Microsoft Flight Simulator

Settings Recommendations

The measured frame rates across the four presets reveal a clear hierarchy for Microsoft Flight Simulator on this platform. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers 99.5 FPS, which is a substantial drop from the High preset's 107.1 FPS. However, the most striking observation is the gap between Low and Medium: the Low preset achieves 181.4 FPS, while Medium falls to 141.9 FPS. This 39.5 FPS difference suggests that the Medium preset introduces significant rendering complexity that heavily taxes the GPU. For users prioritizing smoothness, the High preset appears to be the optimal balance, losing only 7.6 FPS compared to Ultra at 1080p while likely providing most of the visual fidelity.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts. High produces 86.2 FPS, while Ultra drops to 80.7 FPS. The delta between High and Ultra narrows to just 5.5 FPS, indicating that at higher resolutions the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and the extra settings in Ultra have diminishing returns. Medium at 1440p delivers 116.7 FPS, which is still comfortably above 60 FPS. The data suggests that High is the recommended preset for 1440p gaming, as it maintains a solid frame rate while preserving visual quality. At 3840x2160, the situation becomes more constrained: High yields 63.1 FPS, while Ultra barely holds at 60.8 FPS. Given that the difference between High and Ultra at 4K is only 2.3 FPS, the High preset is clearly the superior choice, as it offers nearly identical performance while presumably reducing some of the more demanding visual effects.

Across all resolutions, the Low preset provides the highest frame rates but sacrifices the visual immersion that flight simulation enthusiasts typically seek. The data indicates that High offers the best experience per the measured rows, as it consistently stays above 60 FPS even at 4K, while delivering a meaningful improvement over Medium in visual fidelity. For users with high-refresh-rate monitors at 1080p, the Medium preset at 141.9 FPS may be worth considering, as it remains well above the 100 FPS threshold while offering better visuals than Low.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the Intel Core i5-12400 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER achieves a rank of 288 out of 1795 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the top 16% of all tested combos, which is a strong showing for a mid-range processor paired with a high-end GPU. The percentile data reinforces this positioning: the CPU sits at the 77th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU ranks at the 84th percentile among all GPUs. This suggests that the combo is well-balanced, with both components performing above the median.

When examining the CPU's nearest rivals, the i5-12400's average benchmark score of 19850 is remarkably close to its competitors. It edges out the Intel Core i7-9700 by a mere 0.1% (19 points), while trailing the Intel Core i7-8700 by 0.2% (44 points). The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX, a workstation-class processor, is only 0.4% ahead, which is surprising given its vastly different market positioning. The Intel Core i5-11600K is 0.4% behind. This clustering suggests that in this game, CPU performance is not the primary differentiator, and the i5-12400 holds its own against older and even more expensive processors.

For the GPU, the RTX 4070 SUPER's average benchmark score of 42576 places it in a tight race with its rivals. The NVIDIA RTX A6000 is 0.2% ahead, while the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE is 0.3% ahead. The AMD Radeon Pro 580X trails by 1.4%, and the NVIDIA Tesla M40 is 1.6% behind. The fact that a workstation GPU like the RTX A6000 and a professional card like the Radeon Pro 580X are in the same performance band as the RTX 4070 SUPER in synthetic benchmarks, yet the gaming results show strong 4K performance, indicates that the RTX 4070 SUPER's architecture is well-optimized for this specific title.

The combo rank of 288 suggests that while this pairing is capable, there are 287 other combinations that perform better in this game. This is likely due to the CPU's 6-core, 12-thread configuration, which may limit performance in a simulation title that can leverage more parallel processing. However, the rank also indicates that this combo outperforms the vast majority of tested configurations, making it a viable choice for flight simulation enthusiasts.

GPU Role

The RTX 4070 SUPER's 12 GB of GDDR6X memory and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth are critical for handling Microsoft Flight Simulator's large, detailed environments. The game streams vast amounts of terrain and texture data, and the 192-bit memory bus coupled with the high bandwidth ensures that data can be fed to the GPU without becoming a bottleneck. The GPU's 7168 shading units and 224 texture mapping units allow it to process the complex geometry and lighting calculations required for realistic flight visuals.

The clock speeds of 1980 MHz base and 2475 MHz boost are notably high, and the GPU's boost behavior is particularly important in this title. The benchmark data shows that performance scales consistently across resolutions, but the scaling is not linear. At 1080p, the Low preset achieves 181.4 FPS, but this drops to 147.1 FPS at 1440p and 108.5 FPS at 4K. This represents a 40.2% reduction from 1080p to 4K at Low settings. The fact that the GPU can maintain over 100 FPS even at 4K Low settings demonstrates its raw compute power, supported by the 35.48 TFLOPS FP32 performance.

The GPU's ray tracing capabilities, with 56 RT cores, are likely underutilized in this simulator, as the game does not heavily rely on ray-traced effects in its standard settings. However, the 224 tensor cores may contribute to DLSS or other AI-based enhancements if enabled. The memory clock of 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) provides the bandwidth necessary for high-resolution textures, and the pixel rate of 198.0 GPixel/s ensures that the GPU can fill the screen efficiently even at 4K.

The data shows that the GPU becomes the primary limiter at 4K Ultra settings, where the average FPS drops to 60.8. This is just above the 60 FPS threshold, indicating that the GPU is working near its maximum capacity at this setting. The 12 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for this game at these settings, as there is no evidence of memory-related stuttering or performance degradation in the measured results.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 at High settings provides 86.2 FPS, which offers a good balance between visual quality and smoothness. At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers 107.1 FPS, while 3840x2160 High yields 63.1 FPS, making 1440p the recommended resolution for a comfortable experience.

Q: How does the CPU's single-thread performance affect the game?

A: The i5-12400's single-thread benchmark score of 910 in 3dmark and 3456 in Passmark indicates strong per-core performance. Flight simulators often rely on a few heavily loaded threads, and the CPU's 4.40 GHz boost clock helps maintain frame rates, especially at lower resolutions where the CPU is less likely to be the bottleneck.

Q: Is the RTX 4070 SUPER's 12 GB VRAM sufficient for 4K gaming?

A: The measured results show that the GPU achieves 63.1 FPS at 4K High and 60.8 FPS at 4K Ultra. The 12 GB VRAM appears adequate for these settings, as there is no indication of memory-related performance drops in the data.

Q: How does this combo compare to the CPU's nearest rivals in overall performance?

A: The i5-12400's average benchmark score of 19850 is nearly identical to the Intel Core i7-9700 (19831, 0.1% ahead) and the Intel Core i7-8700 (19894, 0.2% behind). This indicates that the CPU's performance is competitive with older high-end processors.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves 147.1 FPS, while the Ultra preset delivers 80.7 FPS. This represents a 66.4 FPS difference, showing that the Ultra preset imposes a significant performance cost at this resolution.

Q: Does the combo maintain 60 FPS at 4K across all settings?

A: Yes, the data shows that even at 4K Low settings, the combo achieves 108.5 FPS, and at 4K Ultra it maintains 60.8 FPS. This suggests that the GPU is capable of handling 4K in this title at all measured presets.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals important insights about the limiting components. At Low settings, the FPS drops from 181.4 at 1080p to 147.1 at 1440p (a 18.9% reduction) and then to 108.5 at 4K (a 26.2% reduction from 1440p). This pattern indicates that the GPU is becoming the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, as the CPU has less impact when the GPU is working harder. The total reduction from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is 40.2%, which is substantial but not as severe as one might expect for a 4x increase in pixel count.

At High settings, the scaling is slightly different: 107.1 FPS at 1080p, 86.2 FPS at 1440p (a 19.5% reduction), and 63.1 FPS at 4K (a 26.8% reduction from 1440p). This shows a similar pattern, with the GPU becoming more dominant at higher resolutions. The total reduction from 1080p to 4K at High is 41.1%, which is nearly identical to the Low setting's reduction. This consistency suggests that the GPU's performance scaling is predictable across different settings.

The most interesting case is at Ultra settings, where the FPS drops from 99.5 at 1080p to 80.7 at 1440p (a 18.9% reduction) and then to 60.8 at 4K (a 24.7% reduction from 1440p). The total reduction from 1080p to 4K at Ultra is 38.9%, which is slightly less than the reductions at Low and High settings. This could indicate that at Ultra settings, the CPU becomes more involved in the rendering pipeline, slightly mitigating the GPU load at lower resolutions.

The data suggests that the GPU is the limiting component at 4K, as the FPS drops are consistent with the increased pixel count. However, the fact that the combo can still maintain over 60 FPS at 4K Ultra suggests that the RTX 4070 SUPER is well-suited for this game. The scaling pattern also implies that users with 1080p monitors will see the highest frame rates, but those with 1440p monitors can still achieve excellent performance without significant compromises.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400 features 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its 18 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support (DDR4 and DDR5) provide adequate bandwidth for most gaming scenarios. The CPU's benchmark scores show a strong single-thread performance of 2249 in Cinebench R23, which is crucial for flight simulators that often have a primary simulation thread. The multi-thread score of 15935 in the same test indicates that the CPU can handle additional background tasks without impacting the main simulation loop.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is likely most pronounced at lower resolutions where the GPU is not fully saturated. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 181.4 FPS, which is the highest measured value across all configurations. This suggests that the CPU's 12 threads are capable of feeding the GPU with enough data to maintain high frame rates. However, the fact that the FPS drops significantly at 4K, even at Low settings (108.5 FPS), indicates that the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

The CPU's 3dmark scores reveal a scaling pattern that is relevant to this game. The single-thread score of 910 and the 2-thread score of 1692 show that the CPU's performance degrades gracefully as more threads are added, with the 16-thread score of 5873 being only 3.5% higher than the 8-thread score of 4745. This suggests that the CPU's performance is heavily dependent on its single-thread capabilities, which aligns with the requirements of flight simulation.

The nearest rival data shows that the i5-12400 is essentially tied with the Intel Core i7-9700 in average benchmark scores, with a delta of 0.1%. This is notable because the i7-9700 has 8 cores and 8 threads, which could be expected to perform better in multi-threaded workloads. However, the i5-12400's newer architecture and higher boost clock allow it to match the older processor. The CPU's 77th percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates that it is a solid mid-range option, but not a top-tier performer.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates provide a comprehensive view of the combo's performance across all resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 181.4 FPS, which is the highest score in the entire dataset. The Medium preset achieves 141.9 FPS, while High reaches 107.1 FPS. The Ultra preset delivers 99.5 FPS, which is only 7.6 FPS lower than High. This suggests that at 1080p, the Ultra preset's additional visual effects have a moderate impact on performance.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves 147.1 FPS, which is a 18.9% reduction from 1080p. The Medium preset delivers 116.7 FPS, while High reaches 86.2 FPS. The Ultra preset produces 80.7 FPS, which is 5.5 FPS lower than High. The gap between High and Ultra narrows at this resolution, indicating that the GPU is becoming more of a limiting factor.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset delivers 108.5 FPS, which is still comfortably above 60 FPS. The Medium preset achieves 81.7 FPS, while High reaches 63.1 FPS. The Ultra preset delivers 60.8 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS threshold. The differences between settings at 4K are less pronounced: the gap between High and Ultra is only 2.3 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is 18.6 FPS.

The data reveals a consistent pattern where the Medium preset provides a significant performance boost over High across all resolutions. At 1080p, the difference is 34.8 FPS (141.9 vs 107.1), at 1440p it is 30.5 FPS (116.7 vs 86.2), and at 4K it is 18.6 FPS (81.7 vs 63.1). This suggests that the High preset introduces a substantial performance cost, likely due to more advanced lighting or shadow effects. For users seeking the best balance of performance and visuals, the Medium preset may offer the most attractive option, especially at higher resolutions where the GPU is already taxed.