Microsoft Flight Simulator

The benchmark data for Microsoft Flight Simulator, captured with an Intel Core i5-12400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D combination, reveals a system that handles the flight sim with substantial headroom across all tested resolutions. Measured FPS values were recorded at three resolutions and four quality presets, with the data showing that even the most demanding Ultra preset never dips below 84 FPS on average. The results position this combo as a top-tier performer, ranking 70th out of 3714 tested combinations.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers exceptional frame rates that far exceed the 60 FPS playability threshold. The Low preset produces an average of 184 FPS, while Medium reaches 168 FPS with a minimum of 143 FPS and a maximum of 194 FPS. High settings yield 149 FPS, and even the Ultra preset maintains a strong 142 FPS average. The scaling from Low to Ultra at this resolution shows a performance drop of roughly 23%, which is modest given the significant visual quality increase.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain impressively high. The Low preset averages 172 FPS, while Medium delivers 157 FPS with a minimum of 133 FPS and a maximum of 180 FPS. High settings produce 120 FPS, and Ultra stays at 114 FPS. The transition from 1080p to 1440p at Ultra settings reduces the average from 142 FPS to 114 FPS, a 20% decrease that indicates the GPU still has considerable capacity at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, 4K resolution, the system continues to deliver playable frame rates across all presets. Low settings average 151 FPS, Medium reaches 118 FPS with a minimum of 100 FPS and a maximum of 135 FPS, High produces 88 FPS, and Ultra maintains 84 FPS. The gap between Medium and High at 4K is notable—a 30 FPS drop—suggesting that High and Ultra presets introduce significantly more graphical complexity that taxes the GPU. The minimum FPS recorded at 4K Medium is 100, meaning the system never falls below that floor even in demanding scenes.

The data reveals a consistent pattern: at every resolution, the jump from Low to Medium costs roughly 18-20% performance, while the jump from High to Ultra costs only 4-7%. This suggests the High preset is where the most demanding visual features are concentrated, with Ultra adding comparatively less overhead.

FAQ

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

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 84 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playability threshold by a comfortable margin.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same settings?

A: At Ultra settings, the average drops from 142 FPS at 1920x1080 to 84 FPS at 3840x2160, a 41% reduction. At High settings, the drop is from 149 FPS to 88 FPS, a similar 41% decrease.

Q: What is the least demanding preset that still stays above 60 FPS at 4K?

A: All four presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—stay above 60 FPS at 3840x2160. The lowest average is 84 FPS at Ultra, so even the most demanding setting exceeds the threshold.

Q: Is the frame rate more consistent at lower resolutions?

A: Yes. The only presets with reported minimum and maximum FPS values are Medium at each resolution. At 1920x1080, the range is 143-194 FPS; at 2560x1440, it is 133-180 FPS; and at 3840x2160, it is 100-135 FPS. The spread widens as resolution decreases, indicating more variation at lower resolutions.

Q: How does the 1440p Medium preset compare to the 4K Medium preset?

A: At 2560x1440, Medium averages 157 FPS with a 133 FPS minimum, while at 3840x2160, Medium averages 118 FPS with a 100 FPS minimum. The 4K preset is 33% slower on average but still maintains a 100 FPS floor.

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded in the entire dataset?

A: The highest average is 184 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. The second-highest is 172 FPS at 2560x1440 with Low settings.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results indicate a GPU-heavy workload that scales predictably with resolution. At 1920x1080, the CPU's influence is most apparent: the difference between Low and Ultra presets is only 42 FPS (184 vs 142), suggesting the GPU is not the sole bottleneck at this resolution. The Intel Core i5-12400F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads boosting to 4.40 GHz, appears sufficient to feed the RTX 5090 D at 1080p, as the frame rates remain high even when graphical settings drop.

As resolution increases to 2560x1440, the GPU becomes more dominant. The frame rate gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 58 FPS (172 vs 114), and the absolute numbers decrease across all presets. This indicates that the RTX 5090 D's 32 GB of GDDR7 memory and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth are being utilized more heavily, while the CPU's role in frame generation diminishes.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor. The Low preset averages 151 FPS, but Ultra drops to 84 FPS—a 44% reduction. The CPU's 18 MB of shared L3 cache and 65 W TDP are likely not constraining performance at 4K, as the frame rate differences between presets are almost entirely attributable to GPU rendering load. The RTX 5090 D's 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 680 TMUs are being pushed harder at this resolution.

The scaling between presets reinforces this interpretation. At 1080p, the Ultra-to-Low ratio is 1.30 (142/184), while at 4K it is 1.80 (84/151). This widening ratio with resolution confirms that the GPU's capabilities are the primary determinant of frame rate at higher pixel counts, whereas the CPU can keep up with even the least demanding preset at lower resolutions.

The Verdict

This system can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at all tested resolutions and presets with frame rates well above the 60 FPS threshold. At 1920x1080, every preset clears 60 FPS, with the most demanding Ultra setting averaging 142 FPS. The 2560x1440 results are equally strong—Ultra maintains 114 FPS, and even the lowest preset of the group, High, produces 120 FPS. At 3840x2160, all four presets are playable, with Ultra averaging 84 FPS and Medium reaching 118 FPS.

The verdict data confirms that the best settings at each resolution are Ultra. At 4K, Ultra averages 84 FPS, which is 24 FPS above the playability threshold. At 1440p, Ultra averages 114 FPS, and at 1080p, Ultra averages 142 FPS. This combination of the Intel Core i5-12400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D therefore offers maximum visual quality at every resolution without ever approaching the 60 FPS limit.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 70th out of 3714 tested combinations, placing it in the top 2% of all systems benchmarked for this game. This rank reflects the GPU's immense power, as the RTX 5090 D sits in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 77712. The CPU, by comparison, is in the 73rd percentile of all CPUs with an average score of 19039. The combination of a high-percentile GPU with a mid-high-percentile CPU produces a system that excels in this GPU-bound flight simulator.

The ranking suggests that while the CPU is not the strongest available, it does not bottleneck the GPU in Microsoft Flight Simulator's specific workload. The 3714-combo pool includes systems with far more powerful CPUs, yet this pairing still achieves a top-70 position, indicating that the RTX 5090 D compensates for any CPU limitations.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the best settings are Ultra, which produces an average of 142 FPS. This is 82 FPS above the playability threshold, providing substantial headroom for demanding scenes or background applications.

At 2560x1440, Ultra is again the best choice, averaging 114 FPS. This is 54 FPS above the threshold, still offering a comfortable margin.

At 3840x2160, Ultra is the recommended preset, with an average of 84 FPS. While this is the lowest average in the dataset, it remains 24 FPS above the 60 FPS threshold, making it a viable option for 4K gaming.

The data shows that Ultra is the optimal preset at every resolution, with no need to compromise on quality to maintain playability.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals in benchmark scores are the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS with an average score of 19047 (0% delta), the Intel Core 3 201E at 19056 (-0.1% delta), the Intel Core i5-1335U at 18982 (0.3% delta), and the AMD EPYC 7773X at 18979 (0.3% delta). These processors would behave similarly in terms of overall CPU performance, though their core counts and architectures differ. The Ryzen 5 7535HS and Core i5-1335U are mobile parts, while the Core 3 201E and EPYC 7773X target different segments, but their average benchmark scores are nearly identical to the i5-12400F's 19039.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT with an average score of 76904 (1.1% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT at 78940 (-1.6% delta), the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB at 79396 (-2.1% delta), and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB at 79605 (-2.4% delta). These GPUs would produce frame rates within a few percent of the RTX 5090 D in Microsoft Flight Simulator, though the Tesla P100 models are datacenter-focused and lack modern gaming features. The Radeon RX 6850M XT is the closest gaming-oriented alternative, with a delta of -1.6%, meaning it would be slightly slower but broadly comparable in this workload.

A system pairing the i5-12400F with any of these rival GPUs would likely deliver playable frame rates at all resolutions, though the exact FPS would shift by the delta percentages shown. The RX 6850M XT, for instance, would produce roughly 1.6% lower FPS than the RTX 5090 D, which at 4K Ultra would mean approximately 83 FPS instead of 84 FPS. The differences are small enough that the overall verdict would remain unchanged.