Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i5-12400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 presents a compelling mid-to-high-range combination for Microsoft Flight Simulator, a title known for its demanding scenery rendering and complex simulation logic. The measured data indicates this system handles the game robustly across most settings, with performance scaling predictably with resolution and graphical preset. The i5-12400F, a 6-core, 12-thread Alder Lake processor with a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, sits in the 73rd percentile among all CPUs, while the RTX 3080, an Ampere architecture GPU with 10 GB of GDDR6X memory, ranks in the 68th percentile among all GPUs. This pairing yields a combo rank of 1036 out of 3714 tested combinations, placing it comfortably in the upper third of all systems tested for this specific game.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p Ultra settings for this combo?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 resolution with Ultra settings is 88 FPS, which is well above the playable threshold of 60 FPS. This indicates that the combination can handle the highest preset at the most common resolution with significant headroom.

Q: Can this system maintain 60 FPS at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, but not at the highest settings. At 3840x2160, the system achieves 73 FPS on Medium settings and 94 FPS on Low settings, both clearing the 60 FPS threshold. However, High and Ultra presets at 4K fall below 60 FPS, with averages of 55 and 52 FPS respectively.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The i5-12400F has an average benchmark score of 19039. Its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, scores 19047, a negligible 0% difference. The Intel Core 3 201E scores 19056 (-0.1% delta), while the Intel Core i5-1335U is 0.3% behind and the AMD EPYC 7773X is also 0.3% behind. This suggests the processor’s performance is highly consistent with these alternatives.

Q: What is the lowest FPS recorded for this system at 1440p Medium settings?

A: The minimum FPS recorded at 2560x1440 on Medium settings is 84 FPS, with an average of 99 FPS and a maximum of 114 FPS. The minimum value indicates that even in demanding scenes, the frame rate does not dip near the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Q: Is the RTX 3080's performance closely matched by any other GPU in the database?

A: Yes, the benchmark data shows the NVIDIA P106-100 is its closest rival with an average score of 23249 versus the RTX 3080's 23172, a -0.3% difference. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 and AMD Radeon RX 6600M also show a -0.3% and -0.4% delta respectively, indicating very similar aggregate benchmark performance.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 4K that stays above 60 FPS?

A: The verdict data identifies Medium as the best playable preset at 3840x2160, achieving an average of 73 FPS. While Low is also playable at 94 FPS, Medium offers a better visual quality balance while still maintaining a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data suggests a nuanced division of labor between the CPU and GPU depending on resolution. At 1920x1080, the system achieves 158 FPS on Low settings, but this drops to 92 FPS on High and 88 FPS on Ultra. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 70 FPS, a 44% reduction, indicating that the GPU is heavily taxed by the higher fidelity settings. However, the fact that the CPU is only in the 73rd percentile for all CPUs suggests it is not a bottleneck at this resolution, as the frame rates remain exceptionally high.

Moving to 2560x1440, the scaling shows a similar pattern: Low settings produce 127 FPS, while Ultra produces 71 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra is 56 FPS, a 44% drop, mirroring the 1080p scaling. This consistency implies that the GPU is the primary performance limiter as settings increase, with the CPU providing sufficient headroom to feed the GPU at both resolutions.

At 3840x2160, the GPU’s role becomes even more dominant. The Low preset yields 94 FPS, but Ultra drops to 52 FPS. The absolute difference between Low and Ultra is 42 FPS, but the percentage drop is 45%, similar to the other resolutions. Interestingly, the 4K Medium preset (73 FPS) performs worse than the 1440p Ultra preset (71 FPS) by only 2 FPS, suggesting that resolution scaling is less impactful than the combination of resolution and settings. The data implies that the RTX 3080’s 10 GB memory and 320-bit bus are the defining factors at 4K, where the high pixel count and texture loads saturate the GPU’s capabilities, regardless of the CPU’s relatively modest thread count for a flight simulator.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers a wide range of performance across presets. Low settings produce an average of 158 FPS, which is exceptionally high and indicates the GPU is not fully utilized. Medium settings average 123 FPS, with a minimum of 104 FPS and a maximum of 141 FPS. High settings reduce the average to 92 FPS, and Ultra settings yield 88 FPS. The minimum FPS data for Medium (104 FPS) is notably higher than the average FPS for High (92 FPS), suggesting that the Medium preset provides a more consistent frame pacing experience, while High and Ultra push the GPU harder and may introduce more variability.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down as expected. Low settings average 127 FPS, Medium averages 99 FPS with a range of 84 to 114 FPS, High averages 74 FPS, and Ultra averages 71 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is 25 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 3 FPS. This suggests that the High preset is a significant step down from Medium, but Ultra offers diminishing returns in performance cost, possibly due to specific rendering features that are less demanding at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the system’s performance becomes more constrained. Low settings average 94 FPS, Medium averages 73 FPS with a range of 62 to 84 FPS, High averages 55 FPS, and Ultra averages 52 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 62 FPS is only 2 FPS above the playability threshold, indicating that while the average is comfortable, there are moments where the frame rate dips close to the limit. The High and Ultra presets are definitively below 60 FPS, making them unsuitable for a smooth experience at 4K.

The Verdict

This system can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, but the level of playability is strictly tied to resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, the verdict is unambiguous: all four presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—are playable, with the best setting being Ultra at 88 FPS average. This provides a substantial margin above the 60 FPS threshold, making 1080p the most comfortable environment for this hardware.

At 2560x1440, the system also achieves playable status across all settings. The verdict lists High, Low, Medium, and Ultra as playable, with Ultra being the best setting at 71 FPS average. While 71 FPS is above the threshold, it is notably the margin is thinner than at 1080p, but still acceptable for a flight simulator where gameplay is less twitchy than other genres.

At 3840x2160, the system is only partially playable. The verdict indicates that Low and Medium settings are playable, with Medium being the best at 73 FPS average. High and Ultra are not playable, as their averages of 55 and 52 FPS respectively fall below the 60 FPS threshold. For 4K users, the recommendation is to stick with Medium settings to maintain a smooth experience, accepting a visual fidelity trade-off.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, achieving an average of 88 FPS. This is a clear victory for the hardware, as it allows the user to experience the game at its highest visual quality without any performance compromises.

At 2560x1440, the best setting is also Ultra, with an average of 71 FPS. This is a tight but valid margin above the 60 FPS threshold. The data suggests that if a user wants to prioritize visual fidelity at this resolution, Ultra is viable, but they should be aware that the frame rate has less headroom than at 1080p.

At 3840x2160, the best playable setting is Medium, delivering an average of 73 FPS. This is the most demanding preset that maintains playability, and it offers a reasonable balance between visual quality and performance. Users aiming for 4K must accept Medium as their ceiling for this combination.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-12400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 combination ranks 1036 out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the system in the top 28% of all tested configurations, which is a strong showing given the game’s demanding nature. The rank reflects the balanced nature of the pairing: the CPU’s 73rd percentile status and the GPU’s 68th percentile status combine to produce a system that performs well above the median. The rank also implies that many other combinations with higher-end CPUs or GPUs exist, but this specific pairing offers a solid middle-ground performance profile that is well-suited for the game’s requirements at lower resolutions and medium settings at 4K.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score are the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS (19047, 0% delta), the Intel Core 3 201E (19056, -0.1% delta), the Intel Core i5-1335U (18982, 0.3% delta), and the AMD EPYC 7773X (18979, 0.3% delta). These processors exhibit nearly identical aggregate performance to the i5-12400F, meaning that a system built with any of these would likely produce very similar FPS results in Microsoft Flight Simulator, assuming the same GPU is used. The Ryzen 5 7535HS is a mobile part, while the EPYC 7773X is a server chip, but their benchmark scores suggest they would not bottleneck the RTX 3080 any differently than the i5-12400F in this title.

For the GPU, the closest rivals are the NVIDIA P106-100 (23249, -0.3% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23250, -0.3% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23273, -0.4% delta), and the AMD Radeon R9 M290X (23276, -0.4% delta). These GPUs have average benchmark scores that are within a fraction of a percent of the RTX 3080, suggesting they would deliver near-identical frame rates in this game. The P106-100 is a mining-oriented card, while the R9 M290X is an older mobile part, but the data indicates that their raw compute capabilities are comparable to the RTX 3080 in the aggregate benchmarks. A system with the i5-12400F and any of these GPUs would likely see FPS figures within a few points of the measured results at each resolution and preset, making them viable alternatives for users seeking similar performance.