Microsoft Flight Simulator

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER covers three resolutions and four settings presets. All figures are average FPS, as minimum and maximum values were not captured in this dataset.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 109.2 FPS, which is the highest average recorded across the entire test matrix. Medium follows at 87.7 FPS, High at 63.1 FPS, and Ultra at 61.2 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 48 FPS, indicating that the settings slider has a substantial impact on frame rate even at the lowest resolution. Notably, the difference between High and Ultra is small, only 1.9 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the top of the preset ladder.

Moving to 2560x1440, the same pattern persists with lower absolute numbers. Low produces 89.8 FPS, Medium drops to 67.1 FPS, High falls to 49.3 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 49.8 FPS. The High and Ultra results are nearly identical here, with a difference of just 0.5 FPS, reinforcing that the Ultra preset offers little measurable gain over High at this resolution. The drop from Low to Medium is 22.7 FPS, while the drop from Medium to High is 17.8 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates compress further. Low still manages 66.3 FPS, but Medium falls to 52.5 FPS, High to 39.7 FPS, and Ultra to 37.8 FPS. The delta between High and Ultra is only 1.9 FPS again, consistent with the 1080p observation. The Low-to-Medium gap is 13.8 FPS, and the Medium-to-High gap is 12.8 FPS. None of the high-fidelity presets at this resolution reach the playable threshold of 60 FPS.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear shift in component bottleneck behavior as resolution changes. At 1920x1080, the CPU's influence is relatively stronger because the GPU has less pixel work to complete. The Low preset at 109.2 FPS versus Ultra at 61.2 FPS shows that the GPU is still the primary driver of frame rate, but the headroom at Low suggests the CPU can feed frames faster than the GPU can render at higher settings.

At 2560x1440, the scaling from Low to Medium (89.8 to 67.1 FPS) is a 25.3 percent reduction, while Medium to High (67.1 to 49.3 FPS) is a 26.5 percent reduction. This consistent scaling indicates that both components are still contributing, but the GPU load is rising. The near-identical High and Ultra results (49.3 vs 49.8 FPS) suggest that at this resolution the Ultra preset does not add meaningful GPU work beyond High, or that the CPU becomes a limiting factor at these settings.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the dominant constraint. Low at 66.3 FPS is the only preset above 60 FPS, and the drop to Medium (52.5 FPS) represents a 20.8 percent decline. High and Ultra hover near 38 to 40 FPS, which is roughly 60 percent of the Low result. This dramatic falloff at 4K points to the RTX 2070 SUPER's 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth being saturated by the higher resolution textures and shading loads. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 6 threads, appears adequate for the flight simulation's single-threaded and moderately threaded workloads, based on the fact that frame rates at 1080p Low exceed 100 FPS.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: Yes. The recorded average FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 61.2 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold by a narrow margin.

Q: What is the best preset at 1440p for a smooth experience?

A: Medium at 2560x1440 delivers 67.1 FPS, which is the highest preset that remains above 60 FPS at that resolution. High and Ultra both fall below the threshold at 49.3 and 49.8 FPS respectively.

Q: Is 4K playable with this hardware?

A: Only with the Low preset. At 3840x2160, Low averages 66.3 FPS. Medium drops to 52.5 FPS, and High and Ultra are in the 37 to 40 FPS range.

Q: How much performance is lost when going from 1080p to 1440p at Medium settings?

A: The average FPS drops from 87.7 at 1920x1080 to 67.1 at 2560x1440, a reduction of 20.6 FPS or roughly 23 percent.

Q: Does the Ultra preset provide a meaningful boost over High?

A: The data shows negligible differences. At 1080p, Ultra is 61.2 FPS versus High at 63.1 FPS. At 1440p, the difference is 0.5 FPS in favor of Ultra. At 4K, Ultra is 1.9 FPS slower than High.

Q: What is the lowest recorded average FPS in this dataset?

A: The lowest average is 37.8 FPS, observed at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings.

The Verdict

The database verdict for this combination is clear: this PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, but the playable range depends heavily on resolution. At 1920x1080, all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) exceed 60 FPS, with Ultra scraping by at 61.2 FPS. This makes 1080p the fully playable resolution for this setup, regardless of visual fidelity preference.

At 2560x1440, only Low and Medium clear the 60 FPS bar. Low averages 89.8 FPS, which is comfortable, and Medium holds at 67.1 FPS, which is still above the threshold but leaves less headroom. High and Ultra are not playable by the 60 FPS standard, both sitting near 49 to 50 FPS.

At 3840x2160, only Low is playable at 66.3 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall short, with Ultra the worst at 37.8 FPS. The best settings per resolution, as determined by the verdict data, are Ultra at 1080p (61.2 FPS), Medium at 1440p (67.1 FPS), and Low at 4K (66.3 FPS). Users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate may accept the sub-60 results at higher presets, but the playable threshold is strictly met only at the listed settings.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals in the database, based on average benchmark scores, provide context for how this processor compares. The Intel Core i7-1068NG7 scores 2259, which is 0.2 percent higher than the i5-9400's 2254. The Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248, 0.3 percent lower. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, 0.4 percent lower, and the Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264, 0.4 percent higher. These deltas are tiny, all within a 0.8 percent band, meaning any of these CPUs would likely produce near-identical frame rates in this game when paired with the same GPU. The i5-9400 sits at the 47th percentile among all CPUs, indicating it is a mid-pack processor, but its 6-core, 6-thread configuration appears sufficient for this title's demands.

For the GPU, the RTX 2070 SUPER's nearest rivals are equally close in aggregate performance. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M scores 20480, 1 percent higher than the RTX 2070 SUPER's 20282. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20534, 1.2 percent higher. The Intel Arc B570 scores 20556, 1.3 percent higher, and the Intel Arc A750 scores 20582, 1.5 percent higher. These differences are all under 2 percent, suggesting that swapping the RTX 2070 SUPER for any of these alternatives would yield FPS numbers within a couple of frames of the recorded results. The GPU's percentile rank is 65, placing it above the CPU in relative standing, which aligns with the observed bottleneck patterns where the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database's tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this CPU-GPU pairing ranks 2250 out of 3714 combos. That places it in the 60.6th percentile of all tested configurations for this specific game. The rank reflects the balanced nature of this setup: it is not a top-tier pairing, but it outperforms a majority of the tested combos. Given that the i5-9400 is at the 47th percentile among CPUs and the RTX 2070 SUPER is at the 65th percentile among GPUs, the combined rank of 2250 out of 3714 is consistent with the GPU pulling the overall result upward. The data suggests that this combo is mid-to-upper tier for Microsoft Flight Simulator, capable of playable frame rates at 1080p across all settings and at 1440p with reduced presets.

Best Settings per Resolution

The verdict data provides explicit best settings for each resolution, defined as the most demanding preset that maintains at least 60 FPS average.

At 1920x1080, the best settings are Ultra, with an average FPS of 61.2. This is the highest fidelity option that still meets the playable threshold. Users who prefer higher frame rates can step down to High (63.1 FPS), Medium (87.7 FPS), or Low (109.2 FPS), but Ultra is the ceiling for 60-plus performance.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are Medium, with an average FPS of 67.1. This is a significant step down from Ultra, but it is the only preset above Low that clears 60 FPS. Low remains the alternative for more headroom at 89.8 FPS, while High and Ultra are not recommendable for a 60 FPS target.

At 3840x2160, the best settings are Low, with an average FPS of 66.3. This is the only playable preset at 4K. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below 60 FPS, with Medium at 52.5 FPS and Ultra at 37.8 FPS. For 4K users, the choice is stark: accept Low for smooth performance or sacrifice frame rate for higher visual quality.