Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a demanding flight simulation title, and the combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and AMD Radeon RX 9060 produces a specific performance profile defined by resolution and settings. The data indicates that this pairing is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it can deliver smooth frame rates at Medium to High presets, but it struggles to maintain playable performance at 4K Ultra settings. The benchmark results show a clear hierarchy where the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU's six cores provide adequate, if not exceptional, support for the simulation's engine.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is the dominant component in this pairing, and its specifications directly shape the frame rates observed. The GPU is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture and features a boost clock of 2990 MHz, with a game clock rated at 2400 MHz. This clock speed allows for substantial processing power, reflected in its 21.43 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, this raw compute capability translates into the ability to render complex terrain and aircraft models, but the GPU's memory configuration is a critical limiting factor at higher resolutions. The card comes equipped with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. While this is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, the data suggests that 8 GB is a constraint when pushing 4K with High or Ultra presets, where texture data demands exceed what the memory can efficiently handle.

The GPU's performance is quantified by its benchmark scores, where it achieves an average score of 16014 and sits in the 59th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, scores 16129, which is a 0.7% difference. This places the RX 9060 in a competitive mid-range tier. In the measured FPS data, the GPU's role is clear: at 1080p Low settings, the card produces 111 FPS, demonstrating its headroom at lower loads. However, as settings increase to Ultra at 1080p, the frame rate drops to 62 FPS, showing a 44% reduction. This pattern is consistent with a GPU that is being pushed harder by more complex shaders and effects. At 4K, the GPU is the clear bottleneck, as even Medium settings yield only 51 FPS, while Ultra drops to 37 FPS. The PassMark G3D score of 17631 further corroborates the card's mid-range positioning, indicating that it is not designed for maximum settings at the highest resolution in a simulation as demanding as this one.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a stark scaling pattern across resolutions, which clarifies the role of each component. Starting at 1080p with High settings, the system achieves 65 FPS. Moving to 1440p at the same settings, the frame rate drops to 52 FPS, a 20% decrease. At 4K High, the average falls to 39 FPS, which is a 40% reduction from 1080p. This scaling indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor; as the pixel count increases, the rendering load on the RX 9060 grows substantially, outpacing what the CPU can compensate for. The data shows a similar trend for Low settings, where 1080p yields 111 FPS, 1440p drops to 89 FPS, and 4K falls to 66 FPS. The percentage drops are smaller at lower settings, which suggests that the CPU is providing a more consistent baseline, but the absolute FPS numbers still decline sharply.

The most telling evidence of the GPU bottleneck is the performance at 4K Ultra, where the system manages only 37 FPS. This is below the threshold for smooth gameplay in a flight simulator, where constant panning and detailed scenery require high frame rates. The Medium preset at 4K provides 51 FPS, which is more playable but still not ideal. The scaling from 1080p Medium (86 FPS) to 1440p Medium (69 FPS) and then to 4K Medium (51 FPS) shows a linear degradation that is characteristic of a GPU hitting its memory bandwidth and compute limits. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see less variation between 1080p and 1440p, as the CPU workload per frame is relatively constant. Instead, the consistent drop across all resolutions indicates that the RX 9060's 8 GB VRAM and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are being saturated, particularly at 4K where the higher texture resolutions and draw distances demand more memory.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the broader context of all tested configurations, this specific CPU-GPU combination ranks 1712 out of 2996 combos. This places it in the lower half of the database, but the rank is more nuanced than the raw number suggests. The combo's percentile is not provided, but the rank of 1712 indicates that there are many more capable pairings, but also a significant number that are less capable. This positioning is consistent with the mid-range nature of both components. The Intel Core i5-9400 is a six-core, six-thread processor from the Coffee Lake architecture, and its benchmark scores reflect its age. It achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 6629 and a single-core score of 935. In comparison to its nearest rivals, the i5-9400 is nearly identical in performance: the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 scores 2259 in average benchmark, which is a 0.2% difference, and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, a 0.4% difference. This shows that the CPU is not a significant outlier in performance; it is a solid, if unspectacular, mid-range processor.

The combination's rank of 1712 is influenced by the GPU's limitations at high resolutions. The RX 9060's average benchmark score of 16014 places it just below the RTX 3060 Ti, but its performance in this game is heavily dependent on the settings. The data shows that at 1080p Medium, the combo achieves 86 FPS, which is a respectable result and would likely rank higher than the 4K results. The lower rank is likely dragged down by the 4K Ultra result of 37 FPS, which is below playability standards. The fact that the combo can achieve 111 FPS at 1080p Low shows that it has the potential to perform well in less demanding scenarios, but the overall rank reflects the average performance across all tested conditions. The data suggests that this pairing is best considered a 1080p or 1440p solution, and users expecting high frame rates at 4K will be disappointed, which is reflected in the 1712 rank.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combination depend on the user's target resolution and frame rate preference. At 1080p, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance, delivering 86 FPS with a minimum of 73 FPS and a maximum of 99 FPS. This is a smooth experience that maintains high detail without sacrificing playability. The High preset at 1080p drops to 65 FPS, which is still playable but not as fluid, and the Ultra preset at 62 FPS is borderline, as the frame rate can dip during complex scenes. For users who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity, the Low preset at 111 FPS is an option, but the visual compromise is significant for a game that relies heavily on scenery detail.

At 1440p, the Medium preset is again the recommended choice, providing 69 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS. This is a playable frame rate for a flight simulator, and the visual quality is superior to 1080p. The High preset at 1440p delivers 52 FPS, which is acceptable but may feel less smooth during rapid camera movements. The Low preset at 89 FPS is a viable option for maximum fluidity, but again, the visual downgrade is notable. At 4K, the data shows that no preset provides a fully smooth experience. The Medium preset at 51 FPS is the only one that approaches playability, but the minimum FPS of 44 indicates potential stuttering. The High and Ultra presets at 39 and 37 FPS respectively are not recommended, as they fall below the threshold for an enjoyable experience. Therefore, the best experience per the measured rows is to play at 1080p or 1440p with the Medium preset, which offers a stable frame rate above 60 FPS with good visual fidelity.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU-GPU combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The data shows that 1080p and 1440p are the most appropriate resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the combo achieves 86 FPS, and at 1440p Medium, it achieves 69 FPS. At 4K, the frame rates drop below 60 FPS on all presets, with Medium being the only playable option at 51 FPS.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon RX 9060 compare to its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti?

A: The RX 9060 has an average benchmark score of 16014, while the RTX 3060 Ti scores 16129. This represents a 0.7% difference, indicating that the two GPUs are nearly identical in overall performance.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-9400 a bottleneck for the RX 9060?

A: The CPU's benchmark scores, such as a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 6629, are sufficient to support the GPU at lower resolutions. The data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K, as frame rates scale down consistently with increasing resolution. The CPU is not a significant bottleneck at 1080p and 1440p.

Q: What is the combo's overall rank in the database?

A: The combo ranks 1712 out of 2996 tested combinations. This places it in the lower half, reflecting the GPU's limitations at high resolutions, but also showing that it is more capable than many other pairings.

Q: What settings should I use for a smooth experience at 1440p?

A: The Medium preset at 1440p provides 69 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS, which is the best balance of quality and performance. The High preset drops to 52 FPS, which is less smooth.

Q: Does the GPU's 8 GB of VRAM affect performance in this game?

A: The data indicates that the 8 GB of GDDR6 memory is a limiting factor at 4K. At 4K High, the frame rate is 39 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it is 37 FPS. This suggests that the memory capacity is insufficient for the high-resolution textures in this game.

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

The Intel Core i5-9400 provides the foundational processing power for this combination, and its characteristics are important for understanding the overall frame rates. The CPU has 6 cores and 6 threads, which is a configuration that was standard for mid-range desktop processors at its release. Its base clock is 2.90 GHz, and it can boost up to 4.10 GHz, which allows for responsive single-threaded performance. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for its complex physics and AI calculations, the CPU's single-core performance is crucial. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 935 and the Geekbench single-core score of 1389 indicate that the i5-9400 is capable, but not exceptional, in this regard. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the system achieves 111 FPS, which suggests that the CPU is not holding back the GPU at lower settings.

However, the CPU's multi-threaded performance is more modest. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 6629 and the Geekbench multicore score of 5141 show that the 6-core, 6-thread configuration is adequate for the game's demands, but it is not a powerhouse. The CPU's average benchmark score of 2254 places it in the 47th percentile of all CPUs, and it is nearly tied with its nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, which scores 2259. This indicates that the i5-9400 is a solid mid-range processor that does not introduce a significant bottleneck. In the measured FPS data, the CPU's role is more evident at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the 111 FPS result is likely close to the CPU's limit, as the GPU has more headroom at these settings. As resolution increases, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and the CPU's workload per frame remains relatively constant. The 65 W TDP and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for the game's requirements, and the CPU's performance is consistent with its position in the benchmark database.