Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i5-12400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER delivers strong performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator, with measured framerates that clear the 60 FPS playable threshold across every resolution and preset combination tested. The combination ranks 623rd out of 3714 tested combos for this game, placing it in the top 16.8% of all systems evaluated. At 1080p, the combo averages between 99.4 FPS at Ultra settings and 183.1 FPS at Low, while 1440p yields 79.2 to 149 FPS, and even 4K maintains 62 to 105.4 FPS across the settings range. These results indicate a well-balanced pairing for a simulation title that scales heavily with both CPU and GPU resources.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU component, Intel Core i5-12400F, sits at the 73rd percentile among all tested processors with an average benchmark score of 19039. Its nearest rivals in aggregate performance are remarkably close: the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS scores 19047 (0% delta), the Intel Core 3 201E scores 19056 (-0.1% delta), the Intel Core i5-1335U scores 18982 (0.3% delta), and the AMD EPYC 7773X scores 18979 (0.3% delta). In real-world Flight Simulator terms, any of these processors would deliver nearly identical CPU-bound performance, though the i5-12400F's desktop-oriented 6-core/12-thread configuration with 18 MB of L3 cache provides a more consistent baseline than the mobile-oriented alternatives.

For the GPU, the RTX 4070 SUPER achieves the 83rd percentile among all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 43223. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB at 43262 (-0.1% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile at 43268 (-0.1% delta), the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 at 43301 (-0.2% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile at 43667 (-1% delta). The delta values here are minimal, meaning users with any of these GPUs would observe nearly identical frame rates in Flight Simulator, provided the CPU does not become a bottleneck. The RTX 4070 SUPER's 12 GB of GDDR6X memory and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth are relevant for high-resolution textures, but the nearest rivals with similar compute scores suggest that raw shading throughput is the dominant factor at the tested settings.

FAQ

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

A: Yes, the measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 62 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. The verdict data confirms Ultra is listed among playable settings at this resolution, with an average of 62 FPS at the best settings.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p gaming?

A: At 2560x1440, Ultra settings deliver an average of 79.2 FPS, which is the highest preset tested and remains above 60 FPS. All four presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—are playable, with Low reaching 149 FPS and High at 86.2 FPS.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-12400F has an average benchmark score of 19039, placing it at the 73rd percentile. Its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, scores 19047, representing a 0% delta, while the Intel Core 3 201E scores 19056 (-0.1% delta) and the Intel Core i5-1335U scores 18982 (0.3% delta). These differences are negligible for gaming workloads.

Q: Is the RTX 4070 SUPER significantly faster than its nearest GPU rivals?

A: No, the differences are minimal. The RTX 4070 SUPER scores 43223 on average, while the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB scores 43262 (-0.1% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile scores 43667 (-1% delta). The RTX 4070 SUPER actually trails the RTX 4090 Mobile by 1%, though it outperforms the Quadro M6000 by 0.2%.

Q: What framerate can be expected at 1080p with High settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings is 107.8 FPS. This is well above the 60 FPS threshold, and even Ultra settings at this resolution average 99.4 FPS, indicating substantial headroom for demanding flight scenarios.

Q: How does this combo rank relative to all tested systems for this game?

A: The combination ranks 623rd out of 3714 tested combos, placing it in the top 16.8% of all systems evaluated for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This percentile position reflects the strong balance between the CPU's 73rd percentile and GPU's 83rd percentile standings.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank in-game is 623 out of 3714 total combinations tested, which positions this system comfortably in the upper quintile of all hardware pairings evaluated for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This ranking is particularly notable given that the CPU sits at only the 73rd percentile and the GPU at the 83rd percentile among their respective component pools. The in-game rank being higher than either individual component percentile suggests that Flight Simulator benefits from the specific balance this pairing provides, where the six-core i5-12400F with 12 threads is sufficient to feed the RTX 4070 SUPER without becoming a limiting factor, especially at higher resolutions where GPU load intensifies.

When compared to the broader database, 623rd place out of 3714 means roughly 3091 other combinations tested slower or equal, while only 622 performed better. This places the system ahead of the vast majority of configurations, including many with more expensive CPUs or older flagship GPUs. The data indicates that for this particular title, the combination of Alder Lake architecture with Ada Lovelace graphics produces a synergistic result—the CPU's 18 MB of shared L3 cache and 4.40 GHz boost clock handle the simulation's physics and AI threads, while the GPU's 7168 shading units and 35.48 TFLOPS FP32 throughput render the demanding scenery. The ranking also reflects that this pairing avoids the common pitfall of overspending on one component while underpowering the other, as both sit at comparable percentiles relative to their respective markets.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly shows this system can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at playable framerates across all tested resolutions and presets. At 3840x2160, the playable settings include High, Low, Medium, and Ultra, with the best settings being Ultra at an average of 62 FPS—exactly at the playable threshold but still acceptable. At 2560x1440, all four presets are playable, with Ultra achieving 79.2 FPS, providing a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. At 1920x1080, Ultra settings reach 99.4 FPS, and Low settings hit 183.1 FPS, indicating exceptional headroom for even the most demanding flight scenarios or future content updates.

The verdict by resolution confirms that no preset at any resolution falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold. The lowest average FPS recorded is 62 FPS at 4K Ultra, which still meets the threshold, while the highest is 183.1 FPS at 1080p Low. For users prioritizing visual fidelity, 4K Ultra is viable but leaves no room for frame rate drops; 1440p Ultra offers a safer balance with 79.2 FPS; and 1080p Ultra provides the most forgiving experience with 99.4 FPS. This system is unequivocally capable of running the game at high quality, with the primary consideration being whether the user prefers maximum resolution or maximum visual settings headroom.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS scales predictably with settings: Low delivers 183.1 FPS, Medium delivers 144.2 FPS, High delivers 107.8 FPS, and Ultra delivers 99.4 FPS. The step from Low to Medium represents a 21.2% reduction, while the step from High to Ultra is only 7.8%, indicating diminishing returns at the highest preset. At 2560x1440, the averages are 149 FPS (Low), 113.7 FPS (Medium), 86.2 FPS (High), and 79.2 FPS (Ultra). The transition from 1080p to 1440p reduces framerates by 18.6% at Low settings, 21.1% at Medium, 20.0% at High, and 20.3% at Ultra, showing a consistent resolution scaling penalty across presets.

At 3840x2160, the averages drop to 105.4 FPS (Low), 82 FPS (Medium), 62.5 FPS (High), and 62 FPS (Ultra). The jump from 1440p to 4K is more severe: Low falls by 29.3%, Medium by 27.9%, High by 27.5%, and Ultra by 21.7%. Notably, the difference between High and Ultra at 4K is negligible (62.5 vs 62 FPS), suggesting that Ultra adds visual quality without a meaningful performance cost at this resolution. However, the gap between Low and Medium at 4K is 22.2%, and between Medium and High is 23.8%, indicating that the GPU's shading units are the primary constraint as resolution increases. Across all resolutions, the pattern holds: Low to Medium is a significant jump, Medium to High is moderate, and High to Ultra is minimal—a trend that aligns with the RTX 4070 SUPER's 80 ROPs and 224 TMUs handling the incremental effects workload efficiently.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with a measured average of 62 FPS. This is a marginal pass, as the average is only 2 FPS above the threshold, but the data confirms it is playable. At 2560x1440, Ultra is also the best setting, delivering 79.2 FPS—a 32% improvement over the 4K result and a comfortable 19.2 FPS margin above 60. At 1920x1080, Ultra achieves 99.4 FPS, which is 39.4 FPS above the threshold and represents the best balance of visual quality and performance across all tested configurations.

For users who prefer a safety buffer, the next step down at each resolution provides substantial headroom: 4K High offers 62.5 FPS (0.5 FPS more than Ultra), 1440p High offers 86.2 FPS (7 FPS more than Ultra), and 1080p High offers 107.8 FPS (8.4 FPS more than Ultra). However, given that the playable threshold is 60 FPS and Ultra clears it at every resolution, the data supports recommending Ultra as the default choice. The only caveat is at 4K, where the 62 FPS average could dip below 60 in dense urban areas or heavy weather—but the benchmark data does not include min or max FPS values, so this assessment relies solely on average scores.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling patterns across resolutions and presets reveal which component dominates Microsoft Flight Simulator's performance profile. At 1080p, the CPU's role is more pronounced: the i5-12400F's 6 cores and 12 threads, with a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, must keep up with the simulation's physics and AI calculations. The fact that 1080p Low achieves 183.1 FPS while 4K Low achieves 105.4 FPS—a 42.5% reduction—indicates that the GPU becomes increasingly important as resolution rises. Conversely, the relatively small gap between 1080p High (107.8 FPS) and 4K High (62.5 FPS) at 42% reduction suggests that at higher presets, the CPU's ability to feed the GPU becomes less critical than the GPU's raw fill rate.

The RTX 4070 SUPER's 504.2 GB/s memory bandwidth and 35.48 TFLOPS FP32 throughput are the primary drivers of the resolution scaling. From 1080p to 1440p, the average FPS drops by approximately 20% across all presets, which aligns with the 1.78x increase in pixel count. From 1440p to 4K, the drop is approximately 27% across presets, which is less than the 2.25x pixel increase, indicating that the GPU is still capable but the CPU's single-thread performance (3dmark_single_thread score of 909) begins to limit the minimum frame delivery at lower settings. At Ultra settings, the gap between 1440p and 4K narrows to 21.7%, suggesting that the GPU's workload becomes more uniform and the CPU has more time to prepare frames.

The data shows that at 4K, the GPU is overwhelmingly the limiting factor—even the most modest preset (Low) yields 105.4 FPS, which is only 42% faster than Ultra at 62 FPS, indicating that the RTX 4070 SUPER's 7168 shading units are the bottleneck. At 1080p, however, the CPU's influence is more visible: the difference between Low (183.1 FPS) and Ultra (99.4 FPS) is 45.7%, which is larger than the 36.8% difference at 4K. This suggests that at lower resolutions, the i5-12400F's thread scheduling and cache efficiency play a larger role in maintaining high framerates, while at higher resolutions, the GPU's pixel throughput and memory bandwidth dictate performance. For users targeting 1440p or 4K, the GPU matters more; for 1080p with high refresh rates, the CPU's 12 threads and 18 MB L3 cache become the more significant contributor.