Microsoft Flight Simulator

FAQ

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

A: At 3840x2160, the recorded data shows only the Low preset stays at or above 60 FPS, with an average of 66.5 FPS. Medium and High fall below 60 FPS at 55.3 and 41.5 FPS respectively, while Ultra is slightly lower than High at 40.8 FPS.

Q: What is the best visual preset for 1440p gaming?

A: At 2560x1440, the Medium preset delivers 72.2 FPS on average, which is the highest quality setting that clears the 60 FPS threshold. Low runs at 93.4 FPS, but Medium offers a better visual experience while remaining comfortably playable.

Q: Is the RTX 4060 the primary bottleneck in this system?

A: Benchmark results indicate the GPU is the limiting factor for this title. The CPU sits at the 47th percentile among all processors, while the GPU is at the 61st percentile among all GPUs. The frame rate scaling across resolutions and presets points to graphics load as the main constraint.

Q: How does the i5-9400 compare to nearby CPUs in general compute?

A: The i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, scores 2259, which is only 0.2% higher. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, a 0.4% gap. All four nearby CPUs are within roughly half a percent of each other.

Q: What about the GPU's standing among other graphics cards?

A: The RTX 4060 averages 17639 in benchmark scores. The closest rival, the AMD Radeon HD 7790, scores 17666, just 0.2% higher. The AMD Radeon 780M is 0.3% behind, and the AMD Radeon Pro 560 sits 0.5% behind. These are very tight margins.

Q: Is the 8 GB VRAM on the RTX 4060 enough for flight simulators?

A: The recorded frame times show playable results across all tested resolutions, including 4K Ultra at 40.8 FPS. While VRAM capacity is not directly measured here, the fact that the card sustains 68 FPS at 1080p Ultra and 66.5 FPS at 4K Low suggests memory bandwidth of 272.0 GB/s is adequate for this workload at these settings.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data for Microsoft Flight Simulator reveals a clear division of labor between the Intel Core i5-9400 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060. The game is heavily graphics-bound, with frame rates scaling dramatically with resolution and preset changes. The CPU's compute scores are modest, placing it at the 47th percentile of all processors, while the GPU sits at the 61st percentile. This gap matters because flight simulators tend to tax both components, but the measured FPS deltas tell the real story.

At 1920x1080, the difference between Low and Ultra presets is substantial. Low runs at 119.4 FPS, Medium at 92.9 FPS, High at 71.8 FPS, and Ultra at 68 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is roughly 51.4 FPS, which is a 43% drop. This scaling is almost entirely attributable to GPU load, since the CPU workload stays consistent across preset changes. The fact that even Ultra at 1080p stays above 60 FPS suggests the CPU can feed the GPU fast enough at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the picture shifts. Low runs at 93.4 FPS, Medium at 72.2 FPS, High at 54.6 FPS, and Ultra at 54.3 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is negligible at just 0.3 FPS, which indicates both presets are hitting a similar GPU ceiling. The transition from 1080p to 1440p at High preset costs about 17.2 FPS, a 24% reduction. This is a typical pattern for a GPU-limited scenario: the CPU has headroom, but the graphics card cannot keep up with the increased pixel count.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the dominant constraint. Low runs at 66.5 FPS, Medium at 55.3 FPS, High at 41.5 FPS, and Ultra at 40.8 FPS. The step from Low to Medium costs 11.2 FPS, and from Medium to High another 13.8 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra is only 0.7 FPS, again showing that the GPU is saturated. The CPU's role at 4K is mainly to keep draw calls moving, and the i5-9400's six cores and six threads appear sufficient for that task.

The verdict is clear: the RTX 4060 is the component that determines playability. The i5-9400 provides adequate compute headroom, evidenced by the fact that frame rates at each resolution are consistent with GPU-bound behavior. If you were to pair this CPU with a weaker GPU, the same preset scaling would appear at lower absolute FPS. If you paired this GPU with a stronger CPU, the gains would be minimal at 4K and moderate at 1080p. For this game, the GPU is the bottleneck at every resolution above 1080p Low.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the only preset that maintains an average above 60 FPS is Low, which delivers 66.5 FPS. Medium falls to 55.3 FPS, High drops to 41.5 FPS, and Ultra is close behind at 40.8 FPS. If you own a 4K display, you must accept the Low preset to stay playable. The visual hit is significant, but the frame rate is stable enough for a flight simulator, where smooth panning matters more than texture detail.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the best choice, averaging 72.2 FPS. This is a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold, and it offers a meaningful visual upgrade over Low, which runs at 93.4 FPS. High and Ultra both fall below 60 FPS, at 54.6 and 54.3 FPS respectively. The difference between High and Ultra is negligible, so if you insist on pushing beyond Medium, you might as well try Ultra and accept the slight dip, but the data says Medium is the sweet spot.

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset hits 68 FPS on average, which clears the 60 FPS line. This is the most demanding setting that remains playable. High runs at 71.8 FPS, Medium at 92.9 FPS, and Low at 119.4 FPS. The jump from High to Ultra only costs 3.8 FPS, which is a small price for the extra visual fidelity. For 1080p owners, there is no reason to settle for anything below Ultra if you want the best experience this combination can offer.

The pattern across resolutions shows diminishing returns as you raise the preset. At 1080p, every preset is playable, so the choice is purely visual. At 1440p, you must choose between Medium and lower. At 4K, only Low works. The data suggests that this system is best suited to 1080p or 1440p gaming, with 4K reserved for those willing to drop to minimal settings.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Intel Core i5-9400 sits in a tight cluster of CPUs with nearly identical average benchmark scores. The closest match is the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, which scores 2259, a 0.2% difference from the i5-9400's 2254. The Intel Core i3-10305 is just 0.4% higher at 2264, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 is 0.4% lower at 2246. The Intel Core i7-10710U trails by 0.3% at 2248. In practical terms, all four of these processors would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator, since the GPU is the limiting factor. If you already own any of these chips, a CPU upgrade would not meaningfully change your FPS.

On the GPU side, the RTX 4060's nearest rivals are a mixed bag. The AMD Radeon HD 7790 scores 17666, just 0.2% above the 4060's 17639. The AMD Radeon 780M is 0.3% behind, and the AMD Radeon Pro 560 and Pro 460 are 0.5% and 0.7% lower respectively. These are all older or lower-tier cards that happen to land in the same benchmark range. The fact that a modern Ada Lovelace card is compared to a decade-old HD 7790 says more about the benchmark's weighting than about real-world gaming. But for flight sim purposes, the 4060 will behave similarly to these cards only in synthetic tests, not in actual gameplay.

What this means for you: if you are building a system around this CPU, any GPU in the same performance class as the RTX 4060 will produce similar results. The CPU's rivals all fall within a 0.4% band, so swapping between them would change your FPS by less than one frame. The GPU's rivals are less relevant for this game, because the 4060's feature set, including 24 RT cores and 96 tensor cores, matters more for modern titles than raw average scores.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this CPU and GPU pairing ranks 2036 out of 3714 total combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places it in the 55th percentile of all tested systems. This is not a top-tier setup, but it is also far from the bottom. The ranking reflects the fact that the i5-9400 is a mid-range processor from 2018, while the RTX 4060 is a budget-to-mid-range GPU from 2023. Together, they form a system that is capable of running the game at 1080p Ultra and 1440p Medium, but struggles at 4K High and above.

Compared to the 3714 combos in the database, this pairing is firmly in the middle. The CPU's 47th percentile and GPU's 61st percentile combine to produce a system that is better than average for this game, but not exceptional. The ranking is likely pulled down by the CPU's age, as newer six-core processors with higher single-thread scores would feed the GPU slightly better at 1080p. At 4K, the ranking would be higher, because the GPU becomes the sole bottleneck and the CPU's limitations are masked.

The practical takeaway is that this combo is a solid 1080p machine for flight sim, a decent 1440p machine if you keep settings at Medium, and a marginal 4K machine that only works on Low. The rank of 2036 out of 3714 suggests that roughly 45% of tested systems perform better, which is expected given the hardware's age and tier.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Microsoft Flight Simulator? Yes, with caveats. At 1920x1080, the system runs every preset above 60 FPS, including Ultra at 68 FPS. This is the resolution where the combo shines, and you can max out the settings without worry. At 2560x1440, the Medium preset delivers 72.2 FPS, and Low runs at 93.4 FPS, but High and Ultra both fall just short of 60 FPS. If you want to play at 1440p, stick to Medium. At 3840x2160, only Low is playable at 66.5 FPS, and even Medium drops to 55.3 FPS.

The data says this is a capable 1080p setup, a reasonable 1440p setup with conservative settings, and a 4K setup only if you are willing to sacrifice visual quality. For a flight simulator, where smooth frame rates are critical for reading instruments and controlling the aircraft, the 1080p Ultra and 1440p Medium options are the sweet spots. The i5-9400 does its job as a budget CPU, and the RTX 4060 provides enough graphics horsepower to make the game enjoyable at mainstream resolutions.

If you are building this system today, expect to play at 1080p with everything maxed out, or at 1440p with Medium settings. If you plan to use a 4K monitor, you will need to lower expectations significantly. The combo ranks in the middle of the database, which is a fair assessment: it is not a high-end rig, but it will run the game well enough for most players. The GPU is the star here, and the CPU just needs to stay out of the way, which it does.