Microsoft Flight Simulator

# CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i5-14400F is a 10-core, 16-thread desktop processor built on Intel's Raptor Lake architecture, using a 10 nm process. It runs with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and can boost up to 4.70 GHz, which is a substantial range for handling both lightly-threaded simulation logic and heavily-threaded scenery loading. The chip carries 20 MB of shared L3 cache, with 1.25 MB of L2 per core and 80 KB of L1 per core, providing enough on-die storage to keep flight model calculations and terrain data flowing without constant main-memory stalls.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is pronounced because the sim must continuously update aircraft physics, weather systems, and autopilot logic while also streaming world geometry. The i5-14400F's single-thread performance is strong, as evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3055 and a Geekbench single-core score of 2058. These numbers indicate that the processor can handle the sim's primary thread, which often becomes a bottleneck in flight sims when flying over dense cities or complex weather. The multi-threaded scores — 21,645 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 25,470 in Passmark multithread — show ample headroom for background tasks like scenery indexing or AI traffic, though the sim's frame pacing depends more on the single-thread results.

The processor's 83rd percentile ranking among all CPUs places it comfortably above the median, but its nearest rivals show how tight the competition is. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U averages a benchmark score just 0.1% higher, while the Intel Core i9-11900 is 0.2% ahead, and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS is 0.2% behind. The Intel Core i7-12800H leads by 0.5%. These deltas are within measurement noise, meaning the i5-14400F's practical CPU performance is nearly identical to those mobile and older desktop parts. For a flight sim, this means the CPU will not be the limiting factor in most scenarios, provided the GPU is adequate.

The boost clock of 4.70 GHz is particularly relevant because Microsoft Flight Simulator's frame rate in CPU-bound scenes scales directly with single-core frequency. At 1080p with Low settings (where the GPU load is light), the measured 111 FPS average suggests the CPU is feeding the GPU efficiently without major stalls. The 65 W TDP indicates this is a power-efficient part, which matters for sustained performance in long flights where thermal throttling could otherwise reduce clocks. The chip supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, giving builders flexibility, though the dual-channel memory bus is standard for this class.

# GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture using TSMC's 4 nm process, with a chip named Navi 44. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), which is adequate for 1080p and 1440p gaming but becomes a constraint at higher resolutions and settings in a texture-heavy sim like Microsoft Flight Simulator. The GPU's base clock is 1700 MHz, with a game clock of 2400 MHz and a boost clock of 2990 MHz. The high boost clock is critical for maintaining frame rates in scenes where the GPU is the limiting factor, such as when flying over photogrammetry cities.

The GPU has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, along with 28 ray tracing cores. Its compute throughput is 21.43 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, which is solid for a mid-range card. The pixel rate is 191.4 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 334.9 GTexel/s, indicating the card can push a lot of geometry and textures at 1080p and 1440p. The 4 nm process and 29,700 million transistors on a 199 mm² die suggest efficient power delivery, with a 132 W TDP and a suggested 300 W PSU.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM is a notable limitation. At 4K Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 37, which is below playable thresholds for most users. The 8 GB frame buffer can become saturated when loading high-resolution terrain textures and aircraft models, causing stutters or reduced frame rates. The GPU's 59th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it in the mid-range tier. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, which scores 0.7% higher on average, and the AMD Radeon RX 7700, which scores 1% higher. The AMD Radeon R9 370X is 1% lower, and the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 is 2.1% lower. These tight deltas indicate the RX 9060 is performance-competitive with last-generation mid-range cards, though its newer architecture offers better features like DirectX 12 Ultimate support.

The GPU's RDNA 4.0 architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which are important for modern game engines. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface ensures no bandwidth bottleneck, and the display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a) support high-refresh monitors. For flight sim, the GPU's role is most evident at higher resolutions: the gap between Low and Ultra settings at 4K is 29 FPS (66 vs 37), which shows how much the GPU struggles with the sim's demanding shaders and shadow rendering.

# Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data reveals a clear scaling pattern across resolutions. At 1080p Low, the average is 111 FPS, which drops to 89 FPS at 1440p Low (a 19.8% reduction) and further to 66 FPS at 4K Low (a 40.5% reduction from 1080p). This scaling suggests that at Low settings, the GPU is becoming the limiting factor as resolution increases, but the CPU still has headroom. The 1080p Low result of 111 FPS indicates the CPU can drive high frame rates when the GPU load is minimal.

At Medium settings, the pattern is similar but with lower absolute numbers: 86 FPS at 1080p, 69 FPS at 1440p (a 19.8% drop), and 51 FPS at 4K (a 40.7% drop from 1080p). The consistency of these percentage drops (around 20% from 1080p to 1440p, and another 25% from 1440p to 4K) indicates that the GPU's workload scales predictably with pixel count, and the CPU is not introducing variable overhead at these settings.

High settings show a steeper relative decline: 65 FPS at 1080p, 52 FPS at 1440p (a 20% drop), and 39 FPS at 4K (a 40% drop from 1080p). The absolute FPS at 4K High (39) is just above the threshold for smooth gameplay on a 60 Hz monitor, but it is not comfortable. Ultra settings are the most demanding: 62 FPS at 1080p, 50 FPS at 1440p (a 19.4% drop), and 37 FPS at 4K (a 40.3% drop from 1080p). The 4K Ultra result of 37 FPS is below the 40 FPS threshold that many simmers consider minimum for acceptable control response.

The scaling behavior indicates that the GPU is the primary limiter at 1440p and 4K, especially at High and Ultra settings. The CPU's single-thread performance is sufficient to keep up, as evidenced by the 1080p Low result of 111 FPS, which is well above what most flight sim enthusiasts need. The fact that the FPS drops by roughly 40% from 1080p to 4K across all settings suggests that the frame rate is scaling with the number of pixels rendered, which is a GPU-bound behavior. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the drop would be less severe at higher resolutions because the CPU workload would not increase as much.

# How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core i5-14400F and AMD Radeon RX 9060 ranks 1712 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the 57th percentile of all tested systems. This ranking indicates that this combo performs above the median but is not a top-tier configuration for this specific game. The rank reflects the balance between the CPU's strong single-thread performance and the GPU's mid-range capabilities, which together deliver playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p but struggle at 4K with high settings.

Given that the CPU ranks in the 83rd percentile and the GPU in the 59th percentile, the combo's overall rank is dragged down by the GPU. This is typical for flight sims, where the GPU workload at high resolutions and settings dominates. The combo's rank suggests that users with this pairing should prioritize GPU upgrades if they want higher frame rates at 1440p or 4K, rather than CPU upgrades, since the CPU already has headroom relative to the GPU.

The rank also implies that many other combos tested achieve better frame rates in this sim, likely due to more powerful GPUs. However, the combo still delivers playable performance at 1080p and 1440p across most settings, which is the target resolution for many flight sim enthusiasts. The 1712th rank out of 2996 is a solid mid-pack result, indicating that this pairing is a reasonable choice for users who want a balanced system without spending on top-tier components.

# Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a detailed picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings levels.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 111 FPS average
• Medium: 86 FPS average, with a minimum of 73 FPS and a maximum of 99 FPS
• High: 65 FPS average
• Ultra: 62 FPS average

At 1080p, the combo delivers excellent performance. Low settings exceed 100 FPS, which is smooth even on high-refresh monitors. Medium settings average 86 FPS, with the minimum of 73 FPS still above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. High and Ultra settings hover around 62-65 FPS, which is playable but leaves little headroom for demanding scenes like busy airports or dense clouds. The 3 FPS difference between High and Ultra (65 vs 62) suggests that the Ultra preset adds minimal additional GPU load at this resolution, making it the preferred choice for visual quality without a significant FPS penalty.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 89 FPS average
• Medium: 69 FPS average, with a minimum of 59 FPS and a maximum of 80 FPS
• High: 52 FPS average
• Ultra: 50 FPS average

At 1440p, performance drops noticeably. Low settings still deliver 89 FPS, which is smooth, but the margin shrinks. Medium settings average 69 FPS, with the minimum of 59 FPS dipping below 60 FPS, indicating occasional stutters in demanding scenes. High and Ultra settings average 52 and 50 FPS respectively, which is borderline for a flight sim where smooth frame pacing is important for precise control. The 2 FPS difference between High and Ultra (52 vs 50) suggests the Ultra preset is nearly free at this resolution, but the absolute numbers are low enough that users may want to reduce settings to Medium for a more consistent experience.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 66 FPS average
• Medium: 51 FPS average, with a minimum of 44 FPS and a maximum of 59 FPS
• High: 39 FPS average
• Ultra: 37 FPS average

At 4K, the combo struggles. Low settings average 66 FPS, which is playable but not smooth by modern standards. Medium settings average 51 FPS, with the minimum of 44 FPS indicating noticeable frame drops during complex scenery. High and Ultra settings average 39 and 37 FPS respectively, which is below the 40 FPS threshold that many simmers consider the minimum for acceptable control response. The 4K results clearly show the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and memory bandwidth limitations, as the texture and shading demands of 4K overwhelm the card.

# FAQ

Q: Is this combo better for 1080p or 1440p gaming in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The data shows 1080p is the sweet spot. At 1080p High, the average FPS is 65, while at 1440p High it drops to 52. At 1080p Medium, the average is 86 FPS with a minimum of 73 FPS, whereas 1440p Medium averages 69 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS. The 1080p results are consistently above 60 FPS for all settings except Ultra, which is 62 FPS. At 1440p, only Low settings (89 FPS) and Medium settings (69 FPS) average above 60 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F has an average benchmark score of 32,279. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, scores 32,233 (0.1% higher). The Intel Core i9-11900 scores 32,226 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS scores 32,354 (0.2% lower), and the Intel Core i7-12800H scores 32,121 (0.5% higher). These differences are negligible, meaning the CPU's performance is essentially tied with these parts.

Q: What is the GPU's ranking among all GPUs, and how does it compare to the RTX 3060 Ti?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9060 ranks in the 59th percentile among all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 16,014, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti scores 16,129, which is 0.7% higher. This places the RX 9060 essentially on par with the RTX 3060 Ti in synthetic benchmarks, though game-specific performance can vary.

Q: What is the best settings preset at 1440p for maintaining a 60 FPS average?

A: Based on the measured data, only Low settings (89 FPS average) and Medium settings (69 FPS average) achieve a 60 FPS average at 1440p. High settings average 52 FPS, and Ultra averages 50 FPS. For a smooth experience, Medium is the highest preset that safely exceeds 60 FPS, though its minimum of 59 FPS means occasional dips below 60 FPS in heavy scenes.

Q: How much FPS is lost when going from 1080p Low to 4K Low?

A: The average FPS drops from 111 at 1080p Low to 66 at 4K Low, a reduction of 45 FPS or 40.5%. This significant drop indicates that the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions, even at Low settings, since the CPU workload remains relatively constant across resolutions.

Q: Does the combo rank higher or lower than the median in this game?

A: The combo ranks 1712 out of 2996 tested combos, which places it in the 57th percentile. This is above the median (1498th place would be the exact middle), meaning the combo performs better than most tested systems in Microsoft Flight Simulator. However, it is not a top-tier configuration, and users seeking higher frame rates at 4K would need a more powerful GPU.