Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER occupies the 413th position out of 3,714 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the pairing in the top 11.1% of all recorded configurations, a strong result that reflects a balanced high-end setup capable of handling the simulator’s demands without obvious bottlenecks in either direction.

How This Combo Ranks

The comboRankInGame value of 413 out of 3,714 tested combos puts this system firmly in the upper echelon of the database. The data shows that this pairing outperforms roughly 89% of all configurations tested, which is an impressive position for a mid-range CPU paired with a high-end GPU. The rank indicates that the combination is well-suited to Microsoft Flight Simulator’s specific workload, where both CPU and GPU resources are heavily taxed depending on the scenario. The i5-13400F’s 10 cores and 16 threads provide enough parallel processing power for the simulator’s complex flight models and scenery generation, while the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER’s 16 GB of GDDR6X memory ensures that texture streaming at high resolutions does not become a limiting factor. The ranking suggests that users with this setup will enjoy a smooth experience at most settings, though the data also reveals where the compromises begin to appear as settings and resolution scale upward.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture using a 5 nm process at TSMC, featuring the AD103 chip with 45,900 million transistors. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2340 MHz and boosts to 2610 MHz, with memory running at 1313 MHz for 21 Gbps effective speed. The 16 GB of GDDR6X memory sits on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 672.3 GB/s, which is substantial for a flight simulator that streams high-resolution terrain and aircraft textures. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the data indicates that the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions. At 4K with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 64, while at 1080p Ultra the average is 108 FPS, showing a clear scaling pattern tied to pixel throughput. The GPU’s 66 RT cores and 264 tensor cores contribute to the simulator’s rendering pipeline, though the game’s reliance on traditional rasterization means the standard shader performance is more relevant. The 8448 shading units and 96 ROPs deliver a pixel rate of 250.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 689.0 GTexel/s, which the benchmark results show are sufficient to push high frame rates at lower resolutions but struggle to maintain 60 FPS at 4K Ultra. The data reveals that while the GPU is powerful, Microsoft Flight Simulator’s immense draw distances and detailed scenery require more raw throughput than this card can provide at the highest settings in 4K.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern of diminishing returns as resolution increases, which indicates the GPU is the dominant constraint at higher pixel counts. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 192 at 1080p to 157 at 1440p and then to 116 at 4K, representing a 39.6% reduction from 1080p to 4K. This scaling suggests that even at Low settings, the GPU is heavily taxed by the pixel output, as the CPU has sufficient headroom to feed the graphics card at lower resolutions. At Medium settings, the averages drop from 151 at 1080p to 122 at 1440p and 90 at 4K, with the 4K figure showing a 40.4% decrease from 1080p. The High settings row follows a similar trajectory: 114 at 1080p, 92 at 1440p, and 68 at 4K, a 40.4% drop from the lowest to highest resolution. Ultra settings show the most dramatic scaling, with 108 at 1080p, 87 at 1440p, and 64 at 4K, a 40.7% reduction. The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings strongly indicates that the GPU is the limiting component throughout the resolution range, as the CPU’s performance does not degrade with resolution. The data suggests that users targeting 4K will need to accept either lower settings or frame rates in the 60-90 FPS range, while 1440p offers a more comfortable balance with averages above 87 FPS even at Ultra.

Measured FPS Breakdown

Starting with 1920x1080, the data shows that this combo delivers excellent performance across all settings. At Low settings, the average FPS reaches 192, which is well beyond the refresh rate of most monitors and indicates the CPU is not holding back the GPU. Medium settings produce an average of 151 FPS with a minimum of 129 and maximum of 174, providing a smooth experience with plenty of headroom. High settings yield 114 FPS average, while Ultra drops to 108 FPS, still comfortably above 60 FPS for a fluid simulation. Moving to 2560x1440, the averages decrease but remain strong: Low settings produce 157 FPS, Medium yields 122 FPS with a minimum of 104 and maximum of 140, High reaches 92 FPS, and Ultra holds at 87 FPS. The 1440p numbers show that this combo can handle the popular resolution with ease, even at Ultra settings, which is a significant achievement for a flight simulator known for being demanding. At 3840x2160, the data reveals the limits of this pairing. Low settings average 116 FPS, Medium averages 90 FPS with a minimum of 77 and maximum of 104, High drops to 68 FPS, and Ultra falls to 64 FPS. The 4K Ultra figure is marginally above 60 FPS, which is acceptable for a simulator but leaves little headroom for complex scenes with heavy cloud coverage or dense urban areas. The minimum FPS recorded at 4K Medium is 77, which suggests that even at lower settings, the frame times remain consistent without severe stutters. The data overall indicates that 1440p is the sweet spot for this combo, offering high frame rates at all settings while maintaining visual fidelity.

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 features a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, with a 20 MB shared L3 cache. The CPU’s benchmark results show strong multi-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22604 and a Passmark multithread score of 25032. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU’s role is critical for handling the game’s simulation logic, AI traffic, and physics calculations, which are heavily single-thread dependent. The single-core performance, indicated by a 3dmark single-thread score of 960 and a Geekbench single-core score of 1996, is sufficient to maintain high frame rates at lower resolutions where the GPU is not the bottleneck. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the combo achieves 192 FPS, which is likely near the CPU’s limit for this game, as the GPU has ample headroom at this resolution. The CPU’s 16 threads provide enough parallel capacity for the simulator’s background tasks, such as scenery loading and weather simulation, without causing frame drops. The processor’s percentileVsAllCpus of 77 indicates it outperforms 77% of all CPUs in the database, placing it in the upper tier for gaming. The nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS with a deltaPct of 0, the Intel Core 5 120 at -0.3, and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D at -0.3, showing that the i5-13400F sits in a competitive performance band. For this game, the CPU is not the limiting factor at higher resolutions, as evidenced by the consistent FPS drops when moving from 1080p to 4K, which is a GPU-bound behavior. However, at 1080p with lower settings, the CPU’s single-thread performance becomes more relevant, and the data suggests it holds up well without introducing stutters.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience depends on the user’s display resolution and preference for frame rate versus visual quality. For 1080p displays, the Ultra preset delivers an average of 108 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold and provides the best visual fidelity without compromising smoothness. The High preset at 114 FPS offers a marginal improvement in frame rate but with slightly reduced visual quality, making Ultra the better choice for most users with 1080p monitors. For 1440p, the Ultra preset at 87 FPS is the recommended choice, as it provides a high level of detail while maintaining frame rates that are smooth and responsive. The High preset at 92 FPS is nearly identical in performance, so users should opt for Ultra to maximize the simulator’s visual experience. For 4K, the data shows that Ultra averages 64 FPS, which is close to the 60 FPS target but may dip below in complex scenes. The High preset at 68 FPS offers a slightly higher average with a similar visual impact, making it the safer choice for 4K users who prioritize stability over the extra detail from Ultra. The Medium preset at 90 FPS is also a viable option for 4K users who want to ensure frame rates stay well above 60 FPS, especially when flying over dense scenery or during weather-heavy conditions. The minimum FPS recorded for Medium at 4K is 77, which indicates that this preset provides the most consistent frame pacing. For users with high-refresh-rate 1440p monitors, the Medium preset at 122 FPS with a minimum of 104 FPS offers the best balance of smoothness and visual quality, as it stays above 100 FPS throughout. Ultimately, the data suggests that this combo is best utilized at 1440p with Ultra settings, where it delivers a superior experience without requiring compromises. At 4K, users should choose High or Medium settings to maintain consistent frame rates, while 1080p users can enjoy Ultra without any concerns about performance.