Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is one of the most demanding titles in the benchmark database, and the pairing of the Intel Core i5-13400F with the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT produces a system that is firmly capable of smooth flight, but requires careful attention to settings to avoid dipping below playable thresholds. The data shows a combo that scales predictably with resolution and preset, with the CPU providing a solid foundation and the GPU becoming the primary bottleneck at higher fidelity settings. The overall ranking of 966 out of 1795 tested combos places this system in the upper-middle tier, indicating a balanced but not exceptional configuration for this specific simulation.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. In the context of Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for heavy single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads, this CPU’s performance profile is a key factor. Benchmark results show a 3DMark single-thread score of 960, which is modest, but the multi-threaded scores are considerably stronger, with a 3DMark max-threads score of 7307 and a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21279. This suggests the processor can handle the complex physics and AI calculations of the simulator when multiple cores are engaged.

The CPU’s 20 MB of shared L3 cache and support for DDR4 and DDR5 memory provide a robust data pipeline for the game’s extensive world streaming. Compared to its nearest rivals, the i5-13400F’s average benchmark score of 25236 is nearly identical to the Intel Core i7-13620H (0.1% difference) and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (-0.5% difference). This means that in CPU-bound scenarios, the i5-13400F will perform on par with these alternatives, but the data indicates it is not a standout performer in synthetic tests. In practical terms for this game, the CPU appears sufficient to feed the GPU at lower resolutions and settings, but at higher settings, the load shifts to the graphics card, as evidenced by the FPS scaling.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is a RDNA 2.0 architecture GPU with 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s. Its base clock is 2321 MHz, with a game clock of 2424 MHz and a boost clock of 2581 MHz. The 12 GB VRAM is a significant asset for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which loads vast textures and terrain data; this capacity helps prevent stuttering when flying over detailed scenery. The GPU’s FP32 performance of 13.21 TFLOPS and a pixel rate of 165.2 GPixel/s indicate a capable mid-range card that can handle the simulator’s rendering demands.

The RX 6700 XT’s average benchmark score of 33721 places it slightly below the AMD Radeon RX 6800 (0.7% slower) and just above the NVIDIA RTX A5000 (1.3% faster). The data shows that this GPU is the limiting factor in this combo, especially at 4K resolution. For instance, at 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 36.3, which is below the typical 60 FPS target. The GPU’s 40 ray accelerators and DirectX 12 Ultimate support are present, but the simulation’s heavy use of traditional rasterization and CPU-bound draw calls means the raw compute and memory bandwidth are more critical than ray tracing capabilities.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and consistent scaling pattern across resolutions. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves an average of 123 FPS, which drops to 98.1 FPS at 1440p Low and 70.8 FPS at 4K Low. This indicates that at Low settings, the system is still partially CPU-bound at 1080p, but the GPU load increases proportionally with resolution. At High settings, the averages are 73.9 FPS at 1080p, 54.3 FPS at 1440p, and 43 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings is approximately 42%, showing a significant GPU dependency.

The most telling data comes from the Ultra preset. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 66.6 FPS, which is playable. At 1440p Ultra, it falls to 56.8 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it plummets to 36.3 FPS. This scaling suggests that the RX 6700 XT’s 12 GB VRAM and 384.0 GB/s bandwidth are being saturated at 4K Ultra, causing a severe frame rate drop. The data strongly indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting component at higher resolutions and settings; the CPU’s performance is sufficient to maintain frame rates above 60 FPS at 1080p Low, but the GPU cannot sustain those levels as pixel count and texture detail increase.

FAQ

Q: Is this combo capable of 4K gaming in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: Yes, but only at lower settings. The data shows an average of 70.8 FPS at 4K Low, which is playable, but at 4K High and Ultra, the averages drop to 43 FPS and 36.3 FPS, respectively, which may feel choppy.

Q: What is the best resolution for a smooth 60 FPS experience?

A: At 1080p, all presets except Ultra (66.6 FPS) are above 60 FPS, with Low hitting 123 FPS and Medium at 95 FPS. At 1440p, only the Low preset (98.1 FPS) is comfortably above 60 FPS, while Medium (74.2 FPS) is also playable.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals?

A: The i5-13400F’s average benchmark score of 25236 is within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D and 0.1% of the Intel Core i7-13620H, indicating near-identical synthetic performance.

Q: Does the GPU have enough VRAM for this game?

A: The 12 GB of GDDR6 memory appears sufficient, as the frame rates do not indicate a memory capacity bottleneck, but the 384.0 GB/s bandwidth may be a limiting factor at 4K Ultra.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Medium and High at 1440p?

A: At 1440p, the average FPS drops from 74.2 on Medium to 54.3 on High, a difference of 19.9 FPS, showing a significant performance cost for the higher preset.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the bottleneck for this combo?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher settings, as FPS drops steeply with resolution increases, while the CPU’s synthetic scores are competitive with rivals.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-13400F and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT combination ranks 966 out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the 54th percentile, meaning it outperforms slightly more than half of all tested systems. This ranking is consistent with the hardware’s specifications: the CPU is a solid mid-range part (82nd percentile vs all CPUs), and the GPU is also mid-range (77th percentile vs all GPUs). The combo does not feature any top-tier components, so its ranking reflects a balanced but not high-end setup.

In practical terms, this ranking means the combo will provide a decent experience at 1080p with high settings, but users seeking 4K Ultra will be disappointed. The data shows that the combo’s performance is more dependent on the GPU than the CPU, as the FPS scales almost linearly with resolution. Compared to other combos in the database, this system is not optimized for maximum frame rates but rather for a stable, mid-range experience. The rank suggests that there are many more powerful configurations, but also many weaker ones, making this a typical mainstream gaming PC for this simulation.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the combo’s performance across all settings and resolutions.

At 1920x1080:

• Low: 123 FPS average
• Medium: 95 FPS average
• High: 73.9 FPS average
• Ultra: 66.6 FPS average

At 2560x1440:

• Low: 98.1 FPS average
• Medium: 74.2 FPS average
• High: 54.3 FPS average
• Ultra: 56.8 FPS average

At 3840x2160:

• Low: 70.8 FPS average
• Medium: 56.5 FPS average
• High: 43 FPS average
• Ultra: 36.3 FPS average

The data reveals an anomaly at 1440p Ultra (56.8 FPS) versus 1440p High (54.3 FPS), where the Ultra preset is actually faster. This is unusual and suggests a possible driver or optimization quirk, but it does indicate that Ultra settings at 1440p are not significantly more demanding than High. Overall, the trend is clear: 1080p is the sweet spot, with all presets except Ultra above 70 FPS. 1440p is playable on Low and Medium, but High and Ultra fall below 60 FPS. 4K is only viable on Low, with Medium dipping below 60 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience for this combo depends on the user’s priority for visual fidelity versus frame rate. For a smooth, high-refresh-rate experience, the 1080p Low preset delivers an exceptional 123 FPS, making it ideal for competitive or fast-paced flying. However, for a balance of visuals and performance, the 1080p Medium preset at 95 FPS is the best choice, offering a significant improvement in texture and shadow quality without sacrificing smoothness.

For users with 1440p monitors, the Medium preset at 74.2 FPS is the recommended setting, as it provides a playable frame rate while maintaining a good level of detail. The High and Ultra presets at 1440p are not recommended, as they fall below 60 FPS, which can detract from the immersive experience of the simulator. At 4K, only the Low preset (70.8 FPS) is recommended for playable performance; all other settings will result in sub-60 FPS averages, which is not ideal for a simulation that relies on smooth camera movements.

The data suggests that the Ultra preset offers marginal visual gains over High in this game, but with a significant performance cost. Therefore, the best experience per the measured rows is to use the Medium preset at 1440p or 1080p, as it provides the highest frame rates while still enabling the game’s core visual features. Users should avoid 4K Ultra unless they are willing to accept an average of 36.3 FPS.