Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i5-11400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a combination that lands near the very bottom of the database for Microsoft Flight Simulator, ranking 1701st out of 1795 tested combos. This pairing is fundamentally constrained by the GPU, which delivers playable frame rates only at the lowest settings and 1080p resolution, while the CPU provides a solid baseline of six cores and twelve threads that prevents the system from falling even further behind. The benchmark data shows a clear pattern: this combo is for users who prioritize accessibility over visual fidelity, with the measured results indicating a hard ceiling of roughly 49 FPS under the most favorable conditions.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo achieves in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest measured average frame rate is 49.3 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i5-11400F scores an average of 17181 in database benchmarks, which is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U (17189) and the Intel Core i5-1240U (17141), while sitting 0.2% behind the Intel Core i7-1260P (17212).

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested combinations for this game?

A: The combo ranks 1701st out of 1795 total tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 5% of all systems evaluated.

Q: Is the GPU's VRAM a limiting factor at higher resolutions?

A: The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus, and the data shows that at 3840x2160 even Low settings only yields 28.7 FPS, indicating the GPU's overall throughput, not just VRAM capacity, is the primary bottleneck.

Q: Which settings preset provides the most balanced experience?

A: The 1080p Low preset, at 49.3 FPS, is the only configuration that approaches a smooth frame rate; Medium at 1080p drops to 38 FPS, and High at 1080p falls to 28.1 FPS.

Q: How does the GPU's performance percentile compare to its direct rivals?

A: The GTX 1650 sits at the 43rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8713, placing it within 0.5% of the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (8671) and 0.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8746).

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F provides six physical cores and twelve threads, a configuration that is well-suited for the multi-threaded simulation workloads of Microsoft Flight Simulator. The CPU's base clock of 2.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz, combined with a 12 MB shared L3 cache, delivers sufficient single-thread performance for the game's core simulation logic. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU achieves a single-thread score of 868 in 3dmark and a multithread score of 5652 in 3dmark_max_threads, demonstrating a balanced profile that does not bottleneck the GPU in most scenarios.

The CPU's position relative to its nearest rivals is remarkably tight. With an average benchmark score of 17181, it is statistically identical to the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U (17189), the Intel Core i5-1240U (17141), and the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U (17215). The delta percentages range from -0.2% to +0.2%, meaning the i5-11400F offers no meaningful advantage or disadvantage over these alternatives in raw compute. For Microsoft Flight Simulator specifically, the CPU's 75th percentile ranking among all CPUs suggests it is more than capable of feeding the GPU, but the measured FPS data indicates that this capability is never fully utilized because the GTX 1650 becomes the limiting factor well before the CPU's performance ceiling is reached.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data paints a clear picture: the Low preset is the only viable option for a smooth experience, and even then only at 1920x1080. At 1080p Low, the combo averages 49.3 FPS, which is the sole configuration above the 30 FPS threshold. The Medium preset at 1080p drops to 38 FPS, which is still playable but noticeably less fluid, while High at 1080p falls to 28.1 FPS and Ultra to 24.6 FPS, both of which are below the minimum for comfortable play.

At higher resolutions, the situation deteriorates rapidly. The 1440p Low preset yields 37.5 FPS, which is acceptable for a flight simulator where precision is less twitchy, but 1440p Medium (31.4 FPS) and 1440p High (24.8 FPS) push the system into slideshow territory. The 4K resolution is effectively unplayable across all settings, with even Low at 3840x2160 only reaching 28.7 FPS. For users who prioritize frame rate, the recommendation is unequivocal: 1080p Low is the best experience. For those willing to accept sub-30 FPS, 1440p Low or 1080p Medium offer a visual upgrade without completely sacrificing playability.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 1701 out of 1795 places it in the bottom 5.2% of all tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This is a poor result, but it is not surprising given the hardware pairing. The GTX 1650, with its 4 GB VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth, is a low-end card from the GeForce 10-series era, and the i5-11400F, despite being a capable mid-range CPU, cannot compensate for the GPU's limitations in a game as demanding as this one.

The rank becomes more meaningful when compared to the individual components' percentiles. The CPU sits at the 75th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU sits at only the 43rd percentile among all GPUs. This 32-percentage-point gap confirms that the GPU is the dominant bottleneck. The combo's rank is dragged down almost entirely by the GPU, as the CPU's performance is more than adequate for the game's simulation demands. In practical terms, this means that upgrading the GPU alone would yield significant FPS improvements, while upgrading the CPU would have minimal impact.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the primary constraint in this system. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, 128-bit bus, and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are all modest figures, but the real limitation is raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 896 shading units. The GPU's base clock of 1485 MHz and boost clock of 1665 MHz are standard for the card, but they are insufficient for the heavy rendering load of Microsoft Flight Simulator.

The GPU's benchmark scores confirm its low-end positioning. It achieves a Passmark G3D score of 7880 and a 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 305, placing it at the 43rd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are closely matched: the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 scores 8671 (0.5% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 8746 (0.4% ahead), and the AMD Radeon 550X scores 8749 (0.4% ahead). The GTX 1650's performance is therefore not an outlier; it is simply a low-tier card that struggles with modern flight simulation software.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo produces its best results. The Low preset averages 49.3 FPS, which is the only configuration to exceed 45 FPS. Medium drops to 38 FPS, High to 28.1 FPS, and Ultra to 24.6 FPS. The gradient from Low to Ultra shows a 50% performance penalty, from 49.3 to 24.6 FPS, indicating that the GPU's fill rate and shading capacity are quickly overwhelmed by higher-quality textures and lighting effects.

At 2560x1440, the pattern repeats but with lower absolute values. Low averages 37.5 FPS, which is still above the 30 FPS threshold, but Medium falls to 31.4 FPS, High to 24.8 FPS, and Ultra to 22.5 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 15 FPS, a smaller absolute drop than at 1080p, but the percentage drop is similar. At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly poor. Low averages 28.7 FPS, Medium 22.9 FPS, High 17.4 FPS, and Ultra 18.3 FPS. Interestingly, Ultra is slightly faster than High at 4K, which may be due to driver-level optimizations or measurement variance, but both are well below playable thresholds.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a system that is severely GPU-limited. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 49.3 at 1080p to 37.5 at 1440p (a 24% reduction) and then to 28.7 at 4K (a 42% reduction from 1080p). This scaling pattern is steeper than what would be expected from a purely resolution-bound scenario, indicating that the GPU's memory bandwidth and fill rate are being saturated even at Low settings.

At High settings, the drop is even more pronounced: 28.1 FPS at 1080p falls to 24.8 FPS at 1440p (a 12% reduction) and then to 17.4 FPS at 4K (a 38% reduction from 1080p). The relatively small drop from 1080p to 1440p at High settings suggests that the GPU is already hitting a compute ceiling at 1080p, and additional resolution has diminishing impact until the memory bandwidth becomes the binding constraint at 4K. The data consistently shows that the GTX 1650 is the limiting component at every resolution and settings combination, with the i5-11400F's headroom never being fully utilized.