Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Can Intel Core i5-12400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Run Microsoft Flight Simulator?

This combination places a mid-range 12th-gen Intel processor alongside NVIDIA's flagship Ada Lovelace GPU, creating an interesting asymmetry in a simulator known for demanding both CPU and GPU resources. The data shows this pairing achieves rank 156 out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the top 4.2% of all configurations tested. The RTX 4090's 88th percentile ranking among all GPUs and the i5-12400F's 73rd percentile among CPUs suggest a system where the graphics card is doing the heavy lifting, yet the processor is not holding things back at the resolutions tested. This is a combination that punches well above its weight class in this title, though the analysis below reveals exactly where the boundaries of that performance lie.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 156 out of 3714 tested configurations places it firmly in the upper echelon of systems for Microsoft Flight Simulator. To contextualize this, the RTX 4090 sits at the 88th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the i5-12400F reaches the 73rd percentile among CPUs. This gap suggests the GPU is the primary driver of this ranking, but the CPU is sufficiently capable to avoid becoming a bottleneck in most scenarios.

Looking at the measured frame rates, this combo delivers average FPS well above the 60 FPS playability threshold at every resolution and preset combination tested. At 1920x1080, even the most demanding Ultra preset yields 132.7 FPS average, which is more than double the playability threshold. The performance scaling between resolutions is remarkably consistent, with the Ultra preset dropping from 132.7 FPS at 1080p to 102.3 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 74.5 FPS at 4K. This represents a 43.9% performance reduction from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings, indicating that the GPU is being progressively more stressed as resolution increases, but still maintaining comfortable margins above 60 FPS.

The rank of 156 out of 3714 is particularly notable given the CPU's modest position in the overall CPU hierarchy. Many systems ranked above this combo likely pair the RTX 4090 with higher-end processors, yet the i5-12400F manages to keep pace well enough that the combo still lands in the top percentile. This speaks to Microsoft Flight Simulator's ability to leverage GPU resources effectively at higher resolutions, where the CPU demands are relatively lower compared to the GPU workload.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that maintains at least 60 FPS average is Ultra, which delivers 74.5 FPS. This is a significant finding because 4K Ultra is often considered the ultimate stress test for gaming systems, and this combo clears it with over 14 FPS of headroom. The High preset at 4K yields 81.2 FPS, while Medium produces 104.6 FPS and Low reaches 136 FPS, but Ultra remains the optimal choice for visual fidelity without sacrificing playability.

Moving to 2560x1440, the best settings again default to Ultra, with an average of 102.3 FPS. This represents a 37.3% improvement over the 4K Ultra result, showing how resolution scaling benefits this configuration. The High preset at 1440p produces 109.1 FPS, Medium delivers 146.9 FPS, and Low hits 170.6 FPS — all comfortably above 60 FPS, but Ultra offers the best balance of visual quality and performance.

At 1920x1080, Ultra settings produce 132.7 FPS average, which is the clear choice for maximum quality. The High preset yields 135 FPS, so the difference between High and Ultra is minimal — only 2.3 FPS — making Ultra the obvious pick. Medium reaches 167.9 FPS and Low 185.5 FPS, but at this resolution, the system has so much headroom that the question becomes whether to prioritize frame rate or visual fidelity. Ultra at 132.7 FPS is far above the playability threshold, so there is no reason to sacrifice quality.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals an interesting dynamic between CPU and GPU responsibilities at different resolutions. At 1920x1080, the RTX 4090 is likely underutilized due to the lower pixel count, and the i5-12400F becomes more relevant. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a drop from 185.5 FPS to 132.7 FPS — a 28.5% reduction — which indicates the GPU is still doing substantial work even at the lower resolution. However, the fact that the combo ranks only 156th out of 3714 suggests that at 1080p, the CPU may be limiting performance compared to systems with more powerful processors.

As resolution increases to 2560x1440, the GPU workload grows, and the gap between Low and Ultra narrows in relative terms: 170.6 FPS down to 102.3 FPS, a 40% reduction. This larger drop indicates the GPU is becoming the dominant factor. At 3840x2160, the pattern continues with Low at 136 FPS and Ultra at 74.5 FPS — a 45.2% reduction. This progression shows that as resolution climbs, the RTX 4090 becomes the primary performance determinant, while the i5-12400F's role diminishes.

The delta between 1080p Ultra (132.7 FPS) and 4K Ultra (74.5 FPS) is 58.2 FPS, which is a substantial 43.9% decrease. This scaling suggests that the GPU is being pushed harder at 4K, but the CPU is still capable of feeding it enough data to maintain solid frame rates. The fact that 4K Ultra remains above 60 FPS demonstrates the RTX 4090's raw power, but the steady decline across resolutions hints that a stronger CPU might extract even more from this GPU at lower resolutions.

FAQ

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

A: Yes. The data shows Ultra settings at 3840x2160 produce an average of 74.5 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playability threshold. This is the best settings choice at 4K, with High at 81.2 FPS, Medium at 104.6 FPS, and Low at 136 FPS.

Q: Which component is more important for this game at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the GPU still dominates, but the CPU plays a more significant role than at higher resolutions. The Ultra preset delivers 132.7 FPS, while Low reaches 185.5 FPS — a 52.8 FPS difference. The combo's rank of 156 out of 3714 indicates the i5-12400F is adequate but may not be maximizing the RTX 4090's potential at lower resolutions.

Q: How much performance is gained by lowering settings from Ultra to Low at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, moving from Ultra (102.3 FPS) to Low (170.6 FPS) yields a 68.3 FPS improvement, which is a 66.8% increase. Medium sits at 146.9 FPS and High at 109.1 FPS, so the biggest jump occurs between Ultra and High, with a 6.8 FPS difference.

Q: What is the best preset for 1080p gaming with this combo?

A: Ultra is the recommended choice at 1920x1080, delivering 132.7 FPS average. This is only 2.3 FPS below High (135 FPS), so there is no meaningful performance penalty for choosing the highest quality settings. Medium reaches 167.9 FPS and Low 185.5 FPS, but these are unnecessary sacrifices given the Ultra performance.

Q: Does the system maintain 60 FPS at 4K across all settings?

A: Yes. The lowest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 74.5 FPS on Ultra settings, which is still 14.5 FPS above the playability threshold. High delivers 81.2 FPS, Medium 104.6 FPS, and Low 136 FPS, so every preset clears 60 FPS with room to spare.

Q: How does this combo's ranking compare to its percentile positions?

A: The combo ranks 156th out of 3714, placing it in the top 4.2% of tested systems. The RTX 4090's 88th GPU percentile and the i5-12400F's 73rd CPU percentile suggest the GPU is doing more to boost this ranking, but the CPU is still strong enough to avoid major bottlenecks.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the measured average frame rates are: Low at 136 FPS, Medium at 104.6 FPS, High at 81.2 FPS, and Ultra at 74.5 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 61.5 FPS total drop, with the largest single-step decline occurring between Medium and High at 23.4 FPS. This suggests that High settings introduce a significant increase in GPU workload compared to Medium, while the jump from High to Ultra is relatively modest at 6.7 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the results are: Low at 170.6 FPS, Medium at 146.9 FPS, High at 109.1 FPS, and Ultra at 102.3 FPS. The drop from Medium to High is 37.8 FPS, which is the largest step change at this resolution. Low to Medium yields a 23.7 FPS reduction, and High to Ultra only 6.8 FPS. This pattern indicates that High settings represent a inflection point where the GPU workload increases substantially.

At 1920x1080, the frame rates are: Low at 185.5 FPS, Medium at 167.9 FPS, High at 135 FPS, and Ultra at 132.7 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is 17.6 FPS, while Medium to High drops 32.9 FPS — the largest decline in the 1080p set. High to Ultra is minimal at 2.3 FPS, suggesting the visual upgrade from High to Ultra comes at almost no performance cost at this resolution.

Comparing across resolutions at the same settings, the 1080p to 4K scaling shows: Low drops from 185.5 to 136 FPS (49.5 FPS loss), Medium from 167.9 to 104.6 FPS (63.3 FPS loss), High from 135 to 81.2 FPS (53.8 FPS loss), and Ultra from 132.7 to 74.5 FPS (58.2 FPS loss). These figures illustrate how the GPU's workload scales with pixel count, with Medium showing the largest absolute drop.

The Verdict

This system can absolutely run Microsoft Flight Simulator, and it does so with exceptional headroom across all tested configurations. The verdict data confirms that every resolution and preset combination tested clears the 60 FPS playability threshold. At 3840x2160, the best settings are Ultra with 74.5 FPS average, which is the most demanding scenario this combo faces. At 2560x1440, Ultra delivers 102.3 FPS, and at 1920x1080, Ultra reaches 132.7 FPS.

The 4K Ultra result of 74.5 FPS is particularly noteworthy because it means users can enjoy maximum visual quality at the highest resolution without needing to compromise. The headroom above 60 FPS ranges from 14.5 FPS at 4K Ultra to 72.7 FPS at 1080p Ultra, indicating this system is not merely playable but comfortable. Even at the most stressful settings, there is no risk of dropping below the playability threshold based on the measured averages.

The verdict is clear: this PC runs the game exceptionally well at all resolutions, with Ultra settings recommended everywhere. The i5-12400F and RTX 4090 combination proves that a mid-range CPU paired with a flagship GPU can deliver outstanding performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator, particularly at higher resolutions where the GPU's strengths are most pronounced.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for the CPU, the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS has an average benchmark score of 19047, which is essentially identical to the i5-12400F's 19039 — a 0% delta. This mobile processor would likely deliver very similar performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator, though its lower power envelope might affect sustained performance. The Intel Core 3 201E scores 19056 (-0.1% delta), offering nearly indistinguishable CPU performance. The Intel Core i5-1335U scores 18982 (0.3% delta) and the AMD EPYC 7773X scores 18979 (0.3% delta), both within a fraction of a percent of the i5-12400F.

For the GPU, the Intel Arc Pro A60 scores 60326 (0% delta) versus the RTX 4090's 60347, making it a statistically equivalent performer in synthetic benchmarks. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 scores 60140 (0.3% delta), while the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scores 61896 (-2.5% delta) — slightly faster on paper. The AMD Radeon PRO V710 scores 58657 (2.9% delta), indicating it trails the RTX 4090 by a small margin.

In practical terms for this game, these benchmark-equivalent alternatives would be expected to produce similar frame rates to the tested combo. However, the RTX 4090's massive 24 GB of memory and 1.01 TB/s bandwidth are unique attributes that synthetic scores may not fully capture, so actual in-game performance with these rivals could vary from the measured results. The data suggests that users with these alternative components in their systems would have a comparable experience, though the RTX 4090's specific strengths in high-resolution rendering might not be fully replicated by its nearest rivals.