Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator places unusual demands on a system, blending heavy CPU simulation logic with GPU-bound rendering. The data for the Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER reveals a configuration that is surprisingly capable at high resolutions, yet whose behavior shifts dramatically depending on the graphics preset. This analysis breaks down the measured performance, contextualizes the combo's standing among 3,714 tested configurations, and explores the division of labor between the processor and graphics card.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows for this combo show a clear and consistent pattern across all three resolutions: the "Low" preset delivers the highest average frame rates, followed by "Medium," then "High," and finally "Ultra" as the most demanding. At 1080p, the jump from Low to Ultra is substantial, with the average FPS dropping from 262 to 142, a decrease of 120 frames. The gap between Medium and High is also pronounced, with Medium averaging 223 FPS versus High's 189 FPS, suggesting that the High preset introduces a significant rendering load increase over Medium.

For players prioritizing smoothness and high refresh rates, the Low preset is the clear winner, providing 262 FPS at 1080p and 172 FPS at 1440p. However, the data implies that Medium offers a superior balance. At 1080p, Medium still produces 223 FPS, which is 51 FPS higher than High, while likely delivering a more visually detailed cockpit and terrain. The Medium preset also provides the only complete data set with minimum and maximum FPS values, showing a minimum of 190 FPS at 1080p and 124 FPS at 1440p, indicating a stable frame time experience. At 4K, the choice becomes more critical, as even Medium averages 81 FPS, which is playable, but Low pushes to 95 FPS.

The Ultra preset is the most punishing, reducing performance by over half compared to Low at every resolution. At 4K, Ultra averages just 51 FPS, which is below the smooth 60 FPS target. Given that the GTX 1660 SUPER is a 12 nm Turing-generation card with 6 GB of VRAM, the data suggests that Medium is the optimal preset for most users, offering a 223 FPS average at 1080p and 146 FPS at 1440p. It provides a substantial performance cushion over High and Ultra while likely retaining most of the visual fidelity that makes the sim immersive. The lack of min/max data for Low and High at 1080p and 1440p makes a definitive stability comparison impossible, but the Medium preset's measured consistency makes it the recommended starting point.

How This Combo Ranks

In the grand scheme of tested hardware combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this specific pairing of the Intel Core i5-13400F and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER achieves a rank of 71 out of 3,714 combos. This percentile placement, being in the top 2% of all tested systems, is remarkably high and suggests that the combination is well-optimized for this particular title. The rank reflects the synergy between the CPU and GPU, not just their individual strengths.

The CPU itself sits at the 77th percentile when compared to all processors in the database, with an average benchmark score of 25,292. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS, which scores 25,284 (a 0% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H, which scores 25,201 (a 0.4% delta). This indicates the i5-13400F is a strong mid-range performer, but its high rank in this game suggests that Microsoft Flight Simulator is particularly responsive to the CPU's 10 cores and 16 threads.

The GPU, on the other hand, is more modest, ranking at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs with an average score of 12,986. Its closest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (12,940, +0.4%) and the AMD Radeon RX 580 (12,928, +0.4%). The fact that a combo featuring a mid-tier GPU can achieve a top-2% rank in this game is a strong indicator that the title's performance ceiling is heavily influenced by CPU capabilities. The data implies that the i5-13400F is doing the heavy lifting to push this combo to rank 71, leveraging its multi-threaded architecture to feed the simulation engine efficiently.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture using a 12 nm process at TSMC, with a chip designated TU116. It operates with a base clock of 1530 MHz and a boost clock of 1785 MHz. The memory subsystem is a critical component, featuring 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but the 6 GB capacity could become a limiting factor at 4K with higher-resolution textures.

In this game, the GPU's role is to render the complex scenery, aircraft models, and weather effects. The benchmark results show that the GTX 1660 SUPER is capable of handling these tasks at high frame rates when the CPU can keep up. The data shows a clear scaling of FPS with resolution, indicating that the GPU is the primary bottleneck as resolution increases. For example, at Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 223 at 1080p to 146 at 1440p and then to 81 at 4K. This linear degradation points to the GPU's compute and memory bandwidth being saturated at higher pixel counts.

The GPU's compute power is rated at 5.027 TFLOPS for FP32 operations, and its texture rate is 157.1 GTexel/s. These specifications, combined with the 336.0 GB/s bandwidth, allow it to push 142 FPS at 1080p on Ultra settings. However, the transition to 4K Ultra drops the average to 51 FPS, suggesting that the card is reaching its limits in terms of pixel fill rate and memory capacity. The presence of a 192-bit memory bus and 6 GB of VRAM means that at 4K, the card may be swapping textures, which could explain the significant performance hit. The data suggests that for this game, the GTX 1660 SUPER is best utilized at 1080p or 1440p, where it can leverage its bandwidth without being constrained by VRAM.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive look at the combo's performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the performance is exceptionally high. The Low preset achieves an average of 262 FPS, Medium averages 223 FPS (with a minimum of 190 and maximum of 257), High averages 189 FPS, and Ultra averages 142 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 120 FPS, which is substantial. The Medium preset's min/max data shows a 67 FPS range, indicating some frame time variance but still a smooth experience.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages remain high but show a clear step down. Low averages 172 FPS, Medium averages 146 FPS (min 124, max 168), High averages 124 FPS, and Ultra averages 93 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra is 79 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p still provides a very playable 146 FPS average, which is higher than the Ultra preset at 1080p, demonstrating that the resolution scaling is not linear but is heavily influenced by the settings preset.

At 3840x2160, the performance drops significantly. Low averages 95 FPS, Medium averages 81 FPS (min 69, max 93), High averages 68 FPS, and Ultra averages 51 FPS. This is the only resolution where Low falls below 100 FPS, and Ultra dips below 60 FPS. The Medium preset at 4K, with an average of 81 FPS, is still quite usable, but the min FPS of 69 suggests that there can be noticeable dips in complex scenes. The data across all resolutions shows that the combo is most comfortable at 1080p and 1440p, with 4K being viable only on lower presets.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is a critical indicator of system bottleneck behavior. Looking at the Medium preset, the average FPS goes from 223 at 1080p, to 146 at 1440p, and finally to 81 at 4K. This represents a 34.5% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 44.5% drop from 1440p to 4K. This pattern suggests that as resolution increases, the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor.

At 1080p, the CPU is likely the bottleneck, as the GPU can render frames faster than the CPU can process the simulation logic. The high FPS values (262 on Low, 223 on Medium) indicate that the i5-13400F is not holding back the GPU at this resolution. However, as the resolution increases, the GPU's workload grows exponentially due to the increased pixel count, and the GTX 1660 SUPER's 6 GB of VRAM and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth become strained.

The scaling is not uniform across all presets. For the Ultra preset, the FPS drops from 142 at 1080p to 93 at 1440p (a 34.5% drop) and then to 51 at 4K (a 45.2% drop from 1440p). This indicates that Ultra settings are even more GPU-intensive, amplifying the resolution scaling effect. The data implies that at 4K, the GPU is the definitive bottleneck, and the CPU's performance headroom cannot compensate for the GPU's inability to process the increased pixel load. The sim becomes GPU-bound at higher resolutions, meaning the i5-13400F's strong multi-threaded performance is less relevant at 4K, and the GTX 1660 SUPER's limitations are exposed.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 20 MB of L3 cache. This configuration provides strong multi-threaded performance, which is crucial for Microsoft Flight Simulator's complex physics and AI computations.

The CPU's benchmark scores confirm its capability. In Cinebench R23, it achieves a multi-core score of 22,604 and a single-core score of 3,191. In Geekbench, it scores 11,068 multi-core and 1,996 single-core. PassMark results show a multi-thread score of 25,032 and a single-thread score of 3,634. These scores place the CPU at the 77th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 25,292, making it a solid performer for simulation workloads.

In this game, the CPU's role is to handle the flight model, weather simulation, and scenery streaming. The data shows that at 1080p, the CPU is likely the limiting factor, as the FPS values are so high (262 on Low) that the GPU is not being fully utilized. The i5-13400F's 16 threads are well-suited for this game's parallel workloads, allowing it to maintain high frame rates even when the GPU is not the bottleneck. The CPU's 20 MB of shared L3 cache also helps with data locality for the game's large world data.

The combo's rank of 71 out of 3,714 confirms the CPU's strength. Compared to its nearest rivals, the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (delta 0%) and AMD Ryzen 7 6800H (delta 0.4%), the i5-13400F is statistically on par in average benchmark score. This suggests that the CPU is not a weak link in this configuration; rather, it provides the necessary headroom to allow the GTX 1660 SUPER to perform at its best. The data indicates that for this game, the CPU is the primary driver of the high combo rank, while the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

FAQ

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

A: Based on the data, 1920x1080 is the best resolution, as all presets achieve over 142 FPS on average. The Medium preset at 1080p provides an average of 223 FPS with a minimum of 190 FPS, offering a high-refresh-rate experience. At 2560x1440, performance is also strong, with Medium averaging 146 FPS, but 4K is only viable on lower presets.

Q: How does this combo rank against other tested systems in this game?

A: The Intel Core i5-13400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER combination ranks 71st out of 3,714 tested combos. This places it in the top 2% of all configurations, which is exceptionally high. The CPU's 77th percentile ranking among all processors helps explain this strong performance.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the main bottleneck at 4K resolution?

A: The data shows that the GPU is the main bottleneck at 4K. The average FPS drops to 81 on Medium and 51 on Ultra, indicating the GTX 1660 SUPER's 6 GB of VRAM and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for the increased pixel workload. The CPU's performance headroom cannot compensate for the GPU's limitations at this resolution.

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

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 172 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 93 FPS, a difference of 79 FPS. This is a significant drop, indicating that Ultra settings impose a heavy rendering load on the GPU, making Medium (146 FPS) a more balanced choice for maintaining high frame rates.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 SUPER compare to its nearest rivals in terms of benchmark scores?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 12,986, which is similar to its nearest rivals. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 12,940 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Radeon RX 580 scores 12,928 (0.4% higher). This shows the card is a mid-range performer, ranking at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs.

Q: Does the Medium preset provide consistent frame times?

A: The data includes min and max FPS only for the Medium preset at all resolutions. At 1080p, the minimum is 190 FPS and the maximum is 257 FPS, showing a range of 67 FPS. At 1440p, the range is 44 FPS (124 to 168), and at 4K, the range is 24 FPS (69 to 93). While there is some variance, the minimums are still high enough for a smooth experience, especially at 1080p and 1440p.