Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti ranks 1581 out of 1795 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the configuration in the lower 12th percentile of all tested systems, indicating that while it is capable of running the simulation, it sits firmly in the lower tier of performance for this specific title. The ranking reflects a system that will require careful settings management to achieve a smooth experience, as the data shows it is far from the top performers but not entirely at the bottom of the spectrum.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 1581 out of 1795 demonstrates that the majority of tested configurations outperform this pairing in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The position is heavily influenced by the GPU’s age and tier, as the simulation is known to be demanding on graphics hardware. With an average benchmark score of 13925, the GTX 1660 Ti sits in the 55th percentile of all GPUs, which is a mid-range position overall, but the game’s specific requirements push this combo lower in the relative standings. The CPU, in contrast, performs much better in general benchmarks, with an average score of 25236 and an 82nd percentile ranking against all CPUs, suggesting the processor is not the primary bottleneck holding the combo back. Instead, the data points to the graphics card as the limiting factor, particularly at higher resolutions and settings where the GPU’s memory and bandwidth constraints become more apparent.

GPU Role

The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is built on the Turing architecture with a TU116 chip, manufactured on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It features 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1500 MHz with a boost clock of 1770 MHz, and its memory runs at 1500 MHz or 12 Gbps effective. These specifications place the card in a lower-midrange tier, and its performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator reflects this. The card’s 55th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 13925, shows it is a modest performer. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 570X, which scores 0.4 percent higher, and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile, which scores 0.8 percent higher, indicating the GTX 1660 Ti is competitive with similar-tier products but not substantially ahead of any of them. The 6 GB VRAM capacity is a critical factor in this game, as the simulation’s high-resolution textures and complex scenery can easily pressure this limit, leading to reduced frame rates at higher settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable decline as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 76 FPS at 1080p to 62 FPS at 1440p, a 18 percent reduction, and then further to 45 FPS at 4K, which is a 41 percent reduction from the 1440p figure. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU becomes increasingly stressed at higher resolutions, as the rendering load grows with each pixel. At High settings, the drop is steeper: from 46 FPS at 1080p to 35.1 FPS at 1440p, a 24 percent decrease, and then to 26 FPS at 4K, a 26 percent decrease from 1440p. This non-linear scaling suggests that at 4K, the system is hitting a performance wall, likely due to the combination of the GPU’s limited memory bandwidth and the increased pixel count. The data strongly implies that the GPU is the limiting component at 1440p and 4K, as the CPU’s strong benchmark scores cannot compensate for the graphics card’s inability to process the higher resolution workloads efficiently.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the GTX 1660 Ti delivers playable frame rates across all settings. Low settings produce an average of 76 FPS, which is smooth and well above the threshold for comfortable play. Medium settings yield 60.7 FPS, maintaining a solid experience, while High settings drop to 46 FPS, which is still acceptable but starts to show strain. Ultra settings produce 46.5 FPS, nearly identical to High, suggesting that the extra graphical features at Ultra do not significantly impact performance at this resolution, but the frame rate remains moderate. Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates decline noticeably. Low settings average 62 FPS, which remains smooth, but Medium drops to 48.8 FPS, High to 35.1 FPS, and Ultra to 36.1 FPS. The jump from 1080p to 1440p at High settings represents a 24 percent loss, indicating the GPU is working harder to fill the additional pixels. At 3840x2160, performance becomes marginal. Low settings average 45 FPS, which is playable but not ideal, while Medium averages 34.4 FPS, High averages 26 FPS, and Ultra averages 25.8 FPS. These 4K figures show that the combo is not suited for high-fidelity play at this resolution, as even Low settings struggle to maintain a stable 45 FPS, and higher settings fall below 30 FPS, which is generally considered the minimum for a playable experience in a flight simulator.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal experience for this combo is at 1920x1080 with Medium settings, which provides an average of 60.7 FPS. This strikes a balance between visual fidelity and smoothness, offering a frame rate that is well above the 30 FPS threshold while still benefiting from medium-level graphical details. For users who prioritize higher visual quality, High settings at 1080p yield 46 FPS, which is playable but with noticeable compromises in smoothness. Ultra settings at 1080p offer 46.5 FPS, essentially identical to High, so there is no performance penalty for choosing Ultra, but the visual gains may be minimal given the GPU’s limitations. At 1440p, Low settings at 62 FPS is the only option that provides a smooth experience, as Medium drops to 48.8 FPS and High falls to 35.1 FPS, which may be too low for some users. At 4K, the data suggests that the combo is not viable for this game, as even Low settings average only 45 FPS, and any higher settings drop below 35 FPS. The recommendation is to stick to 1080p for the best balance, with Medium as the default and High as an option for those who prefer visuals over frame rate.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor from 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, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU features a large 20 MB shared L3 cache and supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. Its benchmark scores are strong, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 21279 and a single-core score of 3004, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs. The processor’s nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-13620H, scores within 0.1 percent, showing the i5-13400F is highly competitive in general computing tasks. However, in Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU’s role is secondary to the GPU, as the data shows that frame rates scale primarily with resolution and settings, not with CPU load. The CPU’s 16 threads are more than sufficient for the simulation’s threading model, and its high single-core performance ensures that the main simulation loop is not a bottleneck. The benchmark results indicate that the i5-13400F is overqualified for this GPU pairing, as the GTX 1660 Ti holds back the system’s overall performance. This is evident in the 4K results, where even at Low settings, the frame rate drops to 45 FPS, a figure that would be higher if the GPU could keep up with the CPU’s capabilities. In summary, the CPU provides a solid foundation, but the combo’s ranking is ultimately determined by the graphics card’s limitations.