Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a uniquely demanding title, and the pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER produces a combination that is heavily influenced by the graphics card. Measured results show that this combo ranks 2138th out of 3714 tested combinations, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database. The data indicates a system that can manage playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, but which quickly runs out of headroom at 4K, regardless of the visual settings applied.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Phoenix. It operates with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, supported by a 16 MB shared L3 cache. This CPU sits at the 77th percentile when compared to all processors in the database, with an average benchmark score of 25005. Its performance profile is closely matched by rivals such as the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, which scores 24964 (a 0.2% difference), and the Intel Core i7-11850H, which scores 24935 (a 0.3% difference).

For a flight simulator, the CPU's role is significant for handling complex physics, AI traffic, and scenery processing. However, the measured FPS in this game suggests that the Ryzen 5 8400F is not the primary bottleneck in most scenarios. The processor’s single-threaded performance, reflected in a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2943, is adequate for the game’s simulation logic. The multi-threaded capability, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20851, shows that it has sufficient headroom for background tasks and the game's multi-threaded elements.

The data points to a system where the GPU is the limiting factor, especially at higher resolutions. At 1080p with Low settings, the average FPS is 111, which suggests the CPU can feed the GPU well beyond what the RTX 2070 SUPER can render at higher settings. The gap between settings at 1080p (111 FPS at Low vs. 62 FPS at Ultra) is a clear indicator that the graphics card's workload scaling is the primary driver of performance differences. The CPU is capable, but the GPU's limits become apparent as soon as the visual load increases.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the average frame rate for this combo at 1920x1080 on Medium settings?

A: The measured average FPS is 86, with a minimum of 73 and a maximum of 99. This is a comfortable performance level for most gameplay scenarios.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F?

A: The Ryzen 5 8400F has an average benchmark score of 25005, which is 0.2% higher than the Ryzen 5 7500F's score of 24964. The performance difference is negligible.

Q: What is the best average FPS achieved at 4K resolution?

A: The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 66, which is achieved on Low settings. This is the only 4K setting that breaks the 60 FPS barrier.

Q: Is the RTX 2070 SUPER more powerful than the Intel Arc A750?

A: Based on average benchmark scores, the RTX 2070 SUPER scores 20282, which is 1.5% lower than the Intel Arc A750's score of 20582. The Arc A750 is slightly faster in this metric.

Q: Does the game run better at 1440p High or 1080p Ultra?

A: The measured results show that 1440p High achieves an average of 52 FPS, while 1080p Ultra achieves an average of 62 FPS. The 1080p Ultra setting provides a higher average frame rate.

Q: What is the frame rate range for 1440p Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 70, with a minimum of 59 and a maximum of 80. This shows a stable frame time experience.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The performance scaling across resolutions reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario. At 1080p Low, the system produces 111 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 89 FPS, a 19.8% decrease. At 4K Low, the frame rate falls to 66 FPS, a 40.5% decrease from the 1080p baseline. This trend is consistent across all settings, indicating that the rendering resolution has a massive impact on the frame rate.

The pattern is even more pronounced at higher settings. For example, 1080p High yields 65 FPS, 1440p High yields 52 FPS, and 4K High yields 39 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings is a 40.0% reduction in FPS. This consistency across settings strongly suggests that the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER's fixed hardware resources—its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth—are the primary constraint. The CPU’s performance is relatively constant across these resolutions, so the FPS changes must be attributed to the GPU's workload.

The data clearly shows that the RTX 2070 SUPER cannot maintain high frame rates at 4K. Even at Low settings, which drastically reduce the GPU load, the average FPS is only 66. This is a significant drop from the 111 FPS at 1080p Low. The conclusion from the measured data is that the GPU is the limiting component in this pairing for Microsoft Flight Simulator, and users seeking 4K performance would need a more powerful graphics card.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER ranks 2138th out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the 42.4th percentile of all tested systems, meaning that roughly 57.6% of the tested combinations perform better. This is a mid-to-low ranking, reflecting the GPU's age and its limitations in this demanding title.

The ranking is influenced by both components, but the data suggests the GPU is the weaker link. The RTX 2070 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 20282 and sits at the 65th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (scoring 20480, 1% higher) and the Intel Arc B570 (scoring 20556, 1.3% higher). The CPU alone performs above average, but the combo's overall rank is dragged down by the GPU's inability to keep up with newer hardware. This is a clear case where a modern CPU is paired with a previous-generation GPU, resulting in a system that is balanced for 1080p gaming but struggles at higher resolutions.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the user's resolution and performance targets. For a smooth experience at 60 FPS, the data points to 1080p Medium as the best choice, with an average of 86 FPS. This setting provides a substantial performance buffer and a better visual experience than Low. At 1080p, High settings are also viable, with an average of 65 FPS, but they offer less headroom for demanding scenes.

At 1440p, the choice is more constrained. Medium settings yield an average of 70 FPS, which is playable and offers a good balance of visual quality. Low settings push this to 89 FPS, but the visual compromise may be significant for a flight simulator. High settings at 1440p drop to 52 FPS, which may be acceptable for a slower-paced game, but it falls below the 60 FPS target.

For 4K, the data suggests that only Low settings are practical, with an average of 66 FPS. Medium settings drop to 51 FPS, and High settings fall to 39 FPS. The measured numbers indicate that for 4K play, users must accept Low settings to maintain a reasonable frame rate, or they should consider reducing the resolution to 1440p for a better visual experience.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

1920x1080:

• Low: Average FPS is 111. This is the highest frame rate recorded for this combo.
• Medium: Average FPS is 86, with a minimum of 73 and a maximum of 99.
• High: Average FPS is 65.
• Ultra: Average FPS is 62.

2560x1440:

• Low: Average FPS is 89.
• Medium: Average FPS is 70, with a minimum of 59 and a maximum of 80.
• High: Average FPS is 52.
• Ultra: Average FPS is 50.

3840x2160:

• Low: Average FPS is 66. This is the only 4K setting with an average above 60 FPS.
• Medium: Average FPS is 51, with a minimum of 44 and a maximum of 59.
• High: Average FPS is 39.
• Ultra: Average FPS is 37.

The data shows a clear performance hierarchy. The system is capable of high refresh rate gaming at 1080p on lower settings, but the frame rate drops off sharply as resolution and settings increase. The gap between Low and Ultra settings at the same resolution is significant; at 1080p, it is a 49 FPS difference, and at 4K, it is a 29 FPS difference. This indicates that the GPU's rendering capabilities are the primary factor in determining the final frame rate in Microsoft Flight Simulator.