Microsoft Flight Simulator

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-12400 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 ranks 1070 out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the combination in the 71st percentile among all tested systems, meaning roughly 29% of tested configurations deliver higher frame rates in this title. The ranking reflects a strong pairing, though not an elite one, given that the CPU sits at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs and the GPU at the 68th percentile among all GPUs. The data indicates this combo outperforms the majority of tested systems while leaving headroom for more powerful configurations above it.

The CPU’s average benchmark score of 18683 puts it within a narrow band of nearby rivals: the AMD EPYC 7643 scores 18697 (0.1% higher), the Intel Core i7-1355U scores 18730 (0.3% higher), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 scores 18811 (0.7% higher), and the Intel Core i3-14100F scores 18519 (0.9% lower). These deltas are all under 1%, indicating that the i5-12400 delivers essentially identical compute performance to several very different hardware designs, from server-class EPYC parts to mobile and entry-level desktop chips. In a flight simulator that relies heavily on single-threaded physics and simulation logic, this level of parity means users upgrading from any of those rivals would see negligible CPU-bound differences.

The RTX 3080’s average benchmark score of 23172 is similarly close to its nearest rivals: the NVIDIA P106-100 scores 23249 (0.3% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 23250 (0.3% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 6600M scores 23273 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Radeon R9 M290X scores 23276 (0.4% higher). The GPU’s 68th percentile ranking among all GPUs shows it is a solid performer, but the measured FPS data below reveals that Microsoft Flight Simulator’s demands scale heavily with resolution and settings, and the GPU is often the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which delivers an average of 87.1 FPS. This is the highest quality setting available, and it clears the 60 FPS threshold by a comfortable margin. The data shows the combo handles 1080p Ultra without breaking a sweat, with Low averaging 157.2 FPS, Medium at 122.7 FPS, and High at 94.4 FPS—all well above the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is also Ultra, with an average of 73.1 FPS. The step from High to Ultra at this resolution costs 2.5 FPS (from 75.6 to 73.1), which is a modest penalty for the visual upgrade. Low runs at 126.4 FPS, Medium at 101.2 FPS, and High at 75.6 FPS, so every preset exceeds 60 FPS at 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the situation changes markedly. The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, which averages 68.4 FPS. High drops to 57 FPS—below the playable threshold—and Ultra falls to 49.1 FPS. Low runs at 89.6 FPS, but Medium is the highest quality setting that remains playable. This is the resolution where the RTX 3080’s 10 GB of GDDR6X memory and 320-bit bus start to show limitations, as the pixel throughput requirements of 4K overwhelm the GPU’s capabilities at higher presets.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K Ultra settings?

A: No. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the combo averages 49.1 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. The highest playable preset at 4K is Medium, averaging 68.4 FPS.

Q: What is the best preset for 1440p gaming with this hardware?

A: Ultra is the best preset at 2560x1440, averaging 73.1 FPS. All four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) exceed 60 FPS at this resolution, so users can max out the settings.

Q: How does the i5-12400 compare to the Intel Core i3-14100F in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The i5-12400 has an average benchmark score of 18683, which is 0.9% higher than the i3-14100F’s 18519. The performance difference is negligible in practice.

Q: Is the RTX 3080’s benchmark score close to any other GPUs?

A: Yes. The RTX 3080 scores 23172 on average, while the NVIDIA P106-100 scores 23249 (0.3% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 23250 (0.3% higher), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600M scores 23273 (0.4% higher). All are within 0.4% of each other.

Q: What frame rate does this combo achieve at 1080p High settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo averages 94.4 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold and leaves headroom for smoother gameplay.

Q: Does the combo rank high among all tested systems for this game?

A: It ranks 1070 out of 3714 combos, placing it in roughly the 71st percentile. This means it outperforms the majority of tested systems but is not in the top tier.

The Verdict

The data clearly shows this combo can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at every tested resolution, but with important caveats at 4K. At 1920x1080, all four presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—clear the 60 FPS threshold, with Ultra averaging 87.1 FPS. This makes 1080p a fully playable experience with maximum settings. At 2560x1440, the same is true: every preset exceeds 60 FPS, and Ultra averages 73.1 FPS, so users can enjoy the highest quality at this resolution without compromise.

At 3840x2160, the verdict is mixed. The combo can play the game, but only at Low (89.6 FPS) or Medium (68.4 FPS) presets. High drops to 57 FPS—just below the playable threshold—and Ultra falls to 49.1 FPS. The data indicates that for 4K gaming, users must either accept Medium settings for a stable 60+ FPS experience or lower the resolution to 1440p for Ultra quality. The GPU becomes the bottleneck at 4K, as the CPU’s performance remains consistent across resolutions, but the GPU’s workload increases dramatically with pixel count and preset complexity.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Based on the nearest rivals in the benchmark data, several CPUs and GPUs would perform nearly identically to this combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator. On the CPU side, the AMD EPYC 7643 (0.1% higher average score), Intel Core i7-1355U (0.3% higher), AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 (0.7% higher), and Intel Core i3-14100F (0.9% lower) all fall within a 1% band of the i5-12400’s 18683 average benchmark score. In practical terms, any of these chips would deliver essentially the same CPU-bound performance in this flight simulator, which relies on single-threaded simulation logic. The i3-14100F, in particular, offers near-identical compute performance at a likely lower cost, though the data does not cover pricing.

On the GPU side, the RTX 3080’s nearest rivals are the NVIDIA P106-100 (0.3% higher), AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (0.3% higher), AMD Radeon RX 6600M (0.4% higher), and AMD Radeon R9 M290X (0.4% higher). All of these GPUs have average benchmark scores within 0.4% of the RTX 3080’s 23172, meaning they would produce nearly identical frame rates in this game at the same settings and resolutions. However, the RTX 3080’s 10 GB of GDDR6X memory and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth are specific to this card, and the measured FPS data applies only to this exact combo. Users considering these alternatives should expect similar performance, but the actual playable presets at 4K would likely mirror the RTX 3080’s limitations.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of how this combo performs across three resolutions and four settings presets. All values are average FPS, with no minimum or maximum frame data provided.

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings average 157.2 FPS, Medium averages 122.7 FPS, High averages 94.4 FPS, and Ultra averages 87.1 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 70.1 FPS, showing that the GPU has substantial headroom at this resolution even with the most demanding preset. The step from High to Ultra costs only 7.3 FPS, making Ultra a worthwhile choice for users prioritizing visual quality.

At 2560x1440, frame rates drop across all presets. Low averages 126.4 FPS, Medium averages 101.2 FPS, High averages 75.6 FPS, and Ultra averages 73.1 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra narrows to just 2.5 FPS, suggesting that the Ultra preset’s additional GPU workload is minimal at this resolution. The drop from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 30-31 FPS at Low and Medium, but only 18.8 FPS at High and 14 FPS at Ultra, indicating that higher presets see smaller absolute penalties from the resolution increase.

At 3840x2160, the GPU’s limits become apparent. Low averages 89.6 FPS, Medium averages 68.4 FPS, High averages 57 FPS, and Ultra averages 49.1 FPS. The drop from 1440p to 4K at Low settings is 36.8 FPS, while at Ultra it is 24 FPS. Notably, the gap between High and Ultra at 4K is 7.9 FPS, larger than the 2.5 FPS gap at 1440p, indicating that the Ultra preset’s demands scale disproportionately at higher pixel counts. The combo crosses the 60 FPS threshold between Medium (68.4 FPS) and High (57 FPS) at 4K, making Medium the highest playable preset.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals how the CPU and GPU each contribute to performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the CPU’s single-threaded performance is critical for simulation logic, but the GPU still has enough headroom to deliver 87.1 FPS at Ultra. The i5-12400’s boost clock of 4.40 GHz and 12 threads handle the game’s physics and AI calculations, while the RTX 3080’s 8704 shading units and 29.77 TFLOPS FP32 performance render the scene efficiently. The 1080p results suggest the CPU is the primary driver of frame rates at lower resolutions, as the GPU is not fully taxed.

At 2560x1440, the balance shifts slightly toward the GPU. The 44% increase in pixel count from 1080p (from 2.07 million to 3.68 million pixels) forces the GPU to work harder, but the CPU still keeps pace, as evidenced by the 73.1 FPS at Ultra. The modest FPS drop from 1080p to 1440p at Ultra (14 FPS) indicates that the GPU can absorb the extra pixel workload without becoming a bottleneck. The CPU remains capable of feeding the GPU with simulation data, and the combo maintains playable frame rates at all presets.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear limiting factor. The pixel count quadruples from 1080p (8.29 million pixels), and the RTX 3080’s 10 GB memory buffer and 320-bit bus struggle to maintain performance at higher presets. The CPU’s role diminishes relative to the GPU, as the simulation logic runs at the same speed regardless of resolution, but the GPU’s rendering workload increases dramatically. The data shows that High and Ultra presets at 4K drop below 60 FPS, meaning the GPU cannot keep up with the combination of high resolution and complex visual effects. The CPU would need to be paired with a more powerful GPU to achieve 4K Ultra, while the RTX 3080 would benefit from a lower resolution or reduced settings to stay above the playable threshold. The scaling between resolutions confirms that Microsoft Flight Simulator is GPU-bound at 4K, CPU-bound at 1080p, and balanced at 1440p for this specific combo.