Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a uniquely demanding title, and the pairing of the Intel Core i5-9400 with the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT produces a specific performance profile that is heavily dictated by settings and resolution. The data indicates a system that can deliver playable frame rates at lower settings but struggles to maintain smoothness at the highest visual presets, particularly at 4K. This analysis breaks down the measured results to explain where the bottleneck lies and what you can expect from this combination.

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

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor based on the Coffee Lake architecture. It operates at a base clock of 2.90 GHz and can boost up to 4.10 GHz. This is a fixed configuration with no unlocked multiplier, meaning overclocking is off the table. The processor has 9 MB of shared L3 cache and supports dual-channel DDR4 memory, which is standard for its generation. In the broader context of all CPUs, it sits at the 47th percentile, indicating it is a mid-range performer. Its average benchmark score of 2254 places it in close competition with chips like the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (which scores 2259, a 0.2% difference) and the Intel Core i3-10305 (which scores 2264, a 0.4% difference). This suggests that for raw computational power, the i5-9400 is a solid, if unremarkable, contender.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is primarily to handle the complex flight models, physics, and the vast amount of world data streaming. The 6-core/6-thread design is adequate, but the data suggests it can become a limiting factor, especially at lower resolutions where the GPU has more headroom to produce frames quickly. The benchmark results show a clear pattern: at 1080p, the frame rates are high (98 FPS on Low), but they scale down as the resolution increases. This is typical of a system where the CPU is helping to push high frame rates at 1080p, but the GPU takes over as the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. The lack of hyper-threading means that in heavily populated areas or with complex aircraft, the CPU might struggle to keep up, leading to potential stutters, though this is not directly measured in the provided data. The processor's performance is consistent with its nearest rivals, indicating that swapping it for a similar-tier chip would yield negligible differences in this game's average frame rates.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is built on the RDNA 1.0 architecture with the Navi 10 chip, manufactured on a 7nm process. It comes with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. The GPU's base clock is 1605 MHz, with a game clock of 1755 MHz and a boost clock of 1905 MHz. This card ranks in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 16361. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M (scoring 16351, a 0.1% difference) and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell (scoring 16408, a 0.3% difference). This places the 5700 XT in a performance class where it is essentially on par with those cards, despite their different market segments.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's 8 GB of VRAM is a critical factor. The game is known for its high-resolution textures of terrain and aircraft. The measured results show that at 4K Ultra, the average frame rate drops to 33 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is heavily taxed. The memory bandwidth and the 2560 shading units are working hard to render the dense scenery. The difference between 1080p Low (98 FPS) and 4K Ultra (33 FPS) is a 65 FPS drop, which is substantial. This indicates that the GPU is the dominant bottleneck at higher resolutions and settings. The card's performance is solid for 1080p and 1440p gaming at medium to high settings, but it cannot maintain a smooth 60 FPS at 4K with high or ultra presets. When comparing to its rivals, the performance deltas are so small (all within 0.9%) that any of these cards would produce nearly identical results in this game.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K with high settings?

A: The data shows an average of 34 FPS at 3840x2160 with High settings. This is below the 60 FPS threshold typically desired for a smooth experience, so while it is playable, it will not be a fluid experience, and you may need to lower settings or resolution to improve frame rates.

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU and GPU pairing?

A: The most consistent performance is seen at 1920x1080 and 2560x1440. At 1080p, you can achieve 77 FPS on Medium and 98 FPS on Low. At 1440p, the Medium setting yields 62 FPS, which is a good balance of visual quality and performance. The 4K results are generally below 60 FPS for all settings except Low (59 FPS).

Q: How does the RX 5700 XT compare to its closest rivals in this game?

A: The RX 5700 XT's average benchmark score is 16361. This is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M (16351, a 0.1% difference) and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell (16408, a 0.3% difference). In practical terms, you would not notice a performance difference between these cards in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the main bottleneck for this system?

A: The bottleneck shifts depending on the resolution. At 1080p, the CPU is likely more of a factor, as the GPU can push high frame rates (98 FPS on Low). As you increase the resolution to 1440p and 4K, the GPU becomes the clear limiting component, as evidenced by the significant frame rate drops (e.g., from 58 FPS at 1080p High to 34 FPS at 4K High).

Q: What is the impact of the CPU's core count on the results?

A: The i5-9400 has 6 cores and 6 threads. While this is sufficient for the game, it does not have the extra threads of a hyper-threaded CPU. The data does not show a direct correlation between core count and FPS, but the CPU's overall performance percentile (47th) suggests it is a mid-range part that can handle the game's simulation tasks, but may not be ideal for maximum frame rates at low resolutions.

Q: What settings provide the best experience at 1440p?

A: The Medium preset at 2560x1440 yields an average of 62 FPS, with a minimum of 52 FPS and a maximum of 71 FPS. This is the only setting at 1440p that maintains an average above 60 FPS. High (46 FPS) and Ultra (44 FPS) are playable but will have more noticeable frame drops.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-9400 and AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT combination ranks 2745 out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This puts it in the lower 26th percentile of all pairings, meaning that roughly three-quarters of the other tested combinations perform better in this game. This is not a surprising result, as Microsoft Flight Simulator is one of the most demanding titles on the market, and this hardware is a generation old.

The rank indicates that while this system can run the game, it is not a high-performance setup by current standards. Many other CPU and GPU pairings will achieve higher frame rates, especially at higher resolutions and settings. The 5700 XT's performance class is competitive with its immediate rivals, but the overall combo rank is held back by the game's immense requirements. For a builder, this means that this particular combo is suited for playing the game at medium settings and 1080p or 1440p, but it is not a top-tier configuration for this specific title. The data confirms that it is a functional, mid-range option, but users looking for 4K Ultra experiences would need to look at more powerful components.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and expected trend: as resolution increases, average frame rates decrease. The system's performance at 1920x1080 is the strongest, with an average of 77 FPS on Medium settings. Moving to 2560x1440, the average on Medium drops to 62 FPS, a 15 FPS decrease. At 3840x2160, the average on Medium falls to 46 FPS, another 16 FPS decrease. This pattern is consistent across all settings. For instance, on High settings, the frame rates go from 58 FPS at 1080p, to 46 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 34 FPS at 4K.

This scaling behavior is a classic indicator of a GPU-bound system at higher resolutions. The CPU's workload does not increase proportionally with the number of pixels, but the GPU's does. The RX 5700 XT's compute units and memory bandwidth are simply overwhelmed by the sheer number of pixels at 4K. The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K on Low settings is 39 FPS (from 98 to 59), which is significant. This suggests that even on the lowest settings, the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K. The data strongly implies that for a smoother experience at 4K, you would need to drastically reduce settings or lower the resolution, as the CPU is not the primary constraint in this resolution range.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at the system's performance across different resolutions and settings.

At 1920x1080, the system performs well. The Low setting yields an average of 98 FPS, which is very smooth. The Medium setting results in an average of 77 FPS, with a minimum of 65 FPS and a maximum of 88 FPS, indicating a stable experience. The High setting drops to an average of 58 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS target. The Ultra setting produces an average of 55 FPS, making it playable but not ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors.

At 2560x1440, performance takes a noticeable hit. The Low setting produces an average of 79 FPS, which is still good. The Medium setting results in an average of 62 FPS, with a minimum of 52 FPS and a maximum of 71 FPS, making it the best balance at this resolution. The High setting lowers the average to 46 FPS, and the Ultra setting brings it down to 44 FPS. These numbers suggest that for a consistent 60 FPS experience at 1440p, you should stick to Medium settings.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain high frame rates. The Low setting is the only one to approach 60 FPS, with an average of 59 FPS. The Medium setting yields an average of 46 FPS, with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 52 FPS. The High setting drops to an average of 34 FPS, and the Ultra setting falls to 33 FPS. These results clearly show that 4K gaming is not this combo's strong suit, and you will need to compromise significantly on visual quality to get playable frame rates.