Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i5-12400 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT combination delivers a solid, if not spectacular, experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator, a title known for its demanding simulation workloads. The data shows this pairing handles 1080p and 1440p with high fluidity, but the simulator's appetite for processing power and graphical fidelity becomes apparent at 4K Ultra settings. This analysis breaks down the measured performance to help you decide how to configure the game for your display.

FAQ

Q: Is this combo capable of running Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K?

A: Yes, but with caveats. The measured data shows an average of 42.5 FPS at 4K High settings, which is playable. However, at 4K Ultra, the average drops to 42.4 FPS, indicating that the highest preset is a significant strain.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its direct rivals in general processing power?

A: The i5-12400 has an average benchmark score of 19850, placing it in the 77th percentile of all CPUs. It is effectively tied with the Intel Core i7-9700, which scores 19831 (0.1% difference), and the Intel Core i5-11600K, which scores 19771 (0.4% higher for the 12400).

Q: What is the GPU's performance standing relative to other graphics cards?

A: The RX 6750 XT sits in the 79th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 35327. Its closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 5600M, which scores 35264, a negligible 0.2% difference. The data also shows it trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 by 1.3%.

Q: What is the best preset to use for a balance of visual quality and performance?

A: The data suggests that the "High" preset offers the best balance. At 1440p, it achieves 61.9 FPS, which is a significant jump from the 56 FPS of Ultra. At 1080p, High delivers 74 FPS, which is smoother than the 72.9 FPS seen on Ultra.

Q: Does the 12 GB frame buffer on the GPU provide an advantage in this specific game?

A: The 12 GB GDDR6 memory with a 192-bit bus and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth provides ample memory capacity. The performance scaling from 1080p to 4K suggests that memory size is not the primary bottleneck, as the FPS drop is consistent with the increase in pixel count and rendering load.

Q: Is there a large performance gap between the Low and Ultra presets?

A: Yes, the gap is substantial. At 1080p, the average FPS goes from 125.3 on Low to 72.9 on Ultra, a difference of 52.4 FPS. At 4K, the difference is less dramatic in absolute terms (73.5 FPS vs 42.4 FPS) but still represents a major performance hit.

Settings Recommendations

For most users, the "High" preset is the optimal choice. The measured data shows it provides the most consistent experience across all resolutions. At 1080p, High yields 74 FPS, which is only 1.1 FPS less than Ultra but likely reduces visual noise and GPU load. At 1440p, the difference is more pronounced: High delivers 61.9 FPS while Ultra drops to 56 FPS. This 5.9 FPS gain at High makes a tangible difference in smoothness, particularly in a simulator where camera panning can be frequent.

If you are targeting a solid 60 FPS experience at 1440p, High is the only preset that achieves it without dipping below. The "Medium" preset at 1440p achieves 77.1 FPS, which is also very playable and offers a comfortable buffer. At 4K, the choice becomes more difficult. The High preset (42.5 FPS) and Ultra preset (42.4 FPS) are statistically identical in performance, so choosing High over Ultra saves visual overhead for no measurable frame rate cost. The "Low" preset, while hitting 73.5 FPS at 4K, will significantly degrade the visual experience of the flight sim, making it a poor trade-off.

The data indicates that the "Ultra" preset is only marginally more demanding than "High" in this specific configuration, but it does not provide a frame rate benefit. Therefore, the recommended path is to stick with High for a smooth experience, or drop to Medium if you need a higher frame rate headroom, especially at 1440p or 4K.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is significant and reveals a GPU-bound scenario as resolution increases. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 74 at 1080p to 61.9 at 1440p (an 16.3% decrease) and then to 42.5 at 4K (a further 31.3% decrease from 1440p). This pattern shows the GPU struggling to fill the increased pixel count.

The data for the Low preset tells a similar story. The average FPS at 1080p is 125.3, which drops to 100.9 at 1440p and then to 73.5 at 4K. While these are all playable frame rates, the proportional loss is steep. This indicates that the RX 6750 XT's 13.31 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 166.4 GPixel/s pixel rate are the limiting factors at higher resolutions.

The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is less punishing than from 1440p to 4K, which is typical. However, the fact that the gap between presets (Low vs Ultra) narrows as resolution increases (from a 52.4 FPS gap at 1080p to a 31.1 FPS gap at 4K) suggests that the CPU becomes less of a bottleneck at higher resolutions. At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiting component, as the difference between Medium and Ultra is only 13.4 FPS, showing that the GPU is already saturated.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this specific pairing of the Intel Core i5-12400 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT ranks 884th out of 1795 total combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the middle of the pack, which is a reasonable outcome given that this is a demanding simulation title. The rank reflects the balance between the CPU's 77th percentile and the GPU's 79th percentile standings.

This mid-pack ranking means there are many faster combos, but also many slower ones. The data suggests that this setup is not a top-tier performer for this specific game, but it is by no means a weak one. For a mainstream 6-core CPU paired with a mid-range GPU, the performance is consistent with expectations. The combo's rank is likely influenced by the fact that Microsoft Flight Simulator is heavily reliant on single-thread performance, where the i5-12400's 3dmark single-thread score of 910 is decent but not exceptional, and the GPU's raw fill rate at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is the primary driver of performance at higher resolutions. Its 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus provides a 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is sufficient for the textures and geometry in the simulator. The GPU's boost clock of 2600 MHz and game clock of 2495 MHz are high, indicating its capability to push frames when not limited by other factors.

The benchmarks show the GPU has a Passmark G3D score of 20700 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 107621, placing it in the 79th percentile of all GPUs. However, the measured FPS data indicates that even with this performance, the GPU becomes the bottleneck at 4K. The minimal difference between the High (42.5 FPS) and Ultra (42.4 FPS) presets at 4K underscores this point; the card is already at its limit.

The GPU's 40 ray accelerators (RT cores) and DirectX 12 Ultimate support are features that the game can utilize, but the measured data shows that the raw rasterization performance is what dictates the frame rates. The card's 166.4 GPixel/s pixel rate and 416.0 GTexel/s texture rate are the key specifications that correlate with the measured scaling. In summary, the GPU is a strong mid-range performer, but for this simulator, it requires a resolution compromise to achieve high visual settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo provides a wide range of performance depending on the preset. On Low, it achieves an average of 125.3 FPS, which is exceptionally smooth. Moving to Medium yields 96.5 FPS, still very fluid. The High preset delivers 74 FPS, which is solid for a simulator. The Ultra preset drops to 72.9 FPS, showing that at 1080p, the CPU is likely the limiting factor, as the drop from High to Ultra is minimal.

At 2560x1440, the GPU begins to take on a heavier load. The Low preset averages 100.9 FPS, which is excellent. Medium follows at 77.1 FPS, providing a strong 60+ FPS experience. High maintains a playable 61.9 FPS, but this is the threshold for 60 FPS. The Ultra preset drops to 56 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS target and may introduce noticeable stutter for some users.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the bottleneck. The Low preset is the only one that breaks 60 FPS, with an average of 73.5 FPS. Medium drops to 55.8 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. High and Ultra are virtually identical, at 42.5 FPS and 42.4 FPS, respectively. This indicates that at 4K, the graphical preset has less impact on performance, as the GPU is already saturated. For a 4K experience, you must accept a lower frame rate or compromise with Low settings.