Microsoft Flight Simulator

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for this combination shows a clear pattern: resolution scaling heavily impacts playability, while preset selection determines whether the experience stays fluid. At 3840x2160, the system never reaches the 60 FPS playability threshold. The Low preset averages 55 FPS, which is close but still short. Medium drops to 42 FPS with a minimum of 36 FPS and a maximum of 49 FPS. High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 30 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium at 4K is 13 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is the primary limiter at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the situation improves notably. Low averages 74 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold with headroom. Medium averages 58 FPS, just two frames short of playable, with a minimum of 49 FPS and a maximum of 66 FPS. High averages 43 FPS, and Ultra averages 41 FPS. The delta between Low and Medium here is 16 FPS, while the delta between High and Ultra is only 2 FPS, indicating diminishing returns at the upper end of the preset scale.

At 1920x1080, the combination finally shows its full potential. Low averages 92 FPS, Medium averages 71 FPS with a minimum of 61 FPS and a maximum of 82 FPS, High averages 54 FPS, and Ultra averages 51 FPS. The Medium preset is the most demanding setting that stays above 60 FPS, and its minimum of 61 FPS means even the lowest recorded frame stays playable. The drop from Medium to High is 17 FPS, which is the steepest single preset transition in the entire dataset.

The overall data indicates that Microsoft Flight Simulator is unusually sensitive to preset changes at 1080p, while at 4K the differences compress into a narrow 25 FPS band from Low to Ultra. This suggests that the GPU is saturated at higher resolutions, and the CPU has little room to influence the outcome once pixel throughput dominates.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU each have nearby competitors in the database that would produce broadly similar frame rates in this game.

For the Intel Core i7-13700K, the nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 9 5900, which scores 46971 in the aggregate benchmark versus 46881 for the i7-13700K, a delta of -0.2%. In practical terms, this means the Ryzen 9 5900 would deliver nearly identical CPU-bound performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 sits at 47022, a 0.3% gap, and would also behave almost indistinguishably. The AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX and Intel Xeon w3-2535 both score 46654 and 46653 respectively, each 0.5% behind. None of these differences would produce a measurable FPS shift in this game.

For the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060, the database places the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 at 15283 versus 15290 for the RTX 2060, a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon 680M scores 15270, a 0.1% gap, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM scores 15199, a 0.6% gap. The AMD Radeon RX 7600 scores 15171, a 0.8% gap. All four alternatives fall within 1% of the RTX 2060's aggregate score. This means that swapping in any of these GPUs would change the FPS numbers by less than one frame across the measured presets. The RTX 2060 sits near the middle of a tight performance cluster, and users upgrading or downgrading within this group should expect no meaningful difference in Flight Simulator.

The GPU's percentile ranking of 58 versus the CPU's percentile ranking of 89 highlights an important asymmetry. The CPU is a high-end part that sits well above most other processors in the database, while the GPU is a mid-range part. In this game, the measured FPS data shows that the GPU becomes the bottleneck at higher resolutions, which aligns with the fact that the CPU is far stronger relative to its peers than the GPU is relative to its own peer group.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this specific combination at 2912 out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the lower half of all possible pairings, which is surprising given the strong CPU. The rank reflects the fact that the RTX 2060 holds the combination back, particularly at 4K where it cannot reach 60 FPS on any preset.

The percentile interpretation here is straightforward. With 3714 total combos, a rank of 2912 means the combination outperforms roughly 22% of tested systems and underperforms roughly 78%. This is a modest result for a CPU that ranks in the 89th percentile among all processors. The disconnect between CPU strength and overall combo rank confirms that Microsoft Flight Simulator is heavily GPU-bound in this configuration.

The data also shows that the combination's performance varies widely by resolution. At 1080p, it achieves playable results on two presets. At 1440p, it achieves playable results on one preset. At 4K, it achieves no playable results. This progressive decline mirrors the pattern seen in the measured FPS data and reinforces the conclusion that the GPU is the limiting factor.

The Verdict

This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, but only under specific conditions. At 1920x1080, the combination clears 60 FPS on both Low and Medium presets. The Medium preset averages 71 FPS with a minimum of 61 FPS, which means the experience stays smooth even during demanding scenes. The Low preset averages 92 FPS, providing substantial headroom for users who prefer maximum frame rates over visual fidelity.

At 2560x1440, the system clears 60 FPS only on the Low preset, which averages 74 FPS. The Medium preset falls short at 58 FPS, and both High and Ultra are well below the threshold. Users at 1440p must accept Low settings to maintain playable performance.

At 3840x2160, the system cannot reach 60 FPS on any preset. The closest result is Low at 55 FPS, which is playable in the sense that it stays above 30 FPS, but it does not meet the 60 FPS threshold used in this database. The verdict is clear: this combination is a 1080p Medium machine and a 1440p Low machine, with no viable 4K path.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 1080p?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 92 FPS and the Medium preset averages 71 FPS with a minimum of 61 FPS. Both exceed the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combination?

A: The best resolution is 1920x1080 on Medium settings, which averages 71 FPS and stays above 60 FPS even at minimum. This is the most demanding preset that remains playable across the entire dataset.

Q: Is 4K playable with this hardware?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS is 55 on Low settings. Medium averages 42 FPS, High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. None reach the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival?

A: The Intel Core i7-13700K scores 46881 in the aggregate benchmark, while the AMD Ryzen 9 5900 scores 46971, a difference of -0.2%. This means the two processors deliver nearly identical performance in this game.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rival?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 scores 15290, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 scores 15283, a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon 680M is 0.1% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 is 0.8% behind. All are effectively equivalent.

Q: Why does the combination rank low despite a strong CPU?

A: The combination ranks 2912 out of 3714 combos because the RTX 2060 is the limiting factor. The CPU ranks in the 89th percentile among all processors, but the GPU ranks in the 58th percentile, and Microsoft Flight Simulator becomes GPU-bound at higher resolutions.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the best setting is Medium, which averages 71 FPS with a minimum of 61 FPS. This preset is the most demanding option that stays at or above 60 FPS, and it provides the best visual quality among playable options at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the best setting is Low, which averages 74 FPS. This is the only preset that clears the 60 FPS threshold at this resolution. The Medium preset averages 58 FPS, which is close but not sufficient.

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The database records no playable settings for this resolution, and the best setting is null. Users at 4K must either accept a frame rate below 60 FPS or reduce their resolution.

The progression across resolutions is notable. At 1080p, Medium is playable. At 1440p, only Low is playable. At 4K, nothing is playable. This stepwise decline matches the GPU's bandwidth and compute limitations, which become more pronounced as pixel count rises.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear division of labor between the CPU and GPU in Microsoft Flight Simulator. At 1920x1080, the CPU has room to express its strength. The jump from Low to Medium costs 21 FPS (from 92 to 71), and the jump from Medium to High costs 17 FPS (from 71 to 54). These are substantial differences, and they suggest that the CPU can feed the GPU efficiently at this resolution, allowing preset changes to have their intended effect.

At 2560x1440, the picture shifts. The jump from Low to Medium costs 16 FPS (from 74 to 58), but the jump from High to Ultra costs only 2 FPS (from 43 to 41). This compression at the top end indicates that the GPU is starting to saturate, and additional rendering work yields diminishing returns.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is fully saturated. The entire preset range spans only 25 FPS, from 55 on Low to 30 on Ultra. The CPU's performance is largely irrelevant at this resolution because the GPU cannot render frames fast enough to benefit from faster processor throughput. The CPU's 89th percentile ranking does not translate into higher FPS at 4K because the RTX 2060, which ranks in the 58th percentile, becomes the bottleneck.

The scaling between resolutions reinforces this interpretation. At Low settings, the FPS drops from 92 at 1080p to 74 at 1440p to 55 at 4K. At Medium settings, the FPS drops from 71 at 1080p to 58 at 1440p to 42 at 4K. The percentage losses are steeper at higher presets, which aligns with the GPU's limited texture and pixel throughput. The CPU's role diminishes as resolution increases, and the GPU's role dominates. Users who want to improve performance at 1080p would benefit from a stronger GPU, while users who want to improve performance at 4K would need a significantly stronger GPU than the RTX 2060.