Microsoft Flight Simulator

Intel Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is a pairing that looks lopsided on paper, but the benchmark data for Microsoft Flight Simulator shows it handles the title with authority across all tested resolutions. The CPU, with its 10 cores and 16 threads, posts a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21645 and a single-core score of 3055, placing it in the 83rd percentile among all CPUs. The GPU, a Blackwell 2.0 part with 32 GB of GDDR7 memory and a 1.79 TB/s bandwidth, sits in the 92nd percentile for all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 79842. In this specific simulator, the combination ranks 110th out of 3714 tested combos, which places it comfortably in the top 3% of systems. While the CPU is not the absolute fastest available, its single-thread performance is strong enough to feed the GPU adequately, as evidenced by the measured frame rates that remain well above the 60 FPS playable threshold at every preset tested.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core i5-14400F, based on average benchmark scores, include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, which scores 32233 and is just 0.1 percent behind, and the Intel Core i9-11900 at 32226, trailing by 0.2 percent. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS scores 32354, which is 0.2 percent ahead of the i5-14400F, while the Intel Core i7-12800H scores 32121, lagging by 0.5 percent. In practical terms, any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator when paired with the same RTX 5090, since the game’s frame pacing is far more dependent on the GPU at the tested settings. The differences among these processors are within measurement noise, so a system builder swapping between them should not expect any meaningful change in average FPS or stutter behavior.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals to the RTX 5090 are the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB, which scores 79605 and is 0.3 percent behind, and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB at 79396, trailing by 0.6 percent. The AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT scores 78940, which is 1.1 percent lower, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X scores 80959, putting it 1.4 percent ahead. These deltaPct values are all under 2 percent, meaning the RTX 5090’s closest alternatives would produce nearly indistinguishable frame rates in this simulator. Note that the Tesla P100 cards are datacenter parts without display outputs, so they are not practical for a gaming PC, but the performance comparison still holds for raw compute. If you were to pair the i5-14400F with any of these GPU rivals, the measured FPS in Microsoft Flight Simulator would stay within a few frames of what is listed below, assuming the same settings and resolution.

FAQ

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

A: Yes. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the combo achieves an average of 79 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The data also shows it clears 60 FPS at High, Medium, and Low settings at this resolution.

Q: What is the highest FPS this combo can produce?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 196 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next highest is 182 at 2560x1440 Low, followed by 142 at 3840x2160 Low.

Q: How does the RTX 5090 compare to its nearest rival in raw performance?

A: The RTX 5090’s average benchmark score is 79842, which is 1.1 percent higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (78940) and 0.3 percent higher than the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (79605). It trails the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X by 1.4 percent, which scores 80959.

Q: Is the Core i5-14400F a bottleneck for the RTX 5090 in this game?

A: The measured FPS data suggests it is not a significant bottleneck. At 1080p Ultra, the combo hits 133 FPS average, and at 4K Ultra it hits 79 FPS. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3055 and multi-core score of 21645 are sufficient to keep the GPU fed, as the frame rates scale predictably with resolution.

Q: What are the minimum FPS numbers available in the data?

A: The dataset only includes minimum FPS for Medium settings. At 3840x2160 Medium, the minimum is 94 FPS; at 2560x1440 Medium, it is 127 FPS; and at 1920x1080 Medium, it is 152 FPS. No minimum FPS values are provided for Low, High, or Ultra settings.

Q: Does the CPU’s memory support affect performance here?

A: The i5-14400F supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode. The benchmark data does not specify which memory type was used, so no conclusion can be drawn about their relative impact on the measured FPS figures.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates. With Low settings, the average FPS is 196. Moving to Medium, the average drops to 179, with a minimum of 152 and a maximum of 206. High settings yield an average of 139 FPS, while Ultra settings produce 133 FPS average. The gap between High and Ultra is only 6 FPS, suggesting that the extra visual fidelity at Ultra costs very little performance at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the pattern continues with strong results. Low settings average 182 FPS, and Medium settings average 149 FPS with a minimum of 127 and a maximum of 172. High settings drop to 112 FPS average, while Ultra settings average 107 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 20-25 percent across all settings, which is expected given the increased pixel count.

At 3840x2160, the GPU starts to work harder but still stays well above 60 FPS. Low settings average 142 FPS, and Medium settings average 110 FPS with a minimum of 94 and a maximum of 127. High settings average 83 FPS, while Ultra settings average 79 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 4K is only 4 FPS, meaning users can enable Ultra without sacrificing much frame rate. The minimum FPS at 4K Medium is 94, which is still 34 FPS above the playable threshold, indicating that even the worst-case dips remain smooth.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 combination ranks 110th out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the top 3 percent of all systems tested for this game. The rank reflects the overall balance of CPU and GPU performance, and the data shows that this pairing is not held back by the relatively modest CPU. For context, the CPU alone is in the 83rd percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 92nd percentile among all GPUs. The combo rank of 110 out of 3714 is higher than either component’s individual percentile would suggest, indicating that the simulator benefits more from the GPU’s raw power than the CPU’s multi-threaded capabilities. Systems ranked above this combo likely use faster CPUs, but the frame rate data shows that the i5-14400F does not prevent the RTX 5090 from achieving high frame rates at any tested resolution.

The Verdict

This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at all tested resolutions and presets, clearing the 60 FPS playable threshold in every configuration. At 3840x2160, the lowest average FPS is 79 at Ultra settings, which is 19 FPS above the threshold. At 2560x1440, the lowest average is 107 FPS at Ultra, and at 1920x1080, the lowest average is 133 FPS at Ultra. There is no setting combination in the data that falls below 60 FPS, so users have complete freedom to choose any resolution and preset without worrying about playability. The verdict is unambiguous: this combo is more than capable of running the simulator at maximum fidelity at any resolution up to 4K.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the best settings are Ultra, which achieves an average of 79 FPS. This is the most demanding preset available, and it still clears the 60 FPS threshold by a comfortable margin. Users who prefer higher frame rates over visual fidelity can drop to High for 83 FPS, Medium for 110 FPS, or Low for 142 FPS, but Ultra is recommended since it offers the best visuals without compromising playability.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are also Ultra, with an average of 107 FPS. This is 47 FPS above the playable threshold, leaving significant headroom for any future updates or add-ons that might increase the load. High settings offer 112 FPS, Medium offers 149 FPS, and Low offers 182 FPS, but none of these are necessary to maintain smooth gameplay.

At 1920x1080, the best settings are Ultra, with an average of 133 FPS. This is more than double the playable threshold, making it ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. The gap between Ultra (133 FPS) and High (139 FPS) is only 6 FPS, so there is little reason to drop below Ultra at this resolution. Medium settings yield 179 FPS and Low settings yield 196 FPS, which could be useful for competitive play or for users with 240 Hz displays, but for standard use, Ultra is the clear choice.