Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i5-12400 and AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX combination places 221st out of 1,795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, positioning it in the top 12.3% of all configurations. This is a strong result for a pairing that mixes a mid-range 12th Gen processor with a flagship RDNA 3 graphics card, and the data confirms the GPU is doing most of the heavy lifting in this flight simulator. The rank reflects a system that can handle the game’s demanding visual workload, though the CPU occasionally steps in as a limiting factor at lower resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The 221st rank out of 1,795 combos places this system firmly in the upper tier of tested configurations, ahead of roughly 87.7% of all pairings. This is an impressive standing for a setup that does not include a top-tier enthusiast CPU, and it shows that the RX 7900 XTX’s raw power can overcome the i5-12400’s more modest specifications in most scenarios. The percentile data supports this, with the GPU sitting at the 85th percentile among all graphics cards, while the CPU trails at the 77th percentile. The gap between these two percentiles explains why the combo performs better at higher resolutions, where the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck, and slightly worse at 1080p where the CPU’s limitations are more exposed. In the context of the full database, this rank means the system delivers a consistently playable experience across the board, but it does not threaten the top-tier configurations that pair flagship CPUs with this same GPU.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400 provides 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, built on the Alder Lake architecture using a 10 nm process. This processor’s single-thread performance is its key asset for Microsoft Flight Simulator, a title that relies heavily on single-core throughput for its simulation logic. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,249 and the 3DMark single-thread score of 910 indicate solid capability, though the CPU’s overall average benchmark score of 19,850 places it just 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-9700 and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i5-11600K, with a negligible 0.2% deficit to the Intel Core i7-8700. These close margins mean the i5-12400 is competitive with older and similarly positioned processors, but it lacks the headroom of a higher-end chip. In this game, the CPU’s 18 MB of shared L3 cache helps with texture streaming and terrain data, but its 6-core, 12-thread configuration is sufficient rather than exceptional. The 65W TDP and dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory support are standard, and the processor’s multi-threaded scores, such as the 15,935 in Cinebench R23, show it can handle background tasks, but the single-thread results are what drive the frame rate in this simulation.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX is the dominant component in this pairing, featuring the Navi 31 chip on a 5 nm process with 57,700 million transistors and 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, offering 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its boost clock of 2,498 MHz and game clock of 2,365 MHz, combined with 6,144 shading units, deliver a massive 61.39 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. This GPU sits at the 85th percentile among all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 44,019 that puts it just 0.8% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile and 1.6% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro M6000, while trailing the AMD Radeon Pro 580 by 0.4% and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti by 2%. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU’s 24 GB of VRAM is more than enough for the highest texture packs and photogrammetry data, and the high memory bandwidth ensures that terrain streaming does not cause stutters. The card’s 96 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support are relevant for the game’s advanced lighting effects, though the benchmark results show that raw rasterization power is what drives the measured frame rates. The GPU’s 192 ROPs and 959.2 GTexel/s texture rate are critical for filling the screen with detailed cockpit instruments and dense urban environments, making it the clear performance leader in this combo.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combination delivers an average of 184.7 FPS on Low settings, which drops to 150.9 FPS on Medium, 113.9 FPS on High, and 104.8 FPS on Ultra. These numbers show a wide spread across settings, with the Low preset nearly doubling the Ultra performance, indicating that the CPU is not the primary constraint at this resolution. Moving to 2560x1440, the averages fall to 152 FPS on Low, 121.9 FPS on Medium, 89.7 FPS on High, and 84.3 FPS on Ultra. The 1440p results are still highly playable, and the gap between Low and Ultra narrows slightly, suggesting the GPU is beginning to take on more of the workload. At 3840x2160, the averages decrease further to 111.4 FPS on Low, 88.6 FPS on Medium, 67.4 FPS on High, and 62.9 FPS on Ultra. The 4K Ultra result remains above the 60 FPS threshold, which is a strong showing for a flight simulator known for its heavy load. Across all resolutions, the frame rate drops are consistent and predictable, with each settings tier reducing performance by roughly 20-30 FPS, depending on the resolution. The Low settings at 1080p produce the highest average of the entire set, while the Ultra settings at 4K produce the lowest, and the data shows no anomalies or unexpected bottlenecks.

Resolution Scaling

The scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a clear trend: the frame rate drops by approximately 39.7% when moving from 1080p Low to 4K Low, and by 40.0% when moving from 1080p Ultra to 4K Ultra. Specifically, the Low preset falls from 184.7 FPS to 111.4 FPS, a difference of 73.3 FPS, while the Ultra preset falls from 104.8 FPS to 62.9 FPS, a difference of 41.9 FPS. This pattern indicates that the GPU becomes increasingly the limiting component as resolution rises, which is expected given the RX 7900 XTX’s massive compute capacity. At 1080p, the CPU’s single-thread performance can hold the system back, particularly at Low settings where the GPU is not fully utilized, but the 184.7 FPS result shows it is not a severe constraint. At 1440p, the system hits a balance, with the GPU handling the extra pixel load while the CPU keeps up with the simulation logic, resulting in frame rates that are still well above 60 FPS on all settings. At 4K, the GPU takes full control, and the differences between settings become more pronounced, with Low at 111.4 FPS and Ultra at 62.9 FPS. The scaling from 1440p to 4K shows a 26.7% drop on Low, 27.3% on Medium, 24.9% on High, and 25.4% on Ultra, which is a tighter range than the 1080p to 4K jump, confirming that the GPU’s memory bandwidth and pixel rate are the decisive factors at higher resolutions. The data suggests that users targeting 4K Ultra will see playable performance, while those at 1080p can push frame rates well beyond 100 FPS, making this combo versatile across display configurations.