Microsoft Flight Simulator

The data for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the Intel Core i5-9400 and AMD Radeon RX 6600 reveals a combination that is heavily influenced by the graphics card, but with a CPU that can still keep pace at lower resolutions. The measured frames per second (FPS) across four resolutions and four quality presets provide a clear picture of where the bottleneck lies and how the system scales under load.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1080p to 4K shows a dramatic and consistent drop in performance across all settings, which is the classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 93.3 at 1920x1080 to 56.8 at 3840x2160, a reduction of approximately 39%. This scaling is expected as the number of pixels rendered quadruples, placing a much heavier load on the Radeon RX 6600’s shading units and memory bus.

The trend continues at Medium settings, where the average drops from 73.0 at 1080p to 45.0 at 4K. At High settings, the system manages 52.9 FPS at 1080p but only 33.9 at 4K. The Ultra preset shows the steepest absolute decline, going from 51.7 FPS at 1080p down to 28.7 at 4K. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions, as the workload scales directly with pixel count.

The data also reveals that the gap between 1440p and 4K is larger than the gap between 1080p and 1440p. For instance, at High settings, moving from 1080p to 1440p costs about 6.8 FPS (52.9 to 46.1), but moving from 1440p to 4K costs 12.2 FPS (46.1 to 33.9). This non-linear drop is typical for a GPU with a 128-bit memory interface, as the 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth becomes increasingly strained at higher pixel densities.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with a Navi 23 chip, featuring 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus. Its boost clock of 2491 MHz and game clock of 2044 MHz are the key drivers of performance in this title. The GPU’s 64 ROPs and 112 TMUs handle the rasterization workload, and the 8.928 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but the data shows it struggles to maintain playable rates at 4K Ultra.

The memory subsystem is a critical factor. With 8 GB of VRAM and a bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s, the RX 6600 is well-suited for 1080p and 1440p flight simulation. At 4K, however, the higher resolution demands more memory and bandwidth, which explains the significant FPS drops. Interestingly, the GPU’s performance relative to its rivals is tight: it sits within 0.5% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti and within 0.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 6700M in average benchmark scores, suggesting that the measured FPS here is representative of its class.

The GPU’s 28 ray accelerators are present, but Microsoft Flight Simulator’s primary workload is traditional rasterization, so their impact is limited in these measured results. The 7 nm process node and 11,060 million transistors contribute to the card’s efficiency, but the data indicates that the 132 W TDP is not the limiting factor; rather, it is the memory bandwidth and raw shading throughput at higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and AMD Radeon RX 6600 ranks 1437 out of 1795 tested combos in this game, placing it in the lower-middle tier of the database. This ranking reflects the modest performance of the CPU, which sits at the 50th percentile among all tested processors, and the GPU, which is at the 69th percentile. The ranking suggests that while the GPU is above average, the CPU drags the overall combo down in a title that is known for being demanding on both components.

The CPU’s nearest rivals show a tight grouping: the Intel Core i3-10305 is just 0.2% faster, and the Intel Core i3-1125G4 is also 0.2% faster, while the Intel Xeon E-2134 is 0.4% faster. The Intel Core i7-8809G is 0.6% slower. This indicates that the i5-9400 is performing exactly at its expected level, and any improvement in combo ranking would likely require a stronger CPU rather than a different GPU.

The GPU’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 890M (0% delta), AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (-0.2%), AMD Radeon RX 6700M (0.2%), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (0.5%). This suggests that the RX 6600 is a middle-of-the-pack GPU, and the combo’s low rank is more attributable to the CPU’s modest single-thread and multi-thread performance in a flight simulator that benefits from strong per-core performance.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 93.3 FPS, which is excellent for a smooth experience, but Medium at 73.0 FPS still provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. High at 52.9 FPS is playable but starts to dip below the ideal threshold, while Ultra at 51.7 FPS offers little benefit over High for a marginal FPS loss.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves 71.0 FPS, which is playable, and Medium drops to 57.3 FPS, which is borderline. High at 46.1 FPS and Ultra at 39.2 FPS are likely to feel stuttery in a simulator where smooth camera panning is important. For 1440p, the data suggests Medium is the safest choice to maintain a consistent experience.

At 3840x2160, only the Low preset at 56.8 FPS comes close to being fluid, while Medium at 45.0 FPS and High at 33.9 FPS are noticeably choppy. Ultra at 28.7 FPS is not recommended for any playable experience. The data indicates that the RX 6600 is not a 4K-class card for this title, and users should either drop to 1440p or accept the Low preset at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete dataset provides a clear matrix of performance. At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 28.7 on Ultra to 56.8 on Low, with Medium at 45.0 and High at 33.9. At 2560x1440, the range is tighter: Low at 71.0, Medium at 57.3, High at 46.1, and Ultra at 39.2. At 1920x1080, the best performance is seen on Low at 93.3 FPS, followed by Medium at 73.0, High at 52.9, and Ultra at 51.7.

The data shows that the difference between High and Ultra is minimal at 1080p (52.9 vs 51.7 FPS), suggesting that Ultra offers almost no visual benefit for the performance cost. In contrast, the jump from Low to Medium at 1080p costs about 20 FPS (93.3 to 73.0), which is a significant trade-off. The pattern is consistent across all resolutions: each step up in settings yields a diminishing return in visual quality for a linear loss in FPS.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor based on the Coffee Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. Its 9 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support are adequate for gaming, but its 50th percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates it is an average performer. In Cinebench R23, it scores 7969 in multi-core and 1125 in single-core, which are modest figures by modern standards.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU’s role is significant because the simulation engine relies heavily on single-thread performance for physics and weather calculations. The i5-9400’s single-core score of 1125 in R23 is below the top-tier processors, but the measured FPS data shows that it does not bottleneck the RX 6600 at 1080p Low, where the system achieves 93.3 FPS. At higher settings, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, as evidenced by the FPS dropping more with resolution increases than with settings changes.

The CPU’s six threads are sufficient for this title, but the lack of hyper-threading means that background tasks could interfere with performance. The 65 W TDP and 14 nm process node are from an older generation, and the data suggests that while the CPU is not the main bottleneck, its performance ceiling is lower than the GPU’s. The combo rank of 1437 out of 1795 reflects this imbalance, where the GPU is capable but the CPU holds back the overall experience in a title that rewards strong per-core performance.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain a smooth 60+ FPS experience?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the measured average FPS is 93.3, and at Medium it is 73.0. At 2560x1440 Low, it drops to 71.0. No preset at 3840x2160 reaches 60 FPS, so 1080p or 1440p Low/Medium are the only viable options for 60+ FPS.

Q: How does the RX 6600 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in this system?

A: The RX 6600 has an average benchmark score of 25235. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon 890M, is 0% different, while the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP is 0.2% slower and the AMD Radeon RX 6700M is 0.2% faster. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti is 0.5% faster.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 Ultra, the average FPS is 28.7. The large drop from 1080p Ultra (51.7 FPS) indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck, as the CPU’s workload does not scale as heavily with resolution.

Q: What is the FPS difference between High and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, High yields an average of 46.1 FPS, while Ultra yields 39.2 FPS. This 6.9 FPS difference is relatively small, suggesting Ultra’s visual gains are not worth the performance cost.

Q: How does the i5-9400’s performance compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: The i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2305. The Intel Core i3-10305 and Intel Core i3-1125G4 are both 0.2% faster, while the Intel Xeon E-2134 is 0.4% faster. The Intel Core i7-8809G is 0.6% slower.

Q: Can this combo run the game at 4K with playable frame rates?

A: Only at Low settings, where the average FPS is 56.8. Medium at 45.0, High at 33.9, and Ultra at 28.7 are all below 60 FPS and may feel sluggish for a flight simulator.