Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is one of the most demanding titles in the benchmark database, and the pairing of the Intel Core i5-11400F with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti places it in a precarious position. The measured data shows a system that is struggling to maintain playable frame rates across all settings, with the combination ranking 3665th out of 3714 tested combos. This places the hardware firmly in the bottom 1.3% of all configurations, indicating a fundamentally constrained experience for virtual pilots.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling behavior of this combo reveals a classic case of GPU-bound performance, but with a twist that points to an overall lack of headroom. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average frame rate peaks at 39 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same Low preset drops the average to 31 FPS, a reduction of roughly 20.5%. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls further to 23 FPS, representing another 25.8% decline from the 1440p result. This scaling pattern is consistent with a GPU that is running out of pixel throughput, as the GTX 1050 Ti's 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 112.1 GB/s bandwidth become increasingly strained at higher resolutions.

However, the more telling data comes from the Medium settings row, which includes minimum and maximum frame rate measurements. At 1080p Medium, the average is 30 FPS with a minimum of 26 FPS and a maximum of 35 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 24 FPS with a minimum of 21 FPS and a maximum of 28 FPS. At 4K Medium, the average falls to 18 FPS with a minimum of 15 FPS and a maximum of 21 FPS. The delta between minimum and maximum remains tight across all three resolutions, suggesting that the system is not experiencing sudden stutters but rather a consistent, sustained load that overwhelms the hardware.

The jump from 1080p to 4K at Medium settings shows a 40% reduction in average frame rate, from 30 FPS to 18 FPS. This is a significant drop that indicates the GPU is the primary limiting factor. The GTX 1050 Ti, with its 768 shading units and 2.138 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, simply cannot feed the pixel pipeline fast enough at 4K. The data suggests that for this specific combo, the CPU is not the bottleneck; the i5-11400F has ample single-thread performance, as evidenced by its 3DMark single-thread score of 868, to keep up with the GPU's output at these settings.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is the clear weak link in this configuration. With a 4 GB memory buffer of GDDR5 running at 7 Gbps effective across a 128-bit bus, the card delivers 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a modest figure by modern standards, and Flight Simulator's vast, streaming world geometry puts heavy pressure on memory bandwidth. The card's base clock of 1291 MHz and boost clock of 1392 MHz are relatively low, and the 75 W TDP with no power connectors indicates a card designed for efficiency rather than raw performance.

Benchmark results for the GPU place it in the 25th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 4193. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R5 M330, which scores 4170 (a 0.6% delta), and the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M, which scores 4151 (a 1% delta). The GTX 1050 Ti is only marginally faster than these entry-level mobile parts, which underscores its position as a low-end desktop solution. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 6340 and DirectX 12 score of 26 further illustrate its limitations in modern API workloads.

In practical terms, the GPU's performance caps the experience at 1080p Low for a minimally playable frame rate. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the average FPS is 39, which is the only measured configuration that comes close to a smooth 60 FPS target. At 1080p High, the average drops to 23 FPS, and at 1080p Ultra, it falls to 22 FPS. The gap between Low and High at 1080p is 16 FPS, a 41% reduction, indicating that the GPU's shading units and texture units are overwhelmed by the higher-fidelity assets. The card's 48 TMUs and 32 ROPs are simply not sufficient for the game's draw calls.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F plays a supporting role in this pairing, and the data suggests it is not the limiting factor. With 6 cores and 12 threads, the CPU has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its 12 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth provide adequate data delivery for the GPU. The CPU's benchmark scores are respectable, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14340 and a single-core score of 2024. Its Geekbench multi-core score is 7737, and its single-core score is 1777.

The CPU's percentile versus all CPUs is 71, which is significantly higher than the GPU's 25th percentile. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7H12, which has an average score of 17120 (a 0.3% delta), and the Intel Core i5-12450H, which scores 17239 (a -0.4% delta). This places the i5-11400F in the mid-range tier for processors, far above the GPU's low-end standing. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 5619 and max-thread score of 5652 show that the CPU scales well with multi-threaded workloads, which is relevant for Flight Simulator's complex flight models and physics calculations.

However, the CPU's potential is never fully realized because the GPU is the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, where the GPU has the least work to do, the average FPS is 39. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see minimal frame rate changes when lowering resolution. Instead, we see a clear progression: 39 FPS at 1080p Low, 31 FPS at 1440p Low, and 23 FPS at 4K Low. This linear degradation with resolution is the hallmark of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU is likely idling at these settings, waiting for the GPU to finish rendering each frame. The data indicates that a stronger GPU would yield substantial improvements, while a faster CPU would provide negligible gains.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 3665 out of 3714 tested configurations places this system in the bottom 1.3% of all hardware pairings tested for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This is a stark indicator of the performance ceiling imposed by the GTX 1050 Ti. The rank is a composite measure that accounts for both CPU and GPU contributions, and the fact that the CPU is in the 71st percentile while the GPU is in the 25th percentile highlights the imbalance. The system is effectively hamstrung by its graphics card.

To contextualize this rank, consider that the GPU's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R5 M330 and the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M, both of which are significantly older or lower-tier parts. The GTX 1050 Ti's average benchmark score of 4193 is only 1.8% higher than the AMD Radeon Vega 3's score of 4268, which is an integrated graphics solution. This means the dedicated GPU is barely outperforming some iGPUs in synthetic benchmarks, and in a real-world scenario like Flight Simulator, the gap narrows further due to the game's memory bandwidth requirements.

The measured FPS data confirms this low ranking. The best-case scenario, 1080p Low, yields an average of 39 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay. At any higher setting or resolution, the frame rate drops into the teens or low twenties. The 4K Ultra setting produces an average of 13 FPS, which is a slideshow. The data suggests that this combo is only suitable for the lowest fidelity experience at 1080p, and even then, it falls short of ideal playability. Users with this hardware would need to accept significant compromises.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured data, the only viable configuration for a playable experience is 1920x1080 with Low settings, which yields an average of 39 FPS. This is the sole preset that approaches a reasonable frame rate, though it is still below the 60 FPS target that most flight sim enthusiasts prefer. The Low preset at 1080p is the recommended starting point, as it provides the best balance of visual fidelity and performance that this hardware can deliver.

For users who prioritize frame rate over visuals, the 1080p Low setting is the clear choice. The 1440p Low setting drops the average to 31 FPS, which is a 20.5% reduction for a modest increase in resolution. The 4K Low setting is not recommended, as the 23 FPS average is too low for a fluid experience. The Medium settings at any resolution are also questionable. At 1080p Medium, the average is 30 FPS, which is only 9 FPS less than Low, but the minimum FPS of 26 suggests occasional dips that could be noticeable. At 1440p Medium, the average of 24 FPS and minimum of 21 FPS are borderline unplayable.

The High and Ultra presets are effectively off-limits. At 1080p High, the average is 23 FPS, and at 1080p Ultra, it is 22 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra is negligible, indicating that the GPU is saturated. At 1440p High, the average drops to 18 FPS, and at 4K High, it falls to 14 FPS. The 4K Ultra setting is the worst performer at 13 FPS average. The data clearly shows that this combo cannot handle anything above Low settings at 1080p, and even that is marginal. Users should set expectations accordingly and consider lowering the in-game resolution scale if available, though the measured data only covers the native resolutions tested.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and preset for this combo?

A: The measured data shows that 1920x1080 with Low settings is the best configuration, producing an average of 39 FPS. This is the only setting that approaches a playable frame rate, as all other presets at this resolution fall to 30 FPS or below.

Q: Can this system run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K?

A: Technically yes, but the performance is extremely poor. At 4K Low, the average FPS is 23; at 4K Medium, it is 18; at 4K High, it is 14; and at 4K Ultra, it is 13. None of these are acceptable for a smooth experience.

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

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck. The GTX 1050 Ti is in the 25th percentile of all GPUs, while the i5-11400F is in the 71st percentile of CPUs. Frame rates scale linearly with resolution, which is a classic sign of GPU limitation.

Q: How does the GTX 1050 Ti compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 4193 is only 0.6% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M330 (4170) and 1% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4151). It is actually 1.8% slower than the AMD Radeon Vega 3 (4268), indicating it is on par with entry-level parts.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1080p with High settings?

A: The measured average is 23 FPS at 1920x1080 High. This is a significant drop from the 39 FPS at Low settings, representing a 41% reduction in performance due to the increased graphical load.

Q: Is this combo worth upgrading for Flight Simulator?

A: The combo ranks 3665th out of 3714 tested configurations. The data suggests that upgrading the GPU would yield the most significant gains, as the CPU has ample performance headroom for this title.