Microsoft Flight Simulator

The benchmark data for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the Intel Core i5-12400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti reveals a configuration that is heavily constrained by its graphics processor. The measured frame rates across all resolutions and settings indicate that this pairing, while functionally capable of running the simulator, is positioned near the very bottom of the performance hierarchy for this title, ranking 1793 out of 1795 tested combinations. The data shows a system where playable performance is limited to the lowest settings at 1080p, with any increase in graphical fidelity or resolution resulting in a rapid and severe drop in frame rate.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling behavior of this configuration is stark, with frame rates falling dramatically as pixel count increases. At 1080p with Low settings, the average frame rate is 38.9 FPS, which drops to 32.9 FPS at 1440p and further to 23.5 FPS at 4K. This represents a 15.4% decrease from 1080p to 1440p and a 39.6% decrease from 1080p to 4K, demonstrating that the GPU is struggling to maintain performance as the rendering load increases.

The pattern becomes more pronounced at higher settings. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 23.8 FPS at 1080p to 15.8 FPS at 1440p, a 33.6% reduction, and then to 13.7 FPS at 4K, a further 13.3% reduction from 1440p. This non-linear scaling suggests that the GPU is not simply bandwidth-limited but is hitting compute and fill-rate limits that compound with resolution. The transition from Medium to High settings at 1440p shows a drop from 26 FPS to 15.8 FPS, a 39.2% reduction, while the same settings change at 4K results in a drop from 15.7 FPS to 13.7 FPS, a smaller 12.7% reduction, indicating that at 4K the system is already so constrained that further increases in workload have diminishing relative impact.

The data clearly indicates that the limiting component is the GPU. The GTX 1050 Ti, with a benchmark percentile of only 30 among all GPUs, has an average score of 5316, placing it in the company of mobile and entry-level parts like the NVIDIA GeForce 930A and 940M. The frame rate collapse at 4K, where even Low settings only achieve 23.5 FPS, suggests that the GPU's 112.1 GB/s memory bandwidth and 2.138 TFLOPS of FP32 performance are insufficient for the demands of high-resolution flight simulation.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400F provides a solid foundation for this configuration, with a percentile rank of 77 among all CPUs and an average benchmark score of 19221. This places it in close competition with the Intel Core i7-8700K, which scores 19210, a delta of only 0.1%, and ahead of the Intel Core i5-1335U by 0.3%. The CPU's performance is consistent across different threaded workloads, with 3DMark scores scaling from 909 in single-thread to 5912 in max-thread tests, and Cinebench R23 results showing 2332 in single-core and 16518 in multi-core.

The CPU configuration of 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz, is well-suited for a flight simulator that relies heavily on single-threaded performance for game logic and physics. The single-thread benchmark results, such as the Geekbench single-core score of 2221 and Passmark single-thread score of 3481, indicate that the CPU has ample headroom. The CPU's L3 cache of 18 MB shared across all cores provides adequate capacity for the simulator's scenery and aircraft data.

Despite the CPU's capability, the benchmark results show that it does not become the bottleneck until the GPU is overwhelmed. At 1080p Low settings, the 38.9 FPS average suggests the CPU is feeding frames efficiently, but as settings increase, the GPU's limitations become the dominant factor. The CPU's performance relative to its rivals, particularly the 0.1% delta against the i7-8700K, indicates that this processor is not the limiting factor in this configuration. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 5895 and max-thread score of 5912 show a near-linear scaling, confirming that the CPU's six performance cores are being fully utilized.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is unequivocally the performance bottleneck in this system. With a percentile rank of only 30 among all GPUs and an average benchmark score of 5316, it sits in the bottom tier of graphics hardware. The nearest rivals, including the NVIDIA GeForce 930A with a score of 5317 (0% delta) and the AMD Radeon R7 240 with a score of 5280 (0.7% delta), are all entry-level or mobile parts. The GPU's Pascal architecture, built on a 14 nm process, provides 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with a boost clock of 1392 MHz.

The GPU's memory configuration is particularly limiting for Microsoft Flight Simulator. The 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s, which is insufficient for the high-resolution textures and streaming scenery that the simulator demands. The Passmark G3D score of 6340 and DirectX 12 score of 26 indicate that the GPU's compute capabilities are adequate for basic rendering but lack the headroom for advanced effects. The FP32 performance of 2.138 TFLOPS is less than a third of what modern mid-range GPUs offer, explaining the severe frame rate drops at higher settings.

The measured FPS data confirms the GPU's limitations. At 4K Ultra settings, the average frame rate is 11.3 FPS, which is nearly unplayable, while even 1080p Ultra only achieves 19.3 FPS. The GPU's direct competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce 940M, scores 5297 on average, a 0.4% delta, and would likely perform similarly in this title. The GTX 1050 Ti's launch MSRP of 139 USD places it in the entry-level segment, but the benchmark data shows that it is outclassed by the demands of this simulator, particularly at resolutions above 1080p.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this configuration?

A: The data shows that 1080p Low settings provide the highest average frame rate at 38.9 FPS. This is the only combination that approaches playable performance, as 1080p Medium drops to 28.9 FPS and 1440p Low falls to 32.9 FPS.

Q: How does this CPU compare to its nearest rivals in performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-12400F has an average benchmark score of 19221, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i7-8700K (19210) and 0.3% higher than the Intel Core i5-1335U (19167). It trails the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS by 0.7%.

Q: Is this GPU suitable for 4K gaming?

A: The benchmark results indicate no. At 4K Low settings, the average frame rate is 23.5 FPS, which drops to 11.3 FPS at Ultra settings. The GPU's average benchmark score of 5316 places it in the 30th percentile, making it unsuitable for 4K in this title.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings achieve 38.9 FPS while Ultra settings achieve 19.3 FPS, representing a 50.4% reduction in average frame rate. Medium settings fall in between at 28.9 FPS.

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

A: The GTX 1050 Ti scores 5316 on average, which is essentially identical to the NVIDIA GeForce 930A (5317, 0% delta) and 0.4% higher than the GeForce 940M (5297). It is 0.7% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 240 (5280).

Q: What does the combo rank in game indicate about this system?

A: The combination of the i5-12400F and GTX 1050 Ti ranks 1793 out of 1795 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the bottom 0.1% of tested systems for this specific title.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data shows a consistent pattern of performance degradation as both resolution and settings increase. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates range from 38.9 FPS at Low settings to 19.3 FPS at Ultra. The step from Low to Medium at this resolution results in a drop from 38.9 to 28.9 FPS, a 25.7% reduction. The step from Medium to High brings a further decline to 23.8 FPS, a 17.6% reduction, and High to Ultra drops to 19.3 FPS, another 18.9% reduction.

At 2560x1440, the performance envelope tightens significantly. Low settings achieve 32.9 FPS, which is 15.4% lower than the same settings at 1080p. Medium settings drop to 26 FPS, a 21% reduction from Low. High settings fall to 15.8 FPS, a 39.2% reduction from Medium, and Ultra bottoms out at 19 FPS, which is actually higher than High due to the non-linear scaling of the workload. This anomaly suggests that at 1440p, the transition from High to Ultra may be hitting a different bottleneck, possibly related to memory allocation.

At 3840x2160, the system is severely constrained. Low settings achieve 23.5 FPS, Medium drops to 15.7 FPS, High falls to 13.7 FPS, and Ultra reaches only 11.3 FPS. The differences between settings at 4K are compressed, with only a 12.7% reduction from High to Ultra, indicating that the GPU is operating at its absolute limit. The overall range of performance across all tested configurations spans from 11.3 FPS at 4K Ultra to 38.9 FPS at 1080p Low, showing that this system is only viable for low-fidelity, low-resolution flight simulation.