Microsoft Flight Simulator

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 shows a clear progression across resolutions and presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 131.1 FPS, Medium reaches 119.8 FPS, High drops to 92.8 FPS, and Ultra sits at 90.8 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is modest at 11.3 FPS, while the step from Medium to High is larger at 27.0 FPS, indicating a significant cost in visual quality. High to Ultra is only 2.0 FPS apart, suggesting that at this resolution, the Ultra preset is nearly as fast as High.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages scale down predictably. Low produces 119.8 FPS, Medium 96.9 FPS, High 72.4 FPS, and Ultra 72.3 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra is negligible, a mere 0.1 FPS, which means the Ultra preset at 1440p costs essentially nothing beyond what High demands. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is most pronounced at Low (11.3 FPS lost) and least pronounced at Ultra (18.5 FPS lost), showing that lower presets lose more absolute performance when pixel count rises. Medium loses 22.9 FPS, and High loses 20.4 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes more dramatically. Low averages 91.7 FPS, Medium 71.3 FPS, High 52.8 FPS, and Ultra 50.6 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is 18.5 FPS, which is the largest single-preset jump in the entire measured set. High and Ultra at 4K both fall below the 60 FPS threshold, with Ultra only 2.2 FPS slower than High. The scaling from 1440p to 4K is severe: Low loses 28.1 FPS, Medium loses 25.6 FPS, High loses 19.6 FPS, and Ultra loses 21.7 FPS. No min or max FPS values were recorded, so the analysis relies solely on averages.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals that this pairing behaves differently depending on resolution. At 1920x1080, the CPU has enough headroom that the RTX 3080 can stretch its legs, with Low hitting 131.1 FPS. The i5-9400, a 6-core, 6-thread part with a 2.90 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost, ranks at the 47th percentile among all CPUs, which places it in the mid-range tier. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 6629 and single-core score of 935 indicate competent but not exceptional throughput. At 1080p, the GPU is the primary limiter only at higher presets; the small delta between High (92.8 FPS) and Ultra (90.8 FPS) suggests the CPU begins to cap performance once the GPU load eases.

At 2560x1440, the GPU's workload increases, and the CPU's role diminishes. The difference between High and Ultra is just 0.1 FPS, which is a hallmark of GPU-bound rendering. The CPU is not the bottleneck here; the RTX 3080's 10 GB of GDDR6X memory and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth are being utilized more fully. The 3080 sits at the 68th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 23172, and its Passmark G3D score of 25086 confirms it is a high-end part. At 1440p, the GPU dictates the frame rate, while the CPU handles the simulation logic without becoming a constraint.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is unequivocally the bottleneck. The RTX 3080's raw compute, 29.77 TFLOPS FP32, is taxed heavily by the 4K pixel count. High and Ultra both fall below 60 FPS, and the 18.5 FPS gap between Medium and High shows that the GPU's fill rate and shading capacity are the deciding factors. The CPU's role shrinks further; even the modest i5-9400 can feed the GPU enough data at 4K. The measured scaling from 1440p to 4K at Low (28.1 FPS loss) versus the smaller loss from 1080p to 1440p at Low (11.3 FPS loss) indicates that the GPU's memory bandwidth and ROP throughput are the limiting resources. The 3080's 96 ROPs and 164.2 GPixel/s pixel rate are substantial, but 4K demands more than they can sustain at High and Ultra.

Across all resolutions, the pattern is consistent: at 1080p, the CPU and GPU share the load more evenly, with the CPU occasionally capping high-preset performance; at 1440p, the GPU takes over; at 4K, the GPU is fully saturated. The i5-9400's single-core performance, a Geekbench single-core score of 1389, is adequate for the simulator's engine, which is known to favor single-thread speed, but the 3080's capabilities dominate the outcome at higher resolutions.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 60 FPS on 3840x2160?

A: Yes, but only on Low and Medium presets. Low averages 91.7 FPS and Medium averages 71.3 FPS. High and Ultra fall short at 52.8 FPS and 50.6 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the best preset at 2560x1440 that stays above 60 FPS?

A: Ultra is the best playable preset, averaging 72.3 FPS. High is nearly identical at 72.4 FPS, so there is no performance penalty for choosing Ultra.

Q: How does the RTX 3080 compare to its nearest rivals in benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 3080 averages 23172 points. The NVIDIA P106-100 scores 23249 (0.3% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 23250 (0.3% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 6600M scores 23273 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Radeon R9 M290X scores 23276 (0.4% higher). All are within a fraction of a percent.

Q: Is the i5-9400 a bottleneck for the RTX 3080 in this game?

A: At 1080p, the CPU can cap performance at High and Ultra, where the gap is only 2.0 FPS. At 1440p and 4K, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and the CPU is sufficient.

Q: What FPS can I expect at 1920x1080 with the Ultra preset?

A: The Ultra preset averages 90.8 FPS, which is comfortably above the 60 FPS playable threshold and only 2.0 FPS lower than High.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations?

A: It ranks 1201 out of 3714 combos, placing it in the upper third of the database.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 has an average score of 2259, which is 0.2% lower than the i5-9400's 2254. The Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248, 0.3% higher, and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, 0.4% higher. The Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264, 0.4% lower. In practice, any of these processors would deliver nearly identical simulation performance when paired with the RTX 3080, since the CPU is not the primary constraint at 1440p or 4K.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are all within 0.4% of the RTX 3080's average score of 23172. The NVIDIA P106-100 scores 23249, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 23250, the AMD Radeon RX 6600M scores 23273, and the AMD Radeon R9 M290X scores 23276. These GPUs would produce nearly the same frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator, though the RTX 3080's feature set, including 68 RT cores and 272 tensor cores, is not directly comparable to the older or lower-tier chips. The benchmark deltas are so small that real-world FPS differences would be within a single frame.

The combination of the i5-9400 with any of these GPU alternatives would yield similar results at 1440p and 4K, since the GPU dominates those resolutions. At 1080p, the CPU's single-thread performance, which is close to the i7-1068NG7 and i3-10305, would be the limiting factor at High and Ultra, but the differences among the rivals are negligible.

The Verdict

This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 60 FPS or better across most configurations. At 1920x1080, every preset exceeds the threshold: Low at 131.1 FPS, Medium at 119.8 FPS, High at 92.8 FPS, and Ultra at 90.8 FPS. At 2560x1440, all presets also pass: Low at 119.8 FPS, Medium at 96.9 FPS, High at 72.4 FPS, and Ultra at 72.3 FPS. The verdict by resolution confirms that 1440p is fully playable at any setting.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more nuanced. Low and Medium are playable, with 91.7 FPS and 71.3 FPS respectively. High and Ultra are not, falling to 52.8 FPS and 50.6 FPS. The playable settings list for 4K includes only Low and Medium, with Medium being the best choice at 71.3 FPS. For users prioritizing visual fidelity at 4K, the High and Ultra presets will require a reduction in resolution or a more powerful GPU. Overall, the system delivers a smooth experience at 1080p and 1440p at all settings, and at 4K with medium or lower settings.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 ranks 1201 out of 3714 tested combos in the database. This places it in the 32nd percentile, meaning roughly two-thirds of tested systems perform better. The ranking is skewed by the CPU: the i5-9400's 47th percentile standing among CPUs drags the combo down, while the RTX 3080's 68th percentile standing among GPUs pulls it up. In this game, the GPU carries most of the weight at higher resolutions, but the CPU's mid-range position prevents the combo from climbing higher in the overall standings. Systems with stronger processors paired with the same GPU would likely rank higher, especially at 1080p where the CPU has a more pronounced effect.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 90.8 FPS. There is no reason to drop below Ultra at this resolution, as even the heaviest settings leave 30 FPS of headroom.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset also holds 60 FPS, averaging 72.3 FPS. High is essentially identical at 72.4 FPS, so Ultra is the recommended choice for maximum quality without a measurable FPS cost.

At 3840x2160, the most demanding playable preset is Medium, averaging 71.3 FPS. Low is also playable at 91.7 FPS, but Medium provides better visuals while retaining a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold. High and Ultra should be avoided at 4K, as they drop to 52.8 FPS and 50.6 FPS respectively. For users who insist on High or Ultra at 4K, the data suggests that a resolution reduction to 1440p is the appropriate compromise.