Microsoft Flight Simulator

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i5-12400F brings a 6-core, 12-thread configuration based on the Alder Lake-S architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It operates with a 2.50 GHz base clock and a 4.40 GHz boost clock, with 18 MB of shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core. This processor sits in the 73rd percentile among all CPUs tested on this database, suggesting it is a solidly capable mid-range part for flight simulation workloads.

Flight simulators are notoriously sensitive to single-thread performance, and the 12400F's benchmark results reflect a meaningful split between its single-core and multi-core capabilities. In Cinebench R23, it scores 1680 in single-core and 12380 in multi-core — a ratio of roughly 1:7.4, which indicates that while the chip scales well across its six physical cores, the per-core strength is what carries many simulation tasks. The 3DMark results reinforce this: the single-thread score of 909 jumps to 1699 with 2 threads, 3067 with 4 threads, and 4779 with 8 threads, before plateauing at 5912 with max threads. That plateau between 8 threads (4779) and max threads (5912) is telling — it suggests diminishing returns beyond 8 threads, which is typical for titles that rely heavily on a few main simulation threads.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the data shows a distinct pattern: at 1080p Low, the combo achieves 158 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra, it drops to 88 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at the same resolution is 70 FPS, which is substantial. This spread indicates that the CPU is not the sole bottleneck — the graphics load from Ultra settings clearly impacts frame rates. However, the fact that 1080p Low produces 158 FPS while 4K Low produces 94 FPS suggests that even at low graphical settings, resolution scaling still costs performance, pointing to a balance between CPU and GPU demands.

The 12400F's nearest rivals in aggregate CPU benchmarks include the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS with an average score of 19047 (deltaPct 0), the Intel Core 3 201E at 19056 (deltaPct -0.1), the Intel Core i5-1335U at 18982 (deltaPct 0.3), and the AMD EPYC 7773X at 18979 (deltaPct 0.3). These are all within a 0.4% band of the 12400F's average benchmark score of 19039, which places it in a crowded performance tier. For a flight simulator, this means the 12400F is competitive with those alternatives, but none of them dramatically outpaces it in raw compute.

The processor's 65 W TDP and dual-channel memory support for both DDR4 and DDR5 suggest it is an efficient choice for a simulation rig, though the data does not directly measure memory bandwidth impact on this game. The CPU's PCIe Gen 5 support with 20 lanes provides headroom for modern GPUs, which is relevant given the RTX 3080's PCIe 4.0 interface. The 12400F's launch MSRP was $174, and it remains in active production.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Looking at the measured FPS across all settings and resolutions, the data reveals a clear hierarchy. At 1080p, Medium delivers 123 FPS average with a minimum of 104 FPS and maximum of 141 FPS. High at 1080p yields 92 FPS, while Ultra drops to 88 FPS. The jump from Medium to High costs 31 FPS, and from High to Ultra costs only 4 FPS. This is an unusual pattern — typically Ultra is much more demanding than High, but here the difference is small at 1080p.

At 1440p, the story shifts. Medium produces 99 FPS (min 84, max 114), High produces 74 FPS, and Ultra produces 71 FPS. The Medium-to-High gap is 25 FPS, while High-to-Ultra is only 3 FPS. At 4K, Medium averages 73 FPS (min 62, max 84), High averages 55 FPS, and Ultra averages 52 FPS. Again, the High-to-Ultra delta is minimal — just 3 FPS — while Medium-to-High costs 18 FPS.

The data suggests that Medium is the sweet spot for this combo. At every resolution, Medium provides a substantial FPS advantage over High (31 FPS at 1080p, 25 FPS at 1440p, 18 FPS at 4K), while the visual penalty from dropping from High to Medium is presumably less severe than the frame rate gain. The minimum FPS at Medium is also healthy: 104 at 1080p, 84 at 1440p, and 62 at 4K — all above the 60 FPS threshold that flight sim enthusiasts typically target for smooth panning.

Ultra, by contrast, offers almost nothing over High in terms of measured performance — the 3-4 FPS difference is within noise — so there is no reason to select Ultra unless the visual enhancements are deemed worth the tiny frame rate cost. Low settings, while achieving 158 FPS at 1080p, 127 FPS at 1440p, and 94 FPS at 4K, likely strip away too much of the simulator's visual fidelity, which is a core part of the experience.

For the best balance, Medium is the recommendation. It provides frame rates that are 40% higher than High at 1080p (123 vs 92), 34% higher at 1440p (99 vs 74), and 33% higher at 4K (73 vs 55). The minimum FPS at Medium in 4K (62) also clears the 60 FPS bar, which is notable for a simulator known for heavy autogen scenery and weather rendering.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured data shows a consistent FPS decline as resolution increases, but the rate of decline varies by settings preset. At Low settings, the drop from 1080p (158 FPS) to 1440p (127 FPS) is 31 FPS (a 20% reduction), and from 1440p to 4K (94 FPS) is another 33 FPS (a 26% reduction). The total decline from 1080p to 4K at Low is 64 FPS, or a 41% loss.

At Medium settings, 1080p yields 123 FPS, 1440p yields 99 FPS (a 24 FPS drop, 20% reduction), and 4K yields 73 FPS (a 26 FPS drop, 26% reduction). The total loss is 50 FPS, or 41%. At High settings, 1080p produces 92 FPS, 1440p produces 74 FPS (18 FPS drop, 20% reduction), and 4K produces 55 FPS (19 FPS drop, 26% reduction). Total loss is 37 FPS, or 40%. At Ultra, 1080p gives 88 FPS, 1440p gives 71 FPS (17 FPS drop, 19% reduction), and 4K gives 52 FPS (19 FPS drop, 27% reduction). Total loss is 36 FPS, or 41%.

The consistency is striking: regardless of settings, the resolution scaling penalty is nearly identical in percentage terms — approximately 20% from 1080p to 1440p, and approximately 26% from 1440p to 4K, with a total of roughly 41% from 1080p to 4K. This uniformity suggests that the limiting component is scaling linearly with pixel count, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to remain flat across resolutions at low settings, since the CPU workload is resolution-independent. Instead, even at Low settings, 4K produces 94 FPS versus 158 FPS at 1080p — a massive 64 FPS gap that can only be explained by the GPU's rendering load.

The RTX 3080's 10 GB of GDDR6X memory and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth are likely being pushed hard at 4K, especially with the simulator's terrain streaming. The fact that the FPS drop from 1440p to 4K is larger than from 1080p to 1440p (in absolute terms at Medium: 26 vs 24 FPS) aligns with the pixel count increase: 4K has 2.25x the pixels of 1440p, while 1440p has 1.78x the pixels of 1080p. The data shows the GPU is the primary limiter as resolution climbs.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific pairing of the Intel Core i5-12400F with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 ranks 1036 out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places it in the 72nd percentile of all combinations tested — meaning roughly 28% of combos perform better, and 72% perform worse. For a mid-range CPU paired with a high-end GPU from the previous generation, this ranking is respectable but not elite.

The rank of 1036 out of 3714 suggests that there is substantial headroom in the database for faster combinations, likely involving newer CPUs with higher single-thread scores or GPUs with more VRAM and bandwidth. The 12400F's 73rd percentile among all CPUs and the RTX 3080's 68th percentile among all GPUs are both above average, but neither is top-tier. The combo's in-game rank being slightly lower than the individual component percentiles (72nd vs 73rd and 68th) hints that the pairing may not extract the full potential of either part in this specific title.

Flight simulators often reward both high single-thread CPU performance and high GPU memory bandwidth. The RTX 3080's 760.3 GB/s bandwidth is substantial, but its 10 GB VRAM capacity may be a limiting factor at 4K Ultra, where texture streaming can exceed that allocation. The 12400F's single-thread score of 1680 in Cinebench R23 is decent, but CPUs with scores above 2000 would likely push higher FPS in CPU-bound scenarios like 1080p Low.

Given that the combo achieves 158 FPS at 1080p Low, the CPU is clearly capable of driving high frame rates in lighter loads. But at 4K Ultra, the 52 FPS average suggests the GPU is saturated. The ranking indicates this is a well-balanced mid-to-high-end combo, though not one that dominates the leaderboard.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is built on the Ampere architecture with a GA102 chip fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process. It packs 28,300 million transistors across a 628 mm² die, with 8704 shading units, 272 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units. The GPU operates at a 1440 MHz base clock and 1710 MHz boost clock, with memory running at 1188 MHz (19 Gbps effective). Its 10 GB of GDDR6X memory sits on a 320-bit bus, yielding 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's role is clearly evident from the resolution scaling data discussed earlier. The near-uniform 41% FPS loss from 1080p to 4K across all settings presets is a classic GPU-bound signature. The RTX 3080's 68th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 23172, places it above the median but not at the top. Its nearest rivals in aggregate GPU benchmarks are the NVIDIA P106-100 (avg score 23249, deltaPct -0.3), AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23250, -0.3), AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23273, -0.4), and AMD Radeon R9 M290X (23276, -0.4). All of these are within 0.4% of the RTX 3080's score, which is remarkable given that the R9 M290X is a much older part.

The 10 GB VRAM capacity is a potential concern for a flight simulator that streams vast amounts of terrain and photogrammetry data. At 4K Ultra, the combo manages 52 FPS, and the minimum FPS is not recorded for that row, which may indicate variability. The GPU's 320 W TDP and suggested 700 W PSU are significant, but the data does not measure power consumption during gameplay. The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) is relevant, as Microsoft Flight Simulator leverages DX12 features, though the measured data does not break down which API features are active.

The RTX 3080's boost clock of 1710 MHz and 29.77 TFLOPS FP32 performance are high-end figures, but the 4K Ultra result of 52 FPS suggests that the simulator's rendering demands are immense. The texture rate of 465.1 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 164.2 GPixel/s provide theoretical ceilings that the game likely approaches at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The complete measured FPS dataset for this combo spans three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the results are: Low averages 158 FPS, Medium averages 123 FPS (with a minimum of 104 and maximum of 141), High averages 92 FPS, and Ultra averages 88 FPS. The minimum and maximum FPS are only recorded for Medium settings across all resolutions, which limits the analysis of frame time consistency for other presets.

At 2560x1440, the results show: Low averages 127 FPS, Medium averages 99 FPS (minimum 84, maximum 114), High averages 74 FPS, and Ultra averages 71 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p maintains a minimum above 60 FPS, which is a key threshold for smooth simulation.

At 3840x2160, the results are: Low averages 94 FPS, Medium averages 73 FPS (minimum 62, maximum 84), High averages 55 FPS, and Ultra averages 52 FPS. The Medium preset at 4K is the only one that keeps the minimum FPS at or above 60 — just barely at 62. High and Ultra both fall below 60 FPS on average, which would likely result in noticeable stutter during dense scenery.

The Medium preset stands out as the only settings level with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values at every resolution. This might indicate that Medium is the "reference" preset for stability testing. The spread between minimum and maximum at Medium is 37 FPS at 1080p (104 to 141), 30 FPS at 1440p (84 to 114), and 22 FPS at 4K (62 to 84). The narrowing spread at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU becomes more consistently loaded, reducing frame time variance.

Across all presets, the pattern is that Low is significantly faster than Medium (35 FPS at 1080p, 28 FPS at 1440p, 21 FPS at 4K), while Ultra is only slightly slower than High (4 FPS at 1080p, 3 FPS at 1440p, 3 FPS at 4K). The diminishing returns between High and Ultra are consistent, while the step from Low to Medium is the largest single jump in performance cost.

FAQ

Q: What is the best settings preset for this CPU-GPU combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: Medium provides the best balance, with 123 FPS at 1080p, 99 FPS at 1440p, and 73 FPS at 4K, all with minimum FPS above 60 (104, 84, and 62 respectively). Ultra offers only 3-4 FPS less than High, making High unnecessary.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K?

A: The loss is approximately 41% regardless of settings preset. At Low, FPS drops from 158 to 94; at Medium, from 123 to 73; at High, from 92 to 55; at Ultra, from 88 to 52. This uniform percentage indicates a GPU-bound workload.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: The data indicates the GPU still plays a significant role even at 1080p. The FPS spread between Low (158) and Ultra (88) at 1080p is 70 FPS, showing that graphical settings heavily impact performance. However, the CPU is capable of driving 158 FPS, so it is not the primary bottleneck at low settings.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to all tested combinations?

A: This combo ranks 1036 out of 3714 tested combos, placing it in the 72nd percentile. The CPU sits in the 73rd percentile among all CPUs, and the GPU sits in the 68th percentile among all GPUs.

Q: What is the VRAM capacity of the RTX 3080 and does it matter for this game?

A: The RTX 3080 has 10 GB of GDDR6X memory with 760.3 GB/s bandwidth. At 4K Ultra, the combo averages 52 FPS, which may indicate VRAM pressure during heavy terrain streaming, though the data does not directly measure VRAM usage.

Q: What are the minimum FPS values for Medium settings at each resolution?

A: At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 104 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the minimum is 84 FPS. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 62 FPS. Minimum FPS data is only available for Medium settings in the measured results.