Microsoft Flight Simulator

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-14600KF paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 sits at rank 2912 out of 3714 tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places this combo in the bottom 22 percent of all tested systems, a low position that reflects the GPU's age more than the CPU's capability. The database shows this pairing landing well below the median performer, and the measured frame rates confirm that this is not a combination built for high-refresh or maxed-out flight simulation.

The ranking becomes more meaningful when you separate the two components. The i5-14600KF sits in the 90th percentile among all CPUs in the database, an excellent standing driven by a 14-core, 20-thread design. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32544 and single-core score of 4594 place it firmly in enthusiast territory. The RTX 2060, by contrast, rests in the 58th percentile among all GPUs, a mid-range position consistent with its 2019 release and 6 GB of GDDR6 memory. The GPU drags the overall combo ranking downward; the CPU is not the limiting factor here.

Microsoft Flight Simulator is known in the database for being unusually demanding on both processor and graphics hardware, but the recorded data for this particular combo shows the GPU hitting its ceiling early. At 1080p Ultra, the average frame rate drops to 51 FPS, below the 60 FPS playable threshold. At 4K Ultra, the average falls to 30 FPS. These numbers indicate that the RTX 2060, while still functional in older titles, cannot sustain the visual complexity that Flight Simulator throws at it. The CPU, with its strong single-thread performance, is ready to feed frames well beyond what this GPU can render.

What is curious is how close the RTX 2060's benchmark average sits to its nearest rivals. The GPU's average benchmark score of 15290 is nearly identical to the GeForce GTX 580 at 15283 (0 percent delta), the AMD Radeon 680M at 15270 (0.1 percent delta), and the RTX 3050 OEM at 15199 (0.6 percent delta). This clustering suggests that in synthetic tests, these very different cards behave similarly, but in Flight Simulator specifically, architectural differences may push them apart. The measured FPS data for this combo is the only ground truth.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 60 FPS on a 1080p monitor?

A: Yes, but only on Low or Medium settings. The database records 92 FPS average on Low and 71 FPS average on Medium at 1920x1080. High settings drop to 54 FPS average, and Ultra falls to 51 FPS average, both below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, only Low settings clear the 60 FPS threshold, with a 74 FPS average. Medium settings average 58 FPS, which is just shy of playable, while High averages 43 FPS and Ultra averages 41 FPS.

Q: Is 4K gaming possible with this combo?

A: No resolution at 3840x2160 reaches 60 FPS. The best recorded average is 55 FPS on Low settings. Medium averages 42 FPS, High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. The verdict data confirms no playable settings exist at 4K.

Q: How close is the RTX 2060 to its nearest GPU rivals in raw benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 2060's average benchmark score is 15290. The GTX 580 scores 15283 (0 percent delta), the Radeon 680M scores 15270 (0.1 percent delta), the RTX 3050 OEM scores 15199 (0.6 percent delta), and the RX 7600 scores 15171 (0.8 percent delta). All five cards are within a 0.8 percent band.

Q: How does the i5-14600KF compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: The i5-14600KF has an average benchmark score of 49394. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900 scores 49228 (0.3 percent behind), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G scores 49196 (0.4 percent behind), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 scores 48995 (0.8 percent behind). The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 49796 (0.8 percent ahead).

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The database includes minimum FPS only for Medium settings. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 61 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the minimum is 49 FPS. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 36 FPS. Low, High, and Ultra settings do not have recorded minimum values.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the i5-14600KF suggest that users could swap in any of several AMD or Intel processors without materially changing CPU-bound performance in Flight Simulator. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900, with a 0.3 percent higher average score, would behave nearly identically in CPU-limited scenarios. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G and Intel Core Ultra 5 245 sit 0.4 and 0.8 percent behind respectively, again within noise. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the only nearby rival that edges ahead, by 0.8 percent. For a flight simulator that is often GPU-bound at higher settings, these small CPU differences would be invisible in practice.

On the GPU side, the RTX 2060's closest rivals are a mixed bag of old, integrated, and newer budget parts. The GeForce GTX 580 matches the RTX 2060's average score exactly (0 percent delta), which is remarkable given the generational gap. The AMD Radeon 680M, an integrated graphics solution, comes within 0.1 percent. The RTX 3050 OEM sits 0.6 percent behind, and the RX 7600 trails by 0.8 percent. In Flight Simulator, however, the RTX 2060's 6 GB memory buffer and Turing architecture may produce different results than these rivals, especially at higher resolutions where memory capacity and bandwidth matter. The RTX 2060 has 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a meaningful advantage over older or integrated parts.

If a user were to replicate this combo's performance with alternative hardware, the data suggests that any of the four rival GPUs would land within a hair of the RTX 2060 in synthetic benchmarks. But the measured FPS figures in this database are specific to the RTX 2060, and the game's response to different architectures is not captured in these rival deltas. The safest assumption is that a GTX 580, Radeon 680M, RTX 3050 OEM, or RX 7600 would produce similar average frame rates, with the caveat that driver support and feature sets differ.

The Verdict

The verdict data in the database is unambiguous. This PC cannot run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 60 FPS in 4K at any setting. The recorded verdict for 3840x2160 lists no playable settings, and the best average FPS at that resolution is 55 on Low. At 2560x1440, the system clears 60 FPS only on Low settings, with a 74 FPS average. At 1920x1080, Low and Medium both exceed the playable threshold, with Medium being the best playable preset at 71 FPS average.

For users targeting 1080p, the answer is a qualified yes. The combo handles Low and Medium settings smoothly, with Medium producing a 71 FPS average and a 61 FPS minimum. That minimum is important because it means even the slowest recorded frames stay above the 60 FPS line. High and Ultra at 1080p fall short, averaging 54 and 51 FPS respectively. At 1440p, the system is playable only on Low, and the gap between Low (74 FPS) and Medium (58 FPS) is steep, suggesting the GPU hits a hard architectural wall rather than a gradual scaling curve.

The 4K results are effectively unusable for smooth gameplay. Even Low settings average only 55 FPS, which is below the threshold, and Ultra averages 30 FPS, which is half of what is needed. The database's verdict field confirms that no 4K preset is playable. In practical terms, this combo is a 1080p machine for Flight Simulator, with 1440p possible only at the lowest visual quality.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the recorded data shows a clear progression across settings. Low settings produce a 92 FPS average, which is the highest frame rate this combo achieves at any resolution. Medium settings drop to a 71 FPS average with a 61 FPS minimum and 82 FPS maximum. High settings average 54 FPS, and Ultra averages 51 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is 17 FPS, which is larger than the gap between High and Ultra at only 3 FPS. This suggests that the High preset introduces a specific rendering feature that is disproportionately expensive on the RTX 2060.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern repeats with lower absolute numbers. Low averages 74 FPS, Medium averages 58 FPS with a 49 FPS minimum and 66 FPS maximum, High averages 43 FPS, and Ultra averages 41 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 49 FPS is worth noting because it falls well below the average, indicating occasional stutter in busy scenes. The High to Ultra drop is again small, just 2 FPS, reinforcing the idea that the step from Medium to High is the costly one.

At 3840x2160, the numbers become marginal across the board. Low averages 55 FPS, Medium averages 42 FPS with a 36 FPS minimum and 49 FPS maximum, High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. The 4K Medium minimum of 36 FPS is particularly low, meaning that even a locked 30 FPS experience would be more consistent than what this preset offers. The resolution scaling from 1080p to 4K is severe: Low drops from 92 to 55 FPS, a 40 percent reduction, while Ultra drops from 51 to 30 FPS, a 41 percent reduction. This consistent percentage drop across settings indicates that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are the limiting factors at higher resolutions.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, with a 71 FPS average. The 61 FPS minimum confirms that even the worst recorded frame stays above the playable line. Low also qualifies at 92 FPS, but Medium is the better choice because it delivers significantly higher visual quality while maintaining a comfortable margin above 60 FPS.

For 2560x1440, the only preset that clears 60 FPS is Low, with a 74 FPS average. Medium falls short at 58 FPS average, and its 49 FPS minimum makes it a poor candidate for consistent gameplay. Users at 1440p must accept Low settings to stay playable, which is a substantial visual compromise for a flight simulator that relies heavily on scenery detail.

For 3840x2160, no preset meets the 60 FPS threshold. The database's verdict field shows an empty list of playable settings, and the best average is 55 FPS on Low. There is no recommended setting at 4K because none of them produce a playable experience. Users who insist on 4K would need to consider a different GPU, as the RTX 2060 cannot deliver the required frame rate even at the lowest quality preset.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals an interesting division of labor between the i5-14600KF and the RTX 2060 in Microsoft Flight Simulator. At 1080p, the CPU's strong single-thread performance (4594 in Cinebench R23 single-core) is more than sufficient to feed the GPU, and the frame rates are limited by the graphics card. The drop from 92 FPS on Low to 71 FPS on Medium at 1080p is a GPU-side cost, not a CPU limitation. The CPU's 90th percentile standing among all processors means it is unlikely to bottleneck any GPU in this class.

At 1440p and 4K, the GPU's role becomes even more dominant. The consistent percentage drops between resolutions, roughly 40 percent from 1080p to 4K across all presets, point to pixel throughput and memory bandwidth as the binding constraints. The RTX 2060's 6 GB of GDDR6 memory and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth are modest by modern standards, and Flight Simulator's high-resolution textures likely exceed what this buffer can efficiently handle. The CPU's 24 MB of L3 cache and 14 cores are irrelevant at 4K because the GPU cannot render frames fast enough to demand more from the processor.

What is curious is the small FPS difference between High and Ultra presets at every resolution. At 1080p, High averages 54 FPS and Ultra averages 51 FPS, a 3 FPS gap. At 1440p, the gap is 2 FPS (43 to 41). At 4K, the gap is again 2 FPS (32 to 30). This suggests that the Ultra preset adds features that are not significantly more expensive than High on this hardware, or that both presets are already saturating the GPU's capabilities. The larger gap between Medium and High, 17 FPS at 1080p and 15 FPS at 1440p, indicates that the High preset introduces a major rendering cost that Medium avoids.

The CPU's benchmark scores tell a story of a processor that is ready for far more demanding GPU workloads. The i5-14600KF's multi-threaded score of 32544 in Cinebench R23 places it well above what Flight Simulator needs, and its single-thread score of 4594 ensures that even the simulation's complex flight models and AI traffic computations will not stall. If a user were to upgrade the GPU to something with a higher percentile ranking, the CPU would not hold the system back. The reverse is not true: the RTX 2060 is the clear bottleneck in this pairing, and no CPU upgrade would improve the recorded frame rates.