Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti combination delivers a fundamentally constrained experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator, ranking 3665 out of 3714 tested combos. This places the pairing in the bottom percentile of all systems, indicating that neither component is able to provide a playable experience at most settings. The CPU, a 6-core, 6-thread Coffee Lake part with a 2.90 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost clock, holds a 47th percentile ranking against all CPUs, but its six threads without Hyper-Threading are a limiting factor for a simulation that demands significant single-core throughput. The GPU, a Pascal-based GTX 1050 Ti with 768 shading units and a 1392 MHz boost clock, sits at the 25th percentile, making it the primary bottleneck in this pairing.

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

The Intel Core i5-9400 operates with six physical cores and six threads, a configuration that is increasingly challenged by modern simulation titles. Its base clock of 2.90 GHz and boost clock of 4.10 GHz provide a modicum of single-thread performance, as evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 935. However, the lack of additional threads means the processor cannot efficiently handle the background simulation tasks that Microsoft Flight Simulator generates alongside the rendering workload. The data shows a multi-core Cinebench R23 score of 6629, which, while respectable for a 65 W part, does not translate into high frame rates when paired with a GPU that is already at the 25th percentile. The CPU’s 9 MB of shared L3 cache is another factor; the benchmark results indicate that the processor’s aggregate performance, with an average benchmark score of 2254, places it just barely above the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 and just below the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, with delta percentages of 0.4% and -0.2%, respectively.

For a flight simulator, the CPU’s role extends beyond basic frame generation; it handles flight model calculations, weather systems, and AI traffic. The i5-9400’s six threads are sufficient to avoid a total stall, but the measured frame rates across all resolutions suggest that the processor is not the primary bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 39 FPS, which is the highest figure recorded for this combo. This indicates that when the GPU load is minimized, the CPU can still push out a playable frame rate, albeit a low one. The Geekbench multi-core score of 5141 and single-core score of 1389 further illustrate that the CPU has moderate headroom, but it is the GPU that caps the overall experience. The processor’s 14 nm process node and end-of-life status suggest it is a mature design, but its performance is firmly in the mid-range, unable to compensate for the GPU’s limitations.

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

The measured FPS data provides a clear hierarchy of settings for this combo. At 1920x1080, the Low preset yields an average of 39 FPS, which is the only configuration that approaches a standard playability threshold of 30 FPS or higher. The Medium preset at 1080p drops to 30 FPS average, with a minimum of 26 FPS and a maximum of 35 FPS, which is technically playable but subject to noticeable dips during complex scenery. The High preset at the same resolution falls to 23 FPS average, and the Ultra preset bottoms out at 22 FPS. Given that the data shows a 16 FPS difference between Low and High at 1080p, the Low preset is the only viable option for consistent frame delivery. Moving to 2560x1440, the Low preset yields 31 FPS average, which is still above the 30 FPS threshold, but the Medium preset drops to 24 FPS, and High falls to 18 FPS. At 3840x2160, no preset achieves even 23 FPS, with Low being the highest at 23 FPS and Ultra at 13 FPS.

The recommendation is to operate at 1920x1080 with the Low preset for a playable experience, as it is the only setting that provides a comfortable margin above the 30 FPS marker. The Medium preset at 1080p is a borderline option for users who prioritize visual fidelity over smoothness, but the 26 FPS minimum suggests stuttering during flyovers of dense urban areas. The data does not support any settings above Medium at 1080p, as the High and Ultra presets both fall below 24 FPS, which is generally considered the lower bound for a simulator where precise control inputs are required. For users with a 1440p monitor, the Low preset is the only option that remains above 30 FPS, but the 31 FPS average is fragile. The Ultra preset is effectively unplayable across all resolutions, with a maximum average of 22 FPS at 1080p, indicating that this combo should not be pushed beyond its measured capabilities.

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

The resolution scaling pattern reveals a system that is heavily GPU-bound. At 1920x1080 Low, the combo achieves 39 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 Low, the average drops to 31 FPS, a reduction of 8 FPS or roughly 20%. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls to 23 FPS, another 8 FPS drop, representing a further 26% reduction. This linear scaling indicates that the GTX 1050 Ti’s 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 112.1 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient to handle the increased pixel count. The GPU’s pixel rate of 44.54 GPixel/s and texture rate of 66.82 GTexel/s are simply too low for the demands of 4K rendering. The data shows that at 1080p High, the average is 23 FPS, which is identical to the 4K Low average, suggesting that the GPU is maxed out in both scenarios, but for different reasons: at 1080p High, it is the shading complexity, while at 4K Low, it is the raw pixel throughput.

The FPS drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across all settings, with the Medium preset dropping from 30 FPS to 24 FPS (a 6 FPS difference) and the Ultra preset dropping from 22 FPS to 17 FPS (a 5 FPS difference). This uniformity points to the GPU as the sole limiting component, as the CPU’s performance does not degrade with resolution. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 6629 suggests it is capable of maintaining a stable simulation loop, while the GPU’s Passmark G3D score of 6340 places it in a performance tier that is simply not designed for high-resolution flight simulation. The 4K Medium preset shows a minimum FPS of 15, indicating that the 4 GB VRAM buffer is being saturated, leading to frame drops below the average. This confirms that the GTX 1050 Ti is the primary bottleneck, and any resolution scaling analysis must conclude that the system is not viable beyond 1080p.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo ranks 3665 out of 3714 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 1.3% of all systems evaluated for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This ranking is a direct consequence of the GTX 1050 Ti’s low performance percentile of 25, which pulls down the overall capability of the pairing. The CPU’s 47th percentile ranking is comparatively stronger, but it cannot compensate for the GPU’s deficits. The data shows that this combo sits just 49 positions above the absolute worst performer, indicating that nearly every other tested combination delivers better frame rates. The nearest rivals for the CPU, such as the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 with a delta of -0.2% and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 with a delta of 0.4%, do not meaningfully change the outcome; even a slightly faster processor would not improve the frame rates, as the GPU is the limiting factor. Similarly, the GPU’s nearest rivals, including the AMD Radeon R5 M330 with a delta of 0.6% and the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M with a delta of 1%, are all within a narrow performance band, confirming that the GTX 1050 Ti is at the very bottom of the GPU hierarchy.

The combo’s rank of 3665 is a stark indicator that this hardware configuration is unsuitable for Microsoft Flight Simulator under any measured settings. The data does not show a single configuration that achieves a 60 FPS average, and the highest recorded average is 39 FPS at 1080p Low. This places the combo in a category where users must accept significant visual compromises or reduced resolutions to achieve playability. The rank is not an outlier; it is consistent with the GPU’s Passmark DirectX 11 score of 45 and DirectX 12 score of 26, which are extremely low. The combo’s performance is so constrained that it effectively functions as a baseline for what not to use for this game, with only 49 other combinations performing worse.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is a 4 GB GDDR5 card with a 128-bit memory bus and a bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s. Its base clock of 1291 MHz and boost clock of 1392 MHz are modest, and the 768 shading units are insufficient for the heavy pixel and texture workloads of a flight simulator. The GPU’s FP32 performance of 2.138 TFLOPS is the key metric that explains the low frame rates; at 1080p High, the card can only manage 23 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it falls to 13 FPS. The 4 GB VRAM is a critical limitation, as Microsoft Flight Simulator’s high-resolution textures easily exceed this capacity. The data shows that the 4K Medium preset has a minimum FPS of 15, which is lower than the 1080p Ultra minimum, indicating that the VRAM is being swapped or the memory controller is overwhelmed.

The GPU’s launch MSRP of 139 USD reflects its entry-level positioning, and its performance percentile of 25 confirms this. The Passmark G3D score of 6340 and the Geekbench Vulkan score of 10001 are low, but they are consistent with the card’s architecture. The 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors suggest this is a card designed for basic 1080p gaming, not for a simulation that can stress even high-end hardware. The texture rate of 66.82 GTexel/s is a bottleneck for the game’s terrain rendering, and the pixel rate of 44.54 GPixel/s is insufficient for 1440p and 4K resolutions. The data indicates that the GPU is the sole reason for the combo’s poor ranking, as even a modest upgrade would yield significant FPS improvements. The card’s 25th percentile ranking places it just above the AMD Radeon Vega 3, which has a delta of -1.8%, but this is cold comfort given the overall low performance.

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

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low preset yields 39 FPS, Medium yields 30 FPS with a minimum of 26 and maximum of 35, High yields 23 FPS, and Ultra yields 22 FPS. The Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum values, indicating a variable frame rate that can dip below the 30 FPS threshold. The jump from Low to Medium is a 9 FPS drop, while the drop from Medium to High is 7 FPS, and from High to Ultra is only 1 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is saturated at the High preset and cannot scale further. At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 31 FPS, Medium averages 24 FPS with a minimum of 21 and maximum of 28, High averages 18 FPS, and Ultra averages 17 FPS. The 1440p data shows a similar pattern, with the Low to Medium drop being 7 FPS, Medium to High being 6 FPS, and High to Ultra being 1 FPS. At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 23 FPS, Medium averages 18 FPS with a minimum of 15 and maximum of 21, High averages 14 FPS, and Ultra averages 13 FPS. The 4K data reveals that the GPU is barely functional, with the Low preset only achieving 23 FPS, which is the same as the 1080p High preset.

The data shows a consistent 5-8 FPS drop when moving from 1080p to 1440p across all settings, and a further 8-9 FPS drop when moving from 1440p to 4K. The Medium presets at all resolutions have recorded minimum and maximum values, which allows for a deeper analysis. At 1080p Medium, the frame rate ranges from 26 to 35 FPS, a 9 FPS spread. At 1440p Medium, the range is 21 to 28 FPS, a 7 FPS spread. At 4K Medium, the range is 15 to 21 FPS, a 6 FPS spread. This narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is becoming more consistently bottlenecked, with less headroom for variance. The absolute lowest recorded average is 13 FPS at 4K Ultra, while the highest is 39 FPS at 1080p Low. The data does not include a single instance of a 60 FPS average, and the only configuration that exceeds 30 FPS is 1080p Low and 1440p Low.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this hardware?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 with the Low preset is the only configuration that yields an average above 39 FPS. The 1440p Low preset also achieves 31 FPS, but 1080p Low provides the highest average frame rate of 39 FPS.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K resolution?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS is 23 FPS on the Low preset, and the Ultra preset drops to 13 FPS. The 4K Medium preset has a minimum FPS of 15, indicating that the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM is insufficient.

Q: How does the GTX 1050 Ti compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score is 4193, which is 0.6% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M330 and 1% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M. It is 1.1% lower than the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M and 1.8% lower than the AMD Radeon Vega 3.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the primary bottleneck in this system?

A: The GPU is the primary bottleneck. The CPU has a 47th percentile ranking, while the GPU has a 25th percentile ranking. The FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are consistent across all settings, indicating the GPU is the limiting component.

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS is 39, recorded at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. The lowest average is 13 FPS at 3840x2160 with the Ultra preset.

Q: How does this combo rank against all tested systems?

A: This combo ranks 3665 out of 3714 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 1.3% of all systems. Only 49 other combinations perform worse in Microsoft Flight Simulator.