Microsoft Flight Simulator

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for this combination of an Intel Core i5-14600K and an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 shows a clear performance hierarchy across resolutions and presets in Microsoft Flight Simulator. At 3840x2160, the system delivers an average of 32 FPS on High settings, 42 FPS on Medium, 55 FPS on Low, and 30 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset at 4K is the only one with complete frame time data, showing a minimum of 36 FPS and a maximum of 49 FPS. This indicates that at 4K, the system is consistently below the 60 FPS playability threshold, with even the Low preset averaging only 55 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the results improve substantially. The Low preset reaches an average of 74 FPS, which clears the playability threshold. Medium settings average 58 FPS with a minimum of 49 FPS and a maximum of 66 FPS, placing it just under the 60 FPS average mark. High settings average 43 FPS, while Ultra drops to 41 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium at this resolution is 16 FPS, while the difference between High and Ultra is only 2 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the top end of the settings range.

At 1920x1080, the combination performs much more comfortably. The Low preset averages 92 FPS, Medium averages 71 FPS with a minimum of 61 FPS and a maximum of 82 FPS, High averages 54 FPS, and Ultra averages 51 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p is the highest settings tier that maintains an average above 60 FPS, and its minimum of 61 FPS means even the worst-case frame rate stays above the threshold. The drop from Low to Medium is 21 FPS, while the drop from High to Ultra is only 3 FPS, again showing that the most demanding presets compress together.

The data shows a consistent pattern: each resolution step down from 4K to 1440p to 1080p yields roughly a 20 to 30 percent improvement in average FPS at equivalent settings. For example, Low settings improve from 55 FPS at 4K to 74 FPS at 1440p to 92 FPS at 1080p. Medium settings improve from 42 FPS at 4K to 58 FPS at 1440p to 71 FPS at 1080p. High settings improve from 32 FPS at 4K to 43 FPS at 1440p to 54 FPS at 1080p. Ultra settings improve from 30 FPS at 4K to 41 FPS at 1440p to 51 FPS at 1080p.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results indicate that the GPU is the dominant constraint at higher resolutions, while the CPU becomes relatively more influential as resolution drops. At 3840x2160, the average FPS across all presets ranges from 30 to 55, a spread of 25 FPS. At 2560x1440, the spread widens slightly to 33 FPS, from 41 to 74. At 1920x1080, the spread widens further to 41 FPS, from 51 to 92. This widening spread at lower resolutions is a classic sign that the CPU has more headroom to feed frames as the GPU load decreases.

The scaling between presets also reveals the component split. At 4K, moving from Low to Ultra costs 25 FPS on average, from 55 down to 30. At 1440p, the same preset range costs 33 FPS, from 74 down to 41. At 1080p, it costs 41 FPS, from 92 down to 51. The larger preset penalty at lower resolutions means the GPU is less saturated, so the CPU can push more frames when the graphics load is light. The Core i5-14600K, with its 14 cores and 20 threads, is clearly capable of sustaining high frame rates in this flight simulator, but the RTX 2060's 6 GB of GDDR6 memory and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth become the limiting factor as pixel count rises.

Specifically, the 4K data shows a narrow band of performance: even the Low preset only reaches 55 FPS, which is 5 FPS below the playability threshold. This suggests that at 4K, the GPU is the bottleneck regardless of settings, because reducing graphics quality from Ultra to Low only gains 25 FPS. At 1080p, the CPU's strength shows through: the Low preset hits 92 FPS, which is 53 percent above the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset at 1080p maintains a minimum of 61 FPS, indicating that the CPU can keep frame pacing stable even when the GPU is working moderately hard.

The RTX 2060's benchmark percentile of 58 versus the Core i5-14600K's percentile of 90 reinforces this interpretation. The CPU ranks far higher among all processors than the GPU ranks among all graphics cards, so in balanced workloads the GPU will typically limit performance first. The recorded FPS data confirms this: at no resolution does the Ultra preset reach 60 FPS, and at 4K even Low falls short.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves an average of 60 FPS or higher. The closest is Low at 55 FPS, which is below the playability threshold. The database records no playable settings for this resolution. Users targeting 4K would need to accept sub-60 FPS performance, with Low providing the highest average at 55 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset is the only playable option, averaging 74 FPS. Medium falls short at 58 FPS, so it cannot be recommended for a consistent 60 FPS experience. The best settings designation for 1440p is Low, with an average FPS of 74. The minimum frame data is not recorded for Low at this resolution, but the average is 14 FPS above the threshold, leaving some margin.

At 1920x1080, both Low and Medium clear the 60 FPS average threshold. Low averages 92 FPS, while Medium averages 71 FPS with a minimum of 61 FPS. The best settings designation for 1080p is Medium, with an average FPS of 71. This is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS on average, and its minimum of 61 FPS means the experience remains smooth throughout. High at 54 FPS and Ultra at 51 FPS both fall short, so they are not viable for a locked 60 FPS experience.

The pattern across resolutions is that the RTX 2060 can handle Medium settings at 1080p, Low settings at 1440p, and nothing at 4K. The CPU's strength does not translate into higher settings at higher resolutions because the GPU runs out of headroom first.

The Verdict

This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, but only at certain resolutions and presets. The verdict by resolution is clear: at 3840x2160, there are no playable settings, meaning no preset reaches an average of 60 FPS. At 2560x1440, only the Low preset is playable, with an average of 74 FPS. At 1920x1080, both Low and Medium are playable, with Medium being the best playable preset at 71 FPS average.

The playable threshold in the database is 60 FPS, and the data shows that this combination crosses that line at 1440p Low and 1080p Low and Medium. For users with a 1080p monitor, the Medium preset delivers a comfortable margin above the threshold, with a minimum of 61 FPS that avoids most stutter. For users with a 1440p monitor, dropping to Low settings is necessary, but the 74 FPS average provides a solid experience. For 4K users, the verdict is that this hardware cannot sustain 60 FPS at any setting, so a lower resolution or different hardware would be required.

The Core i5-14600K is not the limiting factor in most scenarios. Its high single-thread and multi-thread benchmark scores, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 24491 and a single-core score of 2064, indicate it can handle the simulation's CPU demands. The RTX 2060, with a Passmark G3D score of 14111 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1242, is the component that caps the experience. At 1080p Medium, the combination works well. At higher resolutions or presets, the GPU holds the system back.

FAQ

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

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS is 55 on Low settings, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. The database records no playable settings for this resolution.

Q: What is the best playable preset at 1080p?

A: Medium settings, which average 71 FPS with a minimum of 61 FPS and a maximum of 82 FPS. Low settings also work well at 92 FPS average, but Medium is the highest preset that stays above 60 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game with this hardware?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The RTX 2060 ranks at the 58th percentile among all GPUs, while the Core i5-14600K ranks at the 90th percentile among all CPUs. The FPS data shows the GPU constrains performance at higher resolutions, where even Low settings at 4K only reach 55 FPS.

Q: What settings should I use at 1440p?

A: Low settings, which average 74 FPS. Medium settings average 58 FPS, just below the threshold, so they cannot guarantee a consistent 60 FPS experience.

Q: How does the RTX 2060 compare to its nearest rivals in this context?

A: The RTX 2060's average benchmark score is 15290. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 scores 15283, a 0 percent difference. The AMD Radeon 680M scores 15270, 0.1 percent behind. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM scores 15199, 0.6 percent behind. The AMD Radeon RX 7600 scores 15171, 0.8 percent behind. These differences are negligible, so any of these GPUs would behave nearly identically.

Q: Does the CPU have enough processing power for this simulator?

A: Yes. The Core i5-14600K scores 24491 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2064 in single-core, with a Passmark multi-thread score of 38682 and a single-thread score of 4270. These scores place it at the 90th percentile among all CPUs, indicating ample headroom for the simulator's processing demands.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded at 1080p Medium?

A: The minimum is 61 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold. This means the Medium preset at 1080p does not drop below the target frame rate in the recorded data.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-14600K and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 ranks 2912 out of 3714 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the lower 22 percent of all tested hardware pairings for this game. The rank reflects the GPU's modest position in the performance hierarchy: the RTX 2060 sits at the 58th percentile among all GPUs, while the CPU sits at the 90th percentile among all CPUs. The combination's ranking is dragged down by the GPU, which limits the system to 1080p Medium or 1440p Low for a playable experience.

The rank of 2912 out of 3714 means there are 2911 combinations that perform better in this game, and 802 that perform worse. This is not a top-tier pairing for Microsoft Flight Simulator, but it is also not the bottom of the list. The system occupies a middle-to-lower position, consistent with a modern high-end CPU paired with an older mid-range GPU. The CPU's high percentile does not boost the combo's rank because the game's performance at higher resolutions and presets is bounded by the GPU.

The measured FPS data supports this ranking: the system cannot reach 60 FPS at 4K at any setting, can only reach it at 1440p Low, and can reach it at 1080p Low and Medium. These results are typical for a GPU at the 58th percentile in a demanding flight simulator. Users with this combination should expect a playable experience only at lower resolutions and settings.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the CPU and GPU provide a picture of what other hardware would behave similarly in this system. For the Intel Core i5-14600K, the closest alternatives by average benchmark score are the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H, which scores 48698 versus the i5-14600K's 48618, a difference of 0.2 percent. The AMD EPYC 4345P scores 48470, 0.3 percent behind. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX scores 48287, 0.7 percent behind. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 scores 48995, 0.8 percent ahead. All four CPUs are within 1 percent of the i5-14600K's average benchmark score, so swapping to any of them would produce nearly identical CPU performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

For the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060, the nearest rivals are even closer. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 scores 15283 versus the RTX 2060's 15290, a 0 percent difference. The AMD Radeon 680M scores 15270, 0.1 percent behind. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM scores 15199, 0.6 percent behind. The AMD Radeon RX 7600 scores 15171, 0.8 percent behind. These four GPUs are all within 1 percent of the RTX 2060's average benchmark score, so any of them would deliver essentially the same frame rates in this game.

Combining these rival lists, a system with an Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and an AMD Radeon RX 7600 would perform almost identically to the tested configuration, as would a system with an Intel Xeon Gold 5318H and a GTX 580. The delta percentages are all below 1 percent, meaning the FPS differences would be imperceptible in practice. Users considering upgrades should note that the GPU rivals are all older or lower-tier models, while the CPU rivals are comparable or newer parts, reinforcing the conclusion that the GPU is the bottleneck in this pairing.