Microsoft Flight Simulator

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Intel Core i5-9400 sits at the 47th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 2254. Its closest equivalents in raw compute performance are a tight cluster of processors that all land within a fraction of a percent of each other. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, which is 0.4% behind the i5-9400, while the Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248, a 0.3% deficit. On the other side, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 produces a 2259 average score, 0.2% ahead, and the Intel Core i3-10305 reaches 2264, 0.4% ahead. For practical purposes, any of these chips would deliver nearly identical frame pacing in CPU-bound scenarios, meaning users moving between these parts should expect no perceptible difference in Microsoft Flight Simulator performance.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D occupies the 92nd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 77712. Its nearest rivals are a more varied group. The AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT scores 76904, which is 1.1% behind, while the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT reaches 78940, 1.6% ahead. Two NVIDIA Tesla P100 variants also appear nearby: the PCIe 12 GB model scores 79396 (2.1% ahead) and the PCIe 16 GB model scores 79605 (2.4% ahead). These deltas are small enough that in a flight simulator title, where the rendering load is heavy but not always purely GPU-bound, all four alternatives would produce frame rates within a narrow band of the RTX 5090 D. The practical takeaway from the database is that the RTX 5090 D performs like a very high-end GPU, but its immediate neighbors in the benchmark rankings are not the newest parts; they are a mix of mid-range mobile Radeons and older datacenter Teslas, which speaks to how saturated the top end of the GPU score distribution has become.

CPU and GPU Roles

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a title that stresses both the CPU and GPU, but the recorded frame rates reveal which component dominates at each resolution. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the average FPS at Low settings is 128, at Medium it is 117, at High it is 105, and at Ultra it is 104. The gap between Low and Ultra is 24 FPS, which is 18.8% of the Low score. Moving to 2560x1440, the corresponding numbers are 119 Low, 109 Medium, 98 High, and 96 Ultra, a 23 FPS spread. At 3840x2160, the averages are 108 Low, 98 Medium, 88 High, and 84 Ultra, a 24 FPS spread. The consistency of this spread across resolutions suggests that the settings preset, not the resolution, is the primary driver of frame rate variation. However, the absolute values drop as resolution climbs: at every settings level, 1080p is faster than 1440p, which is faster than 2160p. The step from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 7-9% of the frame rate, and the step from 1440p to 2160p costs another 8-10%.

The data indicates that the GPU becomes progressively more important as resolution increases, because the pixel throughput demand grows while the CPU workload stays fixed. At 1080p, the CPU has more headroom to feed the GPU, yet the frame rates are still high, so neither component is a severe bottleneck. At 2160p, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor: the Ultra preset averages 84 FPS, which is only 4 FPS above the 60 FPS threshold, and the gap between Low and Ultra at 2160p is 24 FPS, identical to the gap at 1080p. This means the settings preset has a uniform impact on GPU load regardless of resolution, while the resolution itself adds a fixed cost. For this combo, the CPU is not the constraint at any resolution; the i5-9400 delivers enough throughput to keep the RTX 5090 D fed, and the game's frame rate scales with GPU load as expected.

How This Combo Ranks

Among all 3714 CPU and GPU combinations tested in the database for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this pairing of the Intel Core i5-9400 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D ranks 654th. That places it in the top 17.6% of all tested combos, which is a strong position. The rank reflects the sum of both parts: the CPU is only at the 47th percentile among all CPUs, but the GPU is at the 92nd percentile among all GPUs, and the GPU carries more weight in this title at higher resolutions. The combo rank of 654 is higher than what the CPU alone would suggest, confirming that the RTX 5090 D compensates for the i5-9400's mid-pack compute performance.

The practical interpretation is that this system outperforms the vast majority of tested configurations in this game. The 654th rank out of 3714 means there are 653 combos that score better, but those are almost certainly pairings of top-tier CPUs with top-tier GPUs, such as a recent high-end Ryzen or Core processor matched with a flagship GPU. For a six-core, six-thread CPU from the Coffee Lake generation, the i5-9400 punches above its weight when paired with the RTX 5090 D. The benchmark results show that the GPU is able to push frame rates well past the playable threshold even at the most demanding settings, which is the dominant factor in the ranking.

The Verdict

The recorded data answers the question directly: yes, this PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, and it clears the 60 FPS threshold at every resolution and every preset tested. At 1920x1080, the lowest average FPS is 104, which occurs at Ultra settings. At 2560x1440, the lowest average is 96, again at Ultra. At 3840x2160, the lowest average is 84, also at Ultra. In all cases, the minimum recorded FPS, where available, stays above 60: 1080p Medium has a minimum of 99, 1440p Medium has a minimum of 92, and 2160p Medium has a minimum of 83. The database lists all four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) as playable at each resolution, since the playable threshold is 60 FPS and every average exceeds it.

The verdict by resolution is unambiguous. At 3840x2160, the best settings that maintain at least 60 FPS average are Ultra, with an average of 84 FPS. At 2560x1440, the best settings are also Ultra, averaging 96 FPS. At 1920x1080, Ultra again is the best, averaging 104 FPS. This means the user can run the game at maximum visual quality at any resolution without dropping below the playable threshold. The only caveat is that the minimum FPS at 2160p Medium is 83, and the minimums for Ultra are not recorded in the database, but the averages are sufficiently high that temporary dips below 60 are unlikely based on the pattern of the recorded minimums.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest preset that keeps the game above 60 FPS at 3840x2160?

A: Ultra is the highest preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at 3840x2160, with an average of 84 FPS. All four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are listed as playable at this resolution.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, scores 2259, which is 0.2% higher. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, 0.4% lower, and the Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264, 0.4% higher.

Q: Is the GPU or the CPU more important for this game at 2560x1440?

A: At 2560x1440, the GPU is the more important component. The frame rate drops from 119 FPS at Low to 96 FPS at Ultra, a 19.3% reduction, while the CPU workload stays constant. The GPU handles the increased rendering load from higher presets, and the RTX 5090 D is strong enough to keep the average above 96 FPS even at Ultra.

Q: What is the combo rank for this system in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D ranks 654th out of 3714 tested combos for this game. This places it in the top 17.6% of all configurations.

Q: What is the average FPS at 1920x1080 with Medium settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 117, with a minimum of 99 and a maximum of 134. This is 57 FPS above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: Does the RTX 5090 D have any rivals with nearly identical benchmark scores?

A: Yes, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT scores 76904, which is 1.1% below the RTX 5090 D's 77712. The AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT scores 78940, 1.6% above, and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB scores 79396, 2.1% above.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that maintains at least 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 104 FPS. This is the highest visual quality available in the test set, and it still delivers 44 FPS of headroom above the playable threshold. At 2560x1440, Ultra is also the best setting, averaging 96 FPS, which is 36 FPS above the threshold. At 3840x2160, Ultra remains the best setting, with an average of 84 FPS, 24 FPS above the threshold. In every case, the user can select the highest preset without worrying about dropping below 60 FPS on average.

The database does not record minimum FPS for the Ultra preset at any resolution, but the Medium preset minimums provide a reference: 99 FPS at 1080p, 92 FPS at 1440p, and 83 FPS at 2160p. Since the Ultra averages are only slightly below the Medium averages (104 vs 117 at 1080p, 96 vs 109 at 1440p, 84 vs 98 at 2160p), the Ultra minimums would likely sit proportionally lower but still above 60 FPS, based on the observed pattern. The recommendation is to run Ultra at all resolutions for the best visual experience, as the performance headroom is substantial.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080:

• Low: average 128 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Medium: average 117 FPS, minimum 99, maximum 134
• High: average 105 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: average 104 FPS, no min/max recorded

The spread from Low to Ultra is 24 FPS, with the largest drop occurring between Low and Medium (11 FPS), then a further 12 FPS from Medium to High, and only 1 FPS from High to Ultra. This indicates that the High to Ultra transition is nearly free in terms of performance at 1080p, while the Medium to High step is the most costly.

2560x1440:

• Low: average 119 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Medium: average 109 FPS, minimum 92, maximum 125
• High: average 98 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: average 96 FPS, no min/max recorded

The Low to Medium step costs 10 FPS, Medium to High costs 11 FPS, and High to Ultra costs only 2 FPS. The pattern is similar to 1080p: the gap between High and Ultra is minimal, while the earlier steps are more significant. The minimum at Medium is 92 FPS, which is 32 FPS above the playable threshold.

3840x2160:

• Low: average 108 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Medium: average 98 FPS, minimum 83, maximum 113
• High: average 88 FPS, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: average 84 FPS, no min/max recorded

At 4K, the Low to Medium step costs 10 FPS, Medium to High costs 10 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 4 FPS. The minimum at Medium is 83 FPS, still 23 FPS above the threshold. The overall pattern across all resolutions shows that the Ultra preset is always within 4 FPS of High, making it the sensible choice for maximum quality without a meaningful frame rate penalty.