Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 delivers a remarkably consistent experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator, with the data showing that the Ultra preset is not only playable but often the optimal choice for visual fidelity. While the High preset offers a slight framerate advantage, the performance gap is frequently negligible, making Ultra the recommended setting for most users seeking the best experience per the measured rows.

Settings Recommendations

The benchmark results indicate that the Ultra preset provides the most compelling balance of visual quality and performance across all three tested resolutions. At 1920x1080, the combo achieves 125.7 FPS on Ultra, which is only 3.1% lower than the 129.8 FPS recorded on High. This marginal difference is imperceptible in practice, yet Ultra delivers significantly enhanced graphical details—better shadows, more intricate terrain textures, and improved lighting effects that are central to the flight simulation experience.

Moving to 2560x1440, the pattern holds. Ultra produces 101.3 FPS, while High reaches 101.8 FPS. The delta is a mere 0.5%, effectively placing the two presets at parity. Given that the framerate is virtually identical, there is no reason to sacrifice the visual richness of Ultra. At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset drops to 72.7 FPS, which remains comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, while High manages 73.5 FPS. Again, the 1.1% difference justifies selecting Ultra.

The Medium preset, while offering higher framerates—173.9 FPS at 1080p, 139.5 FPS at 1440p, and 102 FPS at 4K—represents a substantial downgrade in visual fidelity. The data suggests that this preset is best reserved for users with high-refresh-rate displays who prioritize raw framerate over graphical immersion. The Low preset, with 190.4 FPS at 1080p, is only relevant for competitive or analytical scenarios, as the visual compromise is severe for a game that thrives on atmospheric detail.

For the vast majority of users, the Ultra preset is the clear recommendation. It delivers smooth, playable framerates at every resolution while maximizing the game's visual potential. The data shows no scenario where High offers a meaningful performance advantage over Ultra, making the higher settings preset the logical default.

How This Combo Ranks

The Core i5-13400F and RTX 5080 combination holds a strong position in the broader benchmark database, ranking 77th out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the system in the top 4.3% of all configurations evaluated, proof of the balance between the CPU's processing power and the GPU's rendering capability.

The CPU itself sits at the 82nd percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 25236. Its nearest rivals in raw CPU performance include the Intel Core i7-13620H, which scores 25201 (a delta of just 0.1%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D at 25365 (a delta of -0.5%). This indicates that the i5-13400F is well-matched with CPUs that typically command a higher price or platform cost, underscoring its efficiency in this specific gaming workload.

On the GPU side, the RTX 5080 achieves an average benchmark score of 59188, placing it in the 89th percentile of all graphics cards. Its nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks are the Intel Arc A580 (57756, 2.5% lower), the Intel Arc A570M (58239, 1.6% lower), and the Intel Arc Pro A60 (60326, 1.9% higher). While these comparisons are based on generic workloads rather than flight simulation specifically, they illustrate the RTX 5080's position near the top of the performance hierarchy.

The combination's rank of 77 out of 1795 suggests that in Microsoft Flight Simulator, this pairing punches above its individual component percentiles. The game is known for being particularly sensitive to both CPU single-thread performance and GPU rasterization throughput, and the data indicates that the i5-13400F's strong single-core scores (3004 in Cinebench R23) complement the RTX 5080's massive fill-rate capabilities effectively.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 plays a dominant role in determining the framerate outcomes in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The GPU features 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is critical for the game's streaming-heavy workloads, which load high-resolution terrain and aircraft models on the fly.

The GPU's clock speeds are notably high, with a base clock of 2295 MHz and a boost clock of 2617 MHz. This allows the 10752 shading units to operate at peak efficiency, pushing a theoretical FP32 throughput of 56.28 TFLOPS. The 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores provide additional headroom for future updates that may leverage ray tracing or DLSS technologies, though the current measured data does not include such features.

The memory bandwidth of 960.0 GB/s is particularly relevant at higher resolutions. As the framerate data shows, the transition from 1440p to 4K results in a significant performance drop across all settings, indicating that the GPU's memory subsystem and pixel fill rate (293.1 GPixel/s) are the primary constraints. The GPU's 112 ROPs and 336 TMUs ensure that texture filtering and pixel output keep pace with the raw shader throughput.

The RTX 5080's percentile ranking of 89 among all GPUs, coupled with an average benchmark score of 59188, confirms that it is a top-tier part. In the context of this game, the data shows that the GPU is the scaling factor when moving between presets—the CPU can feed it adequately, but the GPU's workload dictates the final framerate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the RTX 5080 demonstrates overwhelming capability. The Low preset yields 190.4 FPS, while Medium reaches 173.9 FPS. High achieves 129.8 FPS, and Ultra settles at 125.7 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 34% reduction in framerate, but even the lowest Ultra figure is more than double the refresh rate of standard 60 Hz monitors.

The 2560x1440 results follow a similar pattern with reduced headroom. Low produces 175.7 FPS, Medium drops to 139.5 FPS, High manages 101.8 FPS, and Ultra achieves 101.3 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at this resolution is effectively nonexistent (0.5%), suggesting that the GPU is hitting a performance ceiling where additional settings have diminishing returns.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's workload becomes substantial. Low still delivers a smooth 129.9 FPS, and Medium remains playable at 102 FPS. However, High drops to 73.5 FPS, and Ultra falls to 72.7 FPS. These figures, while lower, are still within the range of what most users would consider acceptable for a slow-paced simulation game where precise control inputs matter more than twitch reflexes.

The data reveals a notable anomaly: at 1440p, the High and Ultra presets produce nearly identical framerates (101.8 vs 101.3 FPS), whereas at 1080p, there is a 3.1% gap (129.8 vs 125.7 FPS). This suggests that at 1440p, the GPU is becoming pixel-bound, and the extra settings in Ultra do not add enough additional work to impact performance.

Resolution Scaling

The framerate scaling from 1080p to 4K provides clear insight into the limiting component of this system. At the Low preset, the average FPS drops from 190.4 at 1080p to 129.9 at 4K, a reduction of 31.8%. At Medium, the drop is from 173.9 to 102 FPS, a 41.3% reduction. High goes from 129.8 to 73.5 FPS, a 43.4% reduction, and Ultra follows a similar trajectory with 125.7 down to 72.7 FPS, a 42.2% reduction.

These scaling patterns are consistent with a GPU-bound scenario. The theoretical pixel count increases by a factor of 4 when moving from 1080p to 4K, but the framerate does not drop to one-quarter of the original value. This indicates that the CPU is providing a baseline level of performance that remains constant, while the GPU's workload scales with resolution.

The fact that the percentage drop is larger at higher presets (43.4% for High versus 31.8% for Low) suggests that the GPU is the primary constraint. At Low settings, the CPU may be limiting the framerate at 1080p, but as resolution increases, the GPU becomes more dominant. The i5-13400F, with its 10 cores and 16 threads, provides ample single-thread performance (3004 in Cinebench R23) to keep up with the GPU's demands.

The data points to the RTX 5080 as the definitive bottleneck at 4K. The 16 GB of GDDR7 memory and 960.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient, but the raw pixel throughput at 3840x2160 imposes a hard limit. Users seeking higher framerates at 4K would need to reduce settings or employ resolution scaling techniques, though the measured Ultra performance of 72.7 FPS is already respectable for a simulation title.