Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator: Intel Core i5-11400F + AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT

This combination of Intel's 6-core/12-thread Rocket Lake CPU and AMD's RDNA 2 mid-range GPU delivers a playable but demanding experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The data indicates that 1080p is the sweet spot, with 1440p viable only at reduced settings, while 4K requires Low presets to approach smooth frame rates. The system ranks in the 64th percentile of tested combos, placing it firmly in the mid-range tier for this title.

Settings Recommendations

The measured results show that Medium settings at 1080p provide the best balance of visual quality and performance, delivering 80.3 FPS on average. This is 18.2 FPS above the High preset's 62 FPS and only 23.9 FPS below the Low preset's 104.2 FPS, making it the clear recommendation for most users.

For those prioritizing smoothness over fidelity, the Low preset at 1080p yields 104.2 FPS, which is the highest measured frame rate across all configurations. This preset is ideal for competitive or high-refresh-rate displays, though the visual compromise is substantial.

At 1440p, High settings drop to 46.7 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold many consider playable. Medium at 1440p provides 67.8 FPS, making it the recommended choice for this resolution. The Ultra preset at 1440p (49.5 FPS) and High at 1440p (46.7 FPS) both fall into marginal territory.

At 4K, only Low settings achieve a playable frame rate at 58.5 FPS. Medium drops to 48.2 FPS, High to 36.1 FPS, and Ultra to 31.7 FPS. The data strongly suggests avoiding 4K with this combo unless using Low settings or accepting sub-40 FPS performance.

How This Combo Ranks

This configuration ranks 1157 out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the 64th percentile of all tested systems. This is a respectable mid-pack position, indicating that the combo handles the game's demands adequately but doesn't approach top-tier performance.

The CPU's overall benchmark percentile of 75 versus all CPUs suggests the processor is capable, yet the combo's in-game rank is lower, indicating that the GPU becomes the limiting factor in this title. The GPU's percentile of 72 versus all GPUs aligns closely with the combo's rank, confirming that the RX 6650 XT dictates the overall experience.

Compared to the CPU's nearest rivals, the i5-11400F shows near-identical average benchmark scores: the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U (17189) and Intel Core i7-1260P (17212) are within 0.2% of its 17181 average. This suggests that swapping among these CPUs would produce minimal performance changes in Flight Simulator, reinforcing that the graphics card is the bottleneck.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 280.3 GB/s of bandwidth. Its boost clock of 2635 MHz and game clock of 2410 MHz are relatively high for the RX 6000 series, with the base clock set at 2055 MHz. The card has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, translating to 10.79 TFLOPS of FP32 compute.

The GPU's benchmark scores show mixed results across APIs: a PassMark G3D score of 17166 places it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (29011, 0% delta) and AMD Radeon RX 470 (28996, 0.1% delta), indicating that the 6650 XT performs on par with these very different cards in synthetic tests.

In Flight Simulator specifically, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM capacity appears sufficient for 1080p and 1440p at all settings. However, the 4K Ultra result of 31.7 FPS suggests the card's memory bandwidth or compute capacity is stretched at that resolution and preset combination. The data shows a consistent pattern: as resolution and settings increase, frame rates drop proportionally, with the GPU clearly being the performance limiter.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1080p, the results show a clear progression: Low delivers 104.2 FPS, Medium 80.3 FPS, High 62 FPS, and Ultra 59.9 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium (23.9 FPS) is larger than the gap between High and Ultra (2.1 FPS), suggesting diminishing returns at the highest settings.

At 1440p, the same pattern emerges but with lower absolute numbers: Low achieves 82.6 FPS, Medium 67.8 FPS, High 46.7 FPS, and Ultra 49.5 FPS. Notably, Ultra outperforms High by 2.8 FPS at this resolution, which is unusual and may indicate measurement variance or specific scene complexity.

At 4K, the results are: Low 58.5 FPS, Medium 48.2 FPS, High 36.1 FPS, and Ultra 31.7 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 10.3 FPS, while Medium to High is 12.1 FPS, and High to Ultra is 4.4 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is the lowest across all configurations, highlighting the GPU's limitations at this resolution.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 1080p provides the highest frame rates across all settings, with Low achieving 104.2 FPS and Medium 80.3 FPS. 1440p and 4K progressively reduce performance.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Flight Simulator?

A: Only at Low settings, which delivers 58.5 FPS. Medium drops to 48.2 FPS, High to 36.1 FPS, and Ultra to 31.7 FPS, making higher presets impractical.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this title?

A: The GPU is the limiting component. The CPU's 75th percentile ranking versus all CPUs is higher than the combo's 64th percentile in-game rank, and the GPU's 72nd percentile closely matches the combo's performance.

Q: How does this combo compare to similar systems?

A: It ranks 1157 out of 1795 combos, placing it in the 64th percentile. The GPU performs on par with the RX 6800M and RX 470 in synthetic benchmarks, while the CPU matches the Ryzen 7 5700U and Core i7-1260P.

Q: What settings should I use for 1440p?

A: Medium settings deliver 67.8 FPS, which is the only preset above 60 FPS at this resolution. High and Ultra both fall below 50 FPS.

Q: Is there a large difference between High and Ultra settings?

A: At 1080p, the difference is only 2.1 FPS (62 vs 59.9). At 1440p, Ultra actually outperforms High by 2.8 FPS, suggesting the visual gains from Ultra may not justify the performance cost.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F provides 6 cores and 12 threads with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its 12 MB of shared L3 cache and 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth are modest but adequate for this workload. The CPU's 14 nm process node and 65 W TDP indicate it is not a high-power part, yet its benchmark scores show solid single-thread performance.

In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 14372 multicore and 2029 singlecore, while Geekbench shows 7579 multicore and 1979 singlecore. These scores place the CPU in the 75th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17181. The nearest rivals—Ryzen 7 5700U (17189), Core i7-1260P (17212), and Core Ultra 7 164U (17215)—all perform within 0.2% of the i5-11400F.

For Flight Simulator, the CPU's single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 singlecore of 2029) is more relevant than multi-core, as the game is known to be single-thread sensitive. The 3DMark single-thread score of 868 and 2-thread score of 1691 indicate the CPU handles lightly-threaded workloads efficiently. However, the in-game rank of 1157/1795 suggests that even with strong CPU performance, the GPU limits overall results.

Resolution Scaling

The data reveals a clear pattern of frame rate degradation as resolution increases. At 1080p, the average FPS across all settings is 76.6. At 1440p, this drops to 61.7, a reduction of 19.5%. At 4K, the average falls to 43.6, a 56.4% reduction from 1080p.

Looking at individual presets, the scaling is consistent: Low settings drop from 104.2 FPS at 1080p to 82.6 at 1440p (20.7% reduction) and 58.5 at 4K (43.9% reduction). High settings drop from 62 at 1080p to 46.7 at 1440p (24.7%) and 36.1 at 4K (41.8%). Ultra settings drop from 59.9 to 49.5 (17.4%) and 31.7 (47.1%).

This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting component. The frame rate drops are roughly proportional to the pixel count increase, which is characteristic of GPU-bound scenarios. The CPU's strong single-thread performance is sufficient to maintain frame rates at lower resolutions, but the RX 6650 XT cannot sustain high FPS as pixel counts rise. The 4K Low result of 58.5 FPS, which is nearly identical to the 1080p High result of 62 FPS, further confirms that the GPU's compute and memory bandwidth are the deciding factors in this title.