Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i5-12400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 delivers a playable Microsoft Flight Simulator experience across most common resolutions, but 4K Ultra remains out of reach. Benchmark data places this combination at rank 2048 out of 3714 tested combos, which is a solid mid-pack result for a flight simulator known for its heavy demands. The system clears the 60 FPS threshold at 1080p on all four presets, including Ultra at 65.7 FPS average, and at 1440p on Medium settings with 74.3 FPS average. At 4K, only the Low preset achieves playability, hitting 67.5 FPS average, while High and Ultra fall to 40.8 and 41.8 FPS respectively.

How This Combo Ranks

The Core i5-12400F and RTX 4060 combination ranks 2048th out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the 55th percentile of all systems tested. This is a respectable position for a mid-range pairing, especially considering the game’s reputation as one of the most demanding titles in the simulation genre. The rank reflects a system that can handle the game at high settings in Full HD and medium settings in Quad HD, but struggles at 4K with high or ultra presets.

The CPU itself holds the 73rd percentile among all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 19039. The GPU sits at the 61st percentile among all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 17639. This gap between CPU and GPU percentiles suggests the graphics card is the more limiting factor in this pairing, which aligns with the game’s tendency to become GPU-bound at higher resolutions and detail levels.

In practical terms, this rank means the combo outperforms roughly 55% of tested systems in this specific title. It is not a top-tier configuration, but it is far from entry-level. The data shows consistent playability at 1080p and 1440p, with the system only falling below the 60 FPS threshold at 4K High and Ultra settings, and at 1440p Ultra.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for the CPU, the Intel Core i5-12400F delivers an average benchmark score of 19039, which is virtually identical to the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS at 19047 (0% difference). The Intel Core 3 201E scores 19056, just 0.1% higher, while the Intel Core i5-1335U and AMD EPYC 7773X both score 18982 and 18979 respectively, sitting 0.3% below. These four alternatives would all behave nearly identically in Microsoft Flight Simulator, with performance deltas so small they are within run-to-run variance.

For the GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 has an average benchmark score of 17639. The closest rival is the AMD Radeon HD 7790 at 17666, which is 0.2% higher. The AMD Radeon 780M scores 17588, 0.3% lower, while the AMD Radeon Pro 560 and Pro 460 score 17551 and 17509 respectively, sitting 0.5% and 0.7% below. These deltas indicate that a system with any of these GPUs paired with the i5-12400F would produce nearly identical frame rates in this game.

The takeaway is that the measured performance is representative of a broad cluster of similarly-performing hardware. Users with any of these alternative CPUs or GPUs should expect their Microsoft Flight Simulator experience to match the numbers reported for this combo within a fraction of a percent. The differences are negligible for gameplay purposes.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results reveal a clear shift in bottleneck behavior across resolutions. At 1080p, the system achieves 119.6 FPS on Low settings, which drops to 91.6 FPS on Medium, 70.2 FPS on High, and 65.7 FPS on Ultra. The relatively small gap between High and Ultra (4.5 FPS) suggests the GPU is beginning to saturate at the highest preset, but the CPU still has headroom to push frame rates above 60 FPS across all settings.

Moving to 1440p, the scaling pattern changes. Low settings produce 92.8 FPS, Medium drops to 74.3 FPS, High falls to 53.4 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 51.8 FPS. The steep drop from Low to High (39.4 FPS) indicates the GPU becomes the primary constraint as resolution and detail increase. The CPU continues to deliver enough throughput, but the RTX 4060’s 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 128-bit bus begin to limit performance.

At 4K, the GPU bottleneck is definitive. Low settings hit 67.5 FPS, Medium drops to 56.1 FPS, High falls to 40.8 FPS, and Ultra manages 41.8 FPS. The fact that High and Ultra produce nearly identical frame rates (40.8 vs 41.8) suggests the GPU is fully saturated, and additional detail settings have minimal impact. The CPU is no longer the limiting factor at this resolution; the RTX 4060’s compute resources are exhausted.

The data indicates that at 1080p, the CPU and GPU are relatively balanced, with the system able to maintain high frame rates even at Ultra. At 1440p, the GPU becomes the dominant factor, and at 4K, it is almost entirely GPU-bound. Users looking to maximize performance at higher resolutions would benefit more from a stronger GPU than a faster CPU.

The Verdict

This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, but the playable settings vary significantly by resolution. At 1080p, the system clears the 60 FPS threshold on all four presets: Low (119.6 FPS), Medium (91.6 FPS), High (70.2 FPS), and Ultra (65.7 FPS). This means users can enjoy the game at maximum detail in Full HD without dipping below the playable threshold.

At 1440p, the system remains playable on Low (92.8 FPS) and Medium (74.3 FPS), but High (53.4 FPS) and Ultra (51.8 FPS) fall below 60 FPS. For a smooth experience at this resolution, users should stick with Medium settings, which provide a good balance of visual quality and performance.

At 4K, only the Low preset achieves playability at 67.5 FPS. Medium (56.1 FPS), High (40.8 FPS), and Ultra (41.8 FPS) all fall short of the 60 FPS target. Users with a 4K display will need to significantly lower settings or accept frame rates below the playable threshold.

The verdict is clear: this combo is a capable 1080p Ultra machine and a solid 1440p Medium performer, but it is not suited for high-detail 4K gaming in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates provide a comprehensive picture of performance across all three resolutions and four presets. At 1920x1080, the system delivers 119.6 FPS on Low, 91.6 FPS on Medium, 70.2 FPS on High, and 65.7 FPS on Ultra. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a 45% reduction in frame rate, consistent with the increasing graphical load.

At 2560x1440, the numbers are 92.8 FPS on Low, 74.3 FPS on Medium, 53.4 FPS on High, and 51.8 FPS on Ultra. The jump from Medium to High represents a 28% performance drop, highlighting the significant cost of the High preset at this resolution. The difference between High and Ultra is only 1.6 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the top end.

At 3840x2160, the system achieves 67.5 FPS on Low, 56.1 FPS on Medium, 40.8 FPS on High, and 41.8 FPS on Ultra. Interestingly, Ultra performs slightly better than High in this case, likely due to run-to-run variance or specific scene complexity. The overall pattern shows that 4K resolution imposes a severe penalty, with even Low settings barely clearing the 60 FPS threshold.

The data does not include minimum or maximum frame rate values, so the analysis relies solely on average FPS. This means the numbers represent typical performance, but users may experience occasional dips below these averages during complex scenes or dense terrain.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the best settings are Ultra, which delivers 65.7 FPS average. This is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS, and it provides the maximum visual fidelity the game offers. Users can enable every detail option without sacrificing playability.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are Medium, with an average of 74.3 FPS. This preset provides a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold while maintaining decent visual quality. High settings at this resolution fall to 53.4 FPS, which is below the playable threshold, so Medium represents the optimal balance.

At 3840x2160, the best settings are Low, delivering 67.5 FPS average. This is the only 4K preset that clears 60 FPS, and it requires significant visual compromises. Medium at 4K drops to 56.1 FPS, which is below the threshold. Users with 4K displays must accept Low settings for a smooth experience or consider lowering the resolution.

In summary, the system’s best settings are Ultra at 1080p, Medium at 1440p, and Low at 4K. These configurations provide the highest visual quality while maintaining an average frame rate at or above the 60 FPS playable threshold.