Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a demanding flight simulation title that stresses both the CPU and GPU heavily. For the combination of the Intel Core i5-10400F and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070, the measured data reveals a system that is capable of playable performance at lower settings, but which struggles to maintain smooth frame rates at higher presets and resolutions. This analysis walks through the measured FPS data, the role of each component, and how this specific pairing ranks against other tested combinations.

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates show a clear and predictable pattern: as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, average FPS drops significantly across all settings. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 83 FPS at 1920x1080 to 67 FPS at 2560x1440, and then to 49 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 41% reduction in average FPS from 1080p to 4K at the Low preset. At High settings, the scaling is similar in percentage terms: 48 FPS at 1080p drops to 39 FPS at 1440p and then to 29 FPS at 4K, a 40% total reduction.

The Medium preset shows the most complete data, with minimum and maximum FPS recorded at every resolution. At 1920x1080, the average is 64 FPS with a range of 55 to 74 FPS. At 2560x1440, the average drops to 52 FPS, with a range of 44 to 60 FPS. At 3840x2160, the average falls to 38 FPS, with a range of 32 to 44 FPS. The consistent step-down between each resolution tier indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor in this configuration. The GTX 1070's 256-bit memory bus and 256.3 GB/s of bandwidth are being saturated as pixel count increases, which is a typical bottleneck for this class of graphics card in a heavily detailed simulator like Microsoft Flight Simulator.

The delta between 1080p and 1440p is notably smaller than the delta between 1440p and 4K for most settings. For example, at Low settings, the drop from 1080p to 1440p is 16 FPS (83 to 67), while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 18 FPS (67 to 49). This suggests that the game's rendering load scales super-linearly with resolution, particularly when crossing into 4K territory. The data indicates that this system is best suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming, as 4K performance falls below 30 FPS on High and Ultra presets, which is generally considered the threshold for acceptable playability in a flight simulator where smooth visuals are important for immersion.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 is built on the Pascal architecture with a GP104 chip, manufactured on a 16 nm process at TSMC. It features 1920 shading units, 120 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1506 MHz and a boost clock of 1683 MHz, with memory clocked at 2002 MHz (8 Gbps effective). This configuration delivers a pixel rate of 107.7 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 202.0 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 6.463 TFLOPS. The 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 256.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is adequate for 1080p and 1440p gaming but becomes a limiting factor at 4K in this title.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it at the 47th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 9780. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD FirePro W5000 (average score 9803, 0.2% faster), the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M (average score 9832, 0.5% faster), the NVIDIA Tesla M10 (average score 9724, 0.6% slower), and the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 (average score 9716, 0.7% slower). These are all professional or older workstation cards, which highlights that the GTX 1070 sits in a performance tier that is now considered mid-range or older mainstream.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator specifically, the GPU's role is evident in the frame rate differences between settings presets. At 1920x1080, going from Low (83 FPS) to Ultra (46 FPS) costs 37 FPS, a 45% reduction. At 2560x1440, the same setting change costs 30 FPS (67 to 37), and at 3840x2160, it costs 22 FPS (49 to 27). The diminishing absolute differences at higher resolutions suggest that at 4K, even the Low preset is GPU-bound, whereas at 1080p, the CPU has more headroom to push higher frame rates when the GPU is less stressed. The GTX 1070's 8 GB of VRAM is sufficient for this game at all tested settings, as no out-of-memory issues would be indicated by the measured data, but the raw compute and memory bandwidth limits are clearly reached at the higher presets.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the Intel Core i5-10400F and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 ranks 3069 out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the lower 17% of all tested systems, which aligns with the fact that both the CPU and GPU are older or mid-range parts. The CPU sits at the 68th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU is at the 47th percentile, so the pairing is somewhat balanced but with the GPU being the weaker component.

The rank of 3069 indicates that most other tested combinations deliver higher frame rates in this game. However, this does not mean the system is unplayable. The measured data shows that at 1080p Low, the average FPS of 83 is well above playable thresholds, and even at 1080p Medium, the 64 FPS average with a minimum of 55 FPS provides a smooth experience. The system's ranking reflects the broader performance landscape, where more modern CPUs and GPUs can achieve higher frame rates at higher settings, but this combo still delivers acceptable performance for users willing to adjust settings.

Compared to its nearest CPU rivals, the i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14185. The Intel Xeon 6756E scores 14163 (0.2% lower), the Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232 (0.3% higher), the AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115 (0.5% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14277 (0.6% higher). These deltas are all under 1%, meaning the CPU's performance is tightly clustered with these other processors, and any differences in game performance would be minimal. For the GPU, the GTX 1070's nearest rivals are all within 0.7% of its average score, further confirming that this hardware sits in a well-defined performance tier with little variation among comparable parts.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this system in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 is the best resolution. At Low settings it averages 83 FPS, at Medium it averages 64 FPS, and at High it averages 48 FPS. All of these are playable, while 2560x1440 and 3840x2160 drop below 40 FPS at High and Ultra presets.

Q: Can this system run the game at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, but only at lower settings. At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 49 FPS and Medium averages 38 FPS. High averages 29 FPS and Ultra averages 27 FPS, which are below the typical 30 FPS playability threshold.

Q: How does the GTX 1070 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 1070 has an average benchmark score of 9780. Its nearest rivals are the AMD FirePro W5000 (9803, 0.2% faster), NVIDIA Quadro M2000M (9832, 0.5% faster), NVIDIA Tesla M10 (9724, 0.6% slower), and NVIDIA Tesla C2070 (9716, 0.7% slower). All are within 1% performance.

Q: What is the CPU's performance percentile?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F is at the 68th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 14185. Its nearest rivals are all within 0.6% of this score.

Q: Which settings preset provides the best experience at 1080p?

A: Medium settings provide a good balance, with an average of 64 FPS and a minimum of 55 FPS. Low settings are faster at 83 FPS, but Medium offers better visual quality while staying above 60 FPS on average.

Q: How does this combo rank overall?

A: This combo ranks 3069 out of 3714 tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the lower 17% of all tested systems.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the Core 10th Gen series, based on the Comet Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, with a 65W TDP. The CPU supports DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration, providing 42.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth. It has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The processor is built on Intel's 14 nm process and uses the Intel Socket 1200 interface, with PCIe Gen 3 connectivity offering 16 lanes from the CPU.

In synthetic benchmarks, the i5-10400F shows strong multi-threaded performance for its class. It scores 4748 in 3DMark with 16 threads, 4735 with maximum threads, and 3929 with 8 threads. In Cinebench, it achieves 1036 in R15 multicore, 4318 in R20 multicore, and 10283 in R23 multicore. Single-thread scores are more modest, with 688 in 3DMark single-thread and 1451 in Cinebench R23 single-core. Geekbench results show 6257 multicore and 1420 single-core.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is less pronounced than the GPU's at higher resolutions, but it still matters. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 83 FPS, which suggests the CPU can feed the GPU sufficiently at lower graphical loads. The 6 cores and 12 threads are adequate for the game's simulation and physics calculations, which can be processor-intensive. The CPU's 68th percentile ranking indicates it performs better than most CPUs, but the game's results show that at 4K, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck.

The CPU's nearest rivals all have average scores within 0.6% of the i5-10400F, which means that in this specific game, swapping to any of those processors would likely produce very similar frame rates. The data suggests that the i5-10400F provides enough processing power to avoid being the primary limiting factor at 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the GPU's limitations dominate the performance picture.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the recommended settings depend heavily on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance. It delivers an average of 64 FPS with a minimum of 55 FPS and a maximum of 74 FPS. This is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, and the minimum is still within a playable range. Low settings at 1080p average 83 FPS, which is smoother but sacrifices visual fidelity. High at 1080p averages 48 FPS, which is playable but may feel less smooth in fast-moving scenes. Ultra at 1080p averages 46 FPS, which is close to High and offers no meaningful advantage given the lower frame rate.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset is the most reliable choice, averaging 67 FPS. Medium at 1440p averages 52 FPS with a minimum of 44 FPS, which is acceptable for a flight simulator where camera movement is often slower-paced. High at 1440p averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 37 FPS, both below 40 FPS, which may be too choppy for some users. For 3840x2160, Low is the only preset that averages near 50 FPS (49 FPS), while Medium averages 38 FPS and High/Ultra average 29/27 FPS respectively. The data indicates that 4K should be reserved for Low settings, and even then, users should expect occasional dips below 30 FPS in dense areas.

The recommendation is to use Medium at 1080p for the best overall experience, as it provides a solid frame rate with improved visual quality over Low. For users prioritizing frame rate above all else, Low at 1080p is the fastest option. At 1440p, Low is recommended for consistent 60+ FPS, with Medium as a viable alternative for those who accept a lower but still playable frame rate. At 4K, Low is the only practical choice, as higher presets fall below 30 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low settings produce 83 FPS, Medium produces 64 FPS (with a minimum of 55 and maximum of 74), High produces 48 FPS, and Ultra produces 46 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 37 FPS, with the largest single step occurring between Low and Medium (19 FPS). The step from Medium to High is 16 FPS, and from High to Ultra is only 2 FPS, indicating diminishing returns at the highest preset.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 67 FPS, Medium averages 52 FPS (minimum 44, maximum 60), High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 37 FPS. The total spread is 30 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is 15 FPS, from Medium to High is 13 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 2 FPS. The pattern is similar to 1080p, but with lower absolute values.

At 3840x2160, Low averages 49 FPS, Medium averages 38 FPS (minimum 32, maximum 44), High averages 29 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS. The total spread is 22 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is 11 FPS, from Medium to High is 9 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 2 FPS. The narrowing spread at higher resolutions confirms that the GPU is fully saturated, and even the lowest settings cannot fully compensate for the pixel load.

Comparing across resolutions, the Low preset at 4K (49 FPS) performs similarly to the High preset at 1080p (48 FPS), which illustrates the performance cost of increased resolution. The Medium preset at 1440p (52 FPS) is slightly faster than the High preset at 1080p (48 FPS), showing that resolution scaling is not perfectly linear and that settings adjustments can sometimes offset resolution increases. The data shows that this combo is best used at 1080p with Medium or Low settings, with 1440p Low as a secondary option, and 4K only at Low settings for users who prioritize resolution over frame rate.