Microsoft Flight Simulator

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F brings a 6-core, 12-thread configuration based on the Zen 4 architecture, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. Its base clock sits at 4.20 GHz with a boost up to 4.70 GHz, and it carries 16 MB of shared L3 cache alongside 1 MB of L2 per core. This is a desktop-class chip on AMD Socket AM5, supporting DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The CPU's passmark multithread score of 24,389 and single-thread score of 3,685 place it in the 77th percentile among all CPUs, which is a solid mid-to-upper tier position.

What does this mean for Microsoft Flight Simulator? The game is known for heavy single-threaded simulation logic, particularly when rendering dense scenery and computing flight physics. The 8400F's single-thread performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,943 and a 3DMark single-thread score of 951, suggests it can handle the per-core demands of the sim's world rendering. The 12 threads also help with background tasks like terrain streaming and AI traffic, which the sim processes in parallel.

Looking at the measured data, the CPU's influence becomes apparent at 1080p Low settings, where the combination hits 142 FPS. This high frame rate at low graphical load indicates the CPU is feeding the GPU effectively. However, at 1080p Ultra, the average drops to 79 FPS — a 44% reduction from Low. This isn't purely a CPU bottleneck; the GPU is also being taxed by the increased graphical complexity. The fact that the 8400F's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, scores within 0.2% in average benchmark score (24,964 vs 25,005) means the CPU is in good company for this workload. The Intel Core i7-11850H and i7-13620H are also within 0.3% and 0.4%, respectively, showing that the 8400F's compute capability is competitive with a range of modern processors.

The 65W TDP and unlocked multiplier suggest this chip can sustain its boost clocks under sustained loads, which is critical for a sim that runs for hours. The data implies the CPU is rarely the limiting factor in this pairing; instead, it provides a stable foundation over which the GPU's performance scales with resolution and settings.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti is built on the Ampere architecture with a GA104 chip, manufactured on Samsung's 8 nm process. It features 6,144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs, along with 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1575 MHz with a boost clock of 1770 MHz, and its 8 GB of GDDR6X memory runs at an effective 19 Gbps across a 256-bit bus, yielding 608.3 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is crucial for flight sim, which loads vast textures for terrain, airports, and aircraft.

In the measured results, the RTX 3070 Ti shows clear scaling with settings. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 47, while at 4K Low it jumps to 85 FPS — a 38 FPS difference. This indicates the GPU is heavily burdened by the Ultra preset's graphical features, which include advanced lighting and shadow effects. The 8 GB VRAM capacity may also come into play at 4K Ultra, where texture data can exceed this amount in dense areas. However, the fact that the GPU still delivers playable 47 FPS at 4K Ultra suggests the memory bandwidth is sufficient to avoid severe stuttering.

The RTX 3070 Ti's PassMark G3D score of 23,356 places it in the 75th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile (within 0.1%), the AMD Radeon RX 6800 (0.5% ahead), and the RTX 2080 Ti (0.5% behind). This positioning means the 3070 Ti is competitive with newer and older high-end cards, making it a capable partner for the 8400F in this sim. The GPU's FP32 throughput of 21.75 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s provide the raw compute needed for the sim's volumetric clouds and reflective water surfaces.

The measured FPS data reveals a pattern: at 1080p Medium, the combo hits 111 FPS with a minimum of 94 FPS, showing smooth performance. At 1440p Medium, it drops to 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 FPS. These minimums are important for a flight sim where frame pacing affects the sense of smoothness during critical maneuvers. The GPU's role becomes more pronounced at higher resolutions, where the difference between 1080p High (83 FPS) and 4K High (49 FPS) is a 34 FPS drop, indicating the GPU is the primary scaling factor as resolution increases.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset offers the most balanced experience across all three resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the average is 111 FPS with a minimum of 94 FPS and a maximum of 127 FPS. This provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS for smooth flight, while also maintaining visual fidelity that is a step above Low. At 1440p Medium, the average is 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 FPS, which remains playable on high-refresh-rate monitors. At 4K Medium, the average drops to 66 FPS with a minimum of 56 FPS — this is borderline but acceptable for a sim where precise control matters more than fast-twitch reactions.

The High preset is a viable alternative for users prioritizing visuals over frame rate. At 1080p High, the average is 83 FPS, which is still above 60 FPS, but the lack of a minimum FPS figure means we cannot confirm consistency. At 1440p High, the average drops to 67 FPS, which is playable but closer to the edge. At 4K High, the average is 49 FPS, which may feel less smooth during complex scenery loads. The Ultra preset is only recommended for 1080p where it hits 79 FPS average; at 1440p it drops to 64 FPS, and at 4K it falls to 47 FPS, making it the least desirable for smooth gameplay.

The Low preset is the clear choice for maximum frame rates, achieving 142 FPS at 1080p, 115 FPS at 1440p, and 85 FPS at 4K. However, the visual compromise is significant, particularly in a game where immersion relies on detailed terrain and weather effects. The data suggests that Medium provides the best compromise between visual quality and performance, especially when considering the minimum FPS figures that indicate consistent frame delivery. For users with 144Hz displays at 1080p, Medium is the sweet spot; for 1440p users, Medium still delivers above 75 FPS on average; and for 4K users, Medium is the only preset that stays above 60 FPS average.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1440p Ultra for this combo?

A: The measured average FPS at 2560x1440 with Ultra settings is 64 FPS, with no minimum or maximum values recorded.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has an average benchmark score of 25,005, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (24,964) and 0.3% higher than the Intel Core i7-11850H (24,935). It trails the AMD EPYC 9474F by 0.4% (25,103).

Q: What is the FPS difference between 1080p Low and 1080p Ultra?

A: At 1080p, the Low preset averages 142 FPS, while Ultra averages 79 FPS. This is a difference of 63 FPS, representing a 44% reduction in frame rate when moving from Low to Ultra.

Q: Does the GPU have enough memory bandwidth for 4K gaming?

A: The RTX 3070 Ti has 608.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth from its 8 GB GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus. The 4K Medium measurement shows 66 FPS average with a 56 FPS minimum, indicating the bandwidth is sufficient for playable performance at this resolution.

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested configurations?

A: This CPU-GPU combination ranks 1,313 out of 3,714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the top 35% of all configurations.

Q: What are the minimum FPS values for Medium settings at different resolutions?

A: At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 94 FPS; at 1440p Medium, the minimum is 76 FPS; and at 4K Medium, the minimum is 56 FPS. These values indicate that the Medium preset maintains reasonably consistent performance across all resolutions.

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

Examining the FPS scaling across resolutions reveals a clear pattern of GPU limitation at higher pixel counts. At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 111 at 1080p to 89 at 1440p (a 20% reduction) and then to 66 at 4K (a 26% further reduction from 1440p). This progression shows that the GPU's rendering load increases disproportionately with resolution, which is expected given the 4x pixel count difference between 1080p and 4K.

At High settings, the scaling is similar: 83 FPS at 1080p, 67 FPS at 1440p (19% drop), and 49 FPS at 4K (27% drop). The consistent percentage drops across settings suggest that the RTX 3070 Ti is the limiting component as resolution increases, rather than the CPU. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to remain relatively flat across resolutions at lower settings, but the data shows significant drops even at Low settings: 142 FPS at 1080p, 115 FPS at 1440p (19% drop), and 85 FPS at 4K (26% drop).

This behavior indicates that even at Low settings, the GPU is still the primary constraint at higher resolutions. The CPU's role is more evident at 1080p Low, where 142 FPS demonstrates that the 8400F can push frames far beyond typical display refresh rates. The fact that the FPS drops by roughly 20-27% for each resolution step-up, regardless of settings, points to the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth being the limiting factors.

The 8 GB VRAM capacity may also contribute to these scaling patterns. At 4K Ultra, the GPU must manage larger texture sets, and while the average of 47 FPS is still playable, the lack of a minimum FPS figure suggests potential variance in demanding scenes. The data implies that for 4K gaming, users should stick to Medium or below to maintain frame rates above 60 FPS, while 1440p offers a broader range of viable settings.

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

At 1920x1080, the measurements show a wide range depending on settings. Low settings achieve an average of 142 FPS, while Medium averages 111 FPS with a minimum of 94 FPS and a maximum of 127 FPS. High settings reduce the average to 83 FPS, and Ultra brings it down to 79 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is just 4 FPS, suggesting that Ultra's extra graphical features do not heavily tax the GPU at this resolution, but the CPU may be approaching its limits.

At 2560x1440, the FPS values scale downward. Low averages 115 FPS, Medium averages 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 FPS and a maximum of 103 FPS, High averages 67 FPS, and Ultra averages 64 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra narrows to just 3 FPS, indicating that at this resolution, the GPU is beginning to become the limiting factor for the higher presets. The Medium preset's minimum of 76 FPS is still comfortably above 60 FPS, making it a reliable choice for 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the performance drops significantly. Low averages 85 FPS, Medium averages 66 FPS with a minimum of 56 FPS and a maximum of 76 FPS, High averages 49 FPS, and Ultra averages 47 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is just 2 FPS, showing that the GPU is saturated at this resolution. The Medium preset's minimum of 56 FPS falls below the 60 FPS threshold, which may cause noticeable frame drops during heavy scenery loading. Low is the only preset that maintains an average above 60 FPS at 4K.

The minimum FPS values are only recorded for Medium settings across all resolutions, which provides a consistent reference point. At 1080p, the minimum is 94 FPS; at 1440p, it is 76 FPS; and at 4K, it is 56 FPS. These figures show a 20-FPS drop from 1080p to 1440p and another 20-FPS drop to 4K, indicating that the GPU's frame delivery time increases substantially with pixel count.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This AMD Ryzen 5 8400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti combination ranks 1,313 out of 3,714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the 64.6th percentile of all configurations, meaning it outperforms roughly two-thirds of the tested systems. The rank is based on measured FPS data, not synthetic benchmarks, which makes it directly relevant to real-world gameplay.

The ranking reflects a balanced pairing where neither component severely bottlenecks the other. The CPU's 77th percentile standing and the GPU's 75th percentile standing are closely aligned, which is optimal for gaming workloads. If one component were significantly weaker, the rank would likely be lower due to the stronger component being held back.

Comparatively, the GPU's nearest rivals include the RTX 5070 Mobile (0.1% faster in average benchmark), the RX 6800 (0.5% faster), and the RTX 2080 Ti (0.5% slower). The CPU's rivals are similarly close, with the Ryzen 5 7500F being just 0.2% slower. This suggests that swapping either component for a close rival would not dramatically change the in-game rank, as the performance differences are minimal.

The rank of 1,313 out of 3,714 indicates that this combo is well-suited for Microsoft Flight Simulator, but it is not in the top tier. The data shows that at 1080p Medium, the combo achieves 111 FPS, which is excellent for most displays. However, at 4K Ultra, the 47 FPS average suggests that users seeking maximum visual quality will need to accept lower frame rates or consider more powerful GPUs.

The ranking also implies that the combo is well-optimized for the game's specific demands. Flight sims often rely on both CPU and GPU heavily, and this system's balanced performance allows it to handle the sim's complex rendering tasks without significant frame drops. The measured data supports this, showing consistent FPS across settings with minimums never falling below 56 FPS at Medium settings. For users with 1440p or 1080p monitors, this combo delivers a strong experience; for 4K, it requires careful settings management to maintain smooth gameplay.