Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i5-11400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti combination delivers a playable, if not consistently smooth, experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator, with performance scaling that clearly identifies the GPU as the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. The data shows a predictable pattern: as resolution increases, the frame rate drops substantially, and the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows, which is the classic signature of a system shifting from CPU-bound at 1080p to GPU-bound at 4K.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals how the workload transforms across resolutions. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 103 FPS, indicating a scenario where the CPU is doing the heavy lifting, as the GPU has plenty of headroom. Moving to 1440p at the same Low preset, the average drops to 81.9 FPS, a significant 21.1 FPS decrease. At 4K Low, the frame rate falls further to 58.4 FPS. This scaling shows that even at the lowest graphical settings, the increased pixel count begins to strain the RTX 3060 Ti.

The pattern becomes more pronounced when examining High settings. At 1080p High, the average is 58.4 FPS. At 1440p High, it drops to 49.7 FPS, and at 4K High, it plummets to 31.8 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings is a 26.6 FPS loss, which is a 45.5% reduction. This steep decline strongly indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The RTX 3060 Ti, with its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, is being saturated by the demands of 4K rendering in this simulator.

The data also shows that the performance gap between Low and Ultra settings shrinks as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low (103 FPS) and Ultra (55.3 FPS) is 47.7 FPS. At 1440p, the gap narrows to 37.9 FPS (81.9 vs 44). At 4K, the difference is only 25.8 FPS (58.4 vs 32.6). This compression of the settings range at higher resolutions is a clear indicator that the GPU is becoming the bottleneck; the extra work from higher settings cannot be fully realized because the pixel throughput is already maxed out. The system is fundamentally GPU-limited at 4K.

How This Combo Ranks

In the grand scheme of tested hardware combinations, this pairing sits in the lower-middle tier. The comboRankInGame places it at 1282 out of 1795 tested combos, putting it in the 71st percentile of all systems. This ranking is not surprising given that the RTX 3060 Ti is an older, mid-range GPU, while the i5-11400F is also a previous-generation CPU. The data suggests that while this combo is capable, it is far from the top performers in a game as demanding as Microsoft Flight Simulator.

The CPU’s own benchmark data supports its position as a mid-range part. Its avgBenchmarkScore is 17181, placing it in the 75th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U (avgScore 17189, deltaPct 0), the Intel Core i7-1260P (avgScore 17212, deltaPct -0.2), and the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U (avgScore 17215, deltaPct -0.2). These deltas are minuscule, indicating that the i5-11400F performs nearly identically to these mobile and low-power chips in synthetic benchmarks. This suggests that the desktop i5’s performance is on par with more recent efficient parts, but it does not offer any significant advantage.

The GPU’s ranking is similar. Its avgBenchmarkScore is 25120, placing it in the 69th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6700M (avgScore 25180, deltaPct -0.2), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 (avgScore 25235, deltaPct -0.5), and the AMD Radeon 890M (avgScore 25246, deltaPct -0.5). The tiny deltaPct values mean that the RTX 3060 Ti is statistically tied with these alternatives, showing that it is a solid, average performer. The overall combo rank of 1282 reflects the sum of these two mid-pack parts, resulting in a system that is capable but not exceptional for this specific title.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti is the decisive component in this pairing for Microsoft Flight Simulator. Its specifications—8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth—are adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but they become a limiting factor at 4K. The boost clock of 1665 MHz and base clock of 1410 MHz are standard for the Ampere generation, and the 4864 shading units provide the raw compute power.

The benchmark results indicate that the GPU’s memory bandwidth is a critical constraint. The 4K High and Ultra results (31.8 and 32.6 FPS, respectively) are nearly identical, with only a 0.8 FPS difference. This suggests that the GPU is not limited by the complexity of the scene at these settings, but rather by the sheer volume of data it must process. The 448.0 GB/s bandwidth is simply not enough to feed the render pipeline at 4K with high-detail textures and effects.

The GPU’s performance in synthetic tests, such as the passmark_g3d score of 20349, places it in the 69th percentile of all GPUs. This is a solid, mid-range score. However, in a simulation like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for its heavy draw calls and complex scenery, the GPU’s ability to maintain consistent frame times is more important than raw pixel fill rate. The data shows that the GPU can deliver 103 FPS at 1080p Low, but this is likely a scenario where the CPU is the limiting factor. The GPU’s role becomes dominant as resolution climbs, where it struggles to maintain playable frame rates.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience balances visual fidelity with playable frame rates. For a standard 60 FPS target, the 1080p Medium preset is the clear choice, delivering 77.2 FPS. This provides a significant improvement over High (58.4 FPS) and Ultra (55.3 FPS) while still offering a richer visual experience than Low (103 FPS). The Medium preset hits the sweet spot for smooth gameplay.

At 1440p, the situation is more complex. The High preset yields 49.7 FPS, which is below a 60 FPS target, while Medium delivers 63.9 FPS. The data suggests that 1440p Medium is the most sensible option for a playable experience. The Ultra preset at 1440p drops to 44 FPS, which may be acceptable for a flight simulator where precision is more important than fast-paced action, but it is not ideal. The Low preset at 1440p (81.9 FPS) is smooth but sacrifices too much visual detail for a game that is about scenery and immersion.

At 4K, the data paints a grim picture. The best option is the Low preset at 58.4 FPS, which is just shy of a 60 FPS target. The Medium preset at 45.3 FPS and High at 31.8 FPS are playable but feel sluggish. The Ultra preset at 32.6 FPS is the worst option, offering no advantage over High. For 4K, the recommendation is to stick with Low settings to maintain a semblance of smoothness, or to consider lowering the resolution to 1440p for a better balance of quality and performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The exact measured averages provide a detailed picture of performance across all tested configurations.

At 1920x1080, the system achieves its highest frame rates. Low settings produce an average of 103 FPS, Medium drops to 77.2 FPS, High yields 58.4 FPS, and Ultra falls to 55.3 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is a 25.8 FPS drop, while the step from Medium to High is a 18.8 FPS drop. The step from High to Ultra is minimal, only 3.1 FPS, suggesting that Ultra provides little benefit over High at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the averages are lower across the board. Low produces 81.9 FPS, Medium drops to 63.9 FPS, High yields 49.7 FPS, and Ultra falls to 44 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 37.9 FPS, showing a wider spread than at 1080p. The step from High to Ultra is 5.7 FPS, which is still a modest gain.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles. Low produces 58.4 FPS, Medium drops to 45.3 FPS, High yields 31.8 FPS, and Ultra falls to 32.6 FPS. Notably, Ultra is actually faster than High by 0.8 FPS, which is within the margin of error and indicates that both are equally GPU-bound. The step from Low to Medium is a 13.1 FPS drop, and the step from Medium to High is a 13.5 FPS drop, showing a consistent decline as settings increase.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the Rocket Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its 12 MB of shared L3 cache is sufficient for gaming, but its benchmark scores suggest it is not a high-end part. The 3dmark_max_threads score of 5652 and the cinebench_r23_multicore score of 14372 are respectable for a 6-core chip.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU’s role is to handle the simulation logic and draw calls. The data suggests that at 1080p Low, the CPU is the primary bottleneck, as the GPU has headroom to render more frames. The 103 FPS result is likely limited by the CPU’s single-threaded performance, which is reflected in the 3dmark_single_thread score of 868. This score is average, and the game’s engine is known to be sensitive to single-core performance.

However, as resolution increases, the CPU’s workload does not scale with the pixel count, while the GPU’s does. The result is that at 1440p and 4K, the CPU is no longer the limiting factor. The i5-11400F’s performance is sufficient to feed the RTX 3060 Ti at these resolutions, as evidenced by the consistent frame rate drops that align with GPU load. The CPU’s avgBenchmarkScore of 17181 and its 75th percentile ranking indicate that it is a capable mid-range processor that does not hold back the GPU in this game, except at the lowest resolution and settings. The 65 W TDP and dual-channel DDR4 memory support are standard, and the processor’s performance is in line with its nearest rivals, showing no significant advantage or disadvantage.