Microsoft Flight Simulator

FAQ

Q: Can the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 run Microsoft Flight Simulator at playable frame rates?

A: Yes. The recorded data shows the combo clears the 60 FPS playable threshold at every resolution tested, including 3840x2160, 2560x1440, and 1920x1080, across all four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra).

Q: What is the best settings preset at 4K for this combination?

A: At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset runs at an average of 77 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold. The database lists Ultra as the best settings, and it is also the most demanding preset that stays playable.

Q: How does the frame rate scale when moving from 1080p to 1440p and then to 4K?

A: At Ultra settings, the average frame rate drops from 104 FPS at 1920x1080 to 96 FPS at 2560x1440, then to 77 FPS at 3840x2160. The scaling shows a 27 FPS drop from 1440p to 4K, while the drop from 1080p to 1440p is only 8 FPS.

Q: Which component, CPU or GPU, matters more for this game at higher resolutions?

A: The data indicates the GPU becomes the dominant factor at higher resolutions. At 4K Ultra, the average is 77 FPS, whereas at 1080p Ultra it is 104 FPS. The CPU, with a benchmark percentile of 47, is less impactful than the GPU, which sits at the 88th percentile among all GPUs.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum frame rates recorded for this combo?

A: The database records min and max values only for Medium settings. At 1920x1080 Medium, the range is 99 to 134 FPS. At 2560x1440 Medium, it is 92 to 125 FPS. At 3840x2160 Medium, it is 83 to 113 FPS. Other presets have only average values listed.

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

A: The combo ranks 695th out of 3714 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the top 19 percent of all recorded configs.

CPU and GPU Roles

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor with a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, a 9 MB shared L3 cache, and a 65 W TDP. It scores 6629 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 935 in single-core, placing it at the 47th percentile among all CPUs. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090, by contrast, is a 5 nm Ada Lovelace GPU with 16384 shading units, 128 ray tracing cores, 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, and 1.01 TB/s of memory bandwidth. It reaches the 88th percentile among all GPUs.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the division of labor between these two components becomes visible when comparing frame rates across resolutions. At 1920x1080 Ultra, the combo produces 104 FPS on average. Moving to 2560x1440 Ultra, the average drops to 96 FPS, a reduction of 8 FPS. At 3840x2160 Ultra, the average falls further to 77 FPS, a reduction of 19 FPS from 1440p. This pattern shows that the largest performance penalty occurs when jumping from 1440p to 4K, which is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario at higher pixel counts.

At lower settings, the same trend appears. At 1920x1080 Low, the average is 128 FPS. At 2560x1440 Low, it is 119 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Low, it is 108 FPS. The drops are 9 FPS and 11 FPS respectively. At Medium settings, the recorded averages are 117 FPS at 1080p, 109 FPS at 1440p, and 98 FPS at 4K, with min and max values of 99/134, 92/125, and 83/113 respectively. At High settings, the averages are 105 FPS at 1080p, 98 FPS at 1440p, and 81 FPS at 4K.

The CPU's role is most evident at lower resolutions where the GPU has spare capacity. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra settings is only 24 FPS (128 versus 104), which suggests the CPU is holding the system back from reaching even higher frame rates. At 4K, the difference between Low and Ultra is 31 FPS (108 versus 77), a larger gap that indicates the GPU is now the primary constraint. The CPU, with its 47th percentile standing, is a mid-range part, while the GPU is near the top of the database. The data shows that the GPU matters more at 4K, while the CPU becomes relatively more important at 1080p, though even then the combo still delivers well above 60 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The database places this Intel Core i5-9400 and RTX 4090 combination at rank 695 out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This position puts it in the upper 19 percent of all configurations. The ranking reflects the GPU's strong performance, as the RTX 4090 alone sits at the 88th percentile among all GPUs, while the CPU sits at the 47th percentile among all CPUs.

The rank is notable because it shows that a mid-range CPU from 2018 can still pair with a flagship GPU to produce playable results in this flight simulator. The combination outperforms most other tested configs, but it does not reach the top of the chart, which would require a more balanced pairing with a higher-end CPU. The 695th rank out of 3714 means there are 694 configurations that achieve higher average frame rates in this specific game, but the margin is not enormous given that the RTX 4090 is one of the strongest GPUs in the database.

The percentile gap between the two components is wide: 88 versus 47. This gap suggests potential bottlenecking in CPU-light scenarios, but the game's frame rate data shows that the combo still clears 60 FPS everywhere. In less demanding scenes, the CPU may limit the maximum frame rate, but the recorded averages indicate that even at 1080p Low, the system reaches 128 FPS, which is far above the playable threshold.

The Verdict

The recorded data says this PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at all tested resolutions and presets. At 3840x2160, the playable settings include Low, Medium, High, and Ultra, with the best settings being Ultra at an average of 77 FPS. At 2560x1440, all four presets are playable, and Ultra runs at 96 FPS on average. At 1920x1080, all presets are playable, and Ultra runs at 104 FPS on average.

Every single measured average exceeds the 60 FPS playable threshold. The lowest recorded average is 77 FPS at 4K Ultra, which still leaves 17 FPS of headroom. The highest recorded average is 128 FPS at 1080p Low. The min values, where recorded, also stay above 60 FPS: the lowest min is 83 FPS at 4K Medium. There is no resolution or preset in the data where this combo dips below the playable threshold.

The verdict is straightforward: this is a playable configuration for Microsoft Flight Simulator at every setting the database tested, including the maximum Ultra preset at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured averages are as follows. Low settings produce 128 FPS. Medium settings produce 117 FPS, with a recorded range of 99 to 134 FPS. High settings produce 105 FPS. Ultra settings produce 104 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 24 FPS, which is modest and indicates that the GPU handles the extra load without significant penalty.

At 2560x1440, Low settings produce 119 FPS. Medium settings produce 109 FPS, with a recorded range of 92 to 125 FPS. High settings produce 98 FPS. Ultra settings produce 96 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 23 FPS, nearly identical to the 1080p gap.

At 3840x2160, Low settings produce 108 FPS. Medium settings produce 98 FPS, with a recorded range of 83 to 113 FPS. High settings produce 81 FPS. Ultra settings produce 77 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 31 FPS, which is larger than at lower resolutions, showing that the GPU is working harder at 4K.

The Medium preset is the only one with min and max values recorded. At 1080p, the min is 99 FPS and the max is 134 FPS. At 1440p, the min is 92 FPS and the max is 125 FPS. At 4K, the min is 83 FPS and the max is 113 FPS. These min values are all well above 60 FPS, confirming that even the worst recorded frame times do not drop below the playable threshold.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the best settings that stay at or above 60 FPS are Ultra, with an average of 104 FPS. This is the most demanding preset available, and it clears the threshold by 44 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are also Ultra, with an average of 96 FPS. The gap above 60 FPS is 36 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the best settings are Ultra as well, with an average of 77 FPS. This leaves 17 FPS of headroom above the playable threshold.

In all three resolutions, the Ultra preset is fully playable. There is no need to reduce settings to achieve 60 FPS. The database lists Ultra as the best settings for every resolution, and the average frame rates at those settings are 104, 96, and 77 FPS respectively.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals in the database, based on average benchmark scores, are the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, the Intel Core i7-10710U, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500, and the Intel Core i3-10305. The Core i7-1068NG7 has an average score of 2259, which is 0.2 percent lower than the i5-9400's 2254. The Core i7-10710U scores 2248, which is 0.3 percent higher than the i5-9400. The Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, also 0.3 percent higher. The Core i3-10305 scores 2264, which is 0.4 percent lower.

These four CPUs are within a narrow band of 0.7 percent of each other, meaning that swapping the i5-9400 for any of them would produce nearly identical CPU-bound performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The i7-1068NG7 and i3-10305 are slightly weaker, while the i7-10710U and Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 are slightly stronger, but the differences are negligible in practice.

The GPU's nearest rivals are the Intel Arc Pro A60, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48, the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M, and the AMD Radeon PRO V710. The Arc Pro A60 has an average score of 60326, which is 0.0 percent different from the RTX 4090's 60347. The Radeon Pro Vega 48 scores 60140, which is 0.3 percent lower. The Radeon Pro W6600M scores 61896, which is 2.5 percent higher. The Radeon PRO V710 scores 58657, which is 2.9 percent lower.

The closest rival is the Intel Arc Pro A60, which is effectively identical in average score. The Radeon Pro Vega 48 is also very close. The Radeon Pro W6600M is the strongest of the group, while the Radeon PRO V710 is the weakest. None of these GPUs would change the playability verdict for Microsoft Flight Simulator, since the RTX 4090 already clears 60 FPS at all settings. The differences among these rivals are small enough that frame rates would remain well above the threshold in most scenarios.

For the specific combination of the i5-9400 and RTX 4090, users who have any of the CPU rivals would see no meaningful change in the game's performance, and users with any of the GPU rivals would also see similar results, with the Radeon Pro W6600M offering a slight edge and the Radeon PRO V710 a slight deficit. The overall picture remains the same: a playable configuration at all resolutions and presets.