduction from 1080p Ultra. This 29% performance decrease aligns with the 78% increase in pixel count, implying the GPU is becoming more of a limiting factor. The CPU's role diminishes as resolution climbs, since the same number of draw calls is spread across more pixels.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the dominant constraint. The Ultra preset averages exactly 60 FPS, while Low averages 102.8 FPS. The 42.8 FPS swing across settings at 4K is the largest absolute range of any resolution, and it directly tracks GPU workload. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, is unlikely to bottleneck at 4K because frame rates are lower and the GPU has more time to complete each frame. The data indicates that users at 4K should focus on GPU settings, while those at 1080p might see more benefit from CPU optimizations, though the i5-11400F already provides solid single-thread performance as evidenced by its 2,024 Cinebench R23 single-core score.