Microsoft Flight Simulator

The benchmark data for Microsoft Flight Simulator, paired with the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080, shows a configuration that scales predictably across resolutions and presets. The measured frames per second (FPS) values reveal a clear hierarchy, with the RTX 3080 providing substantial headroom at lower settings, while the CPU’s six cores and six threads become a limiting factor at higher resolutions. This analysis walks through the data step by step, interpreting what the scores mean relative to other tested combinations.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows indicate that the "Ultra" preset is only viable for users who prioritize visual fidelity over smoothness. At 3840x2160, Ultra averages 50.6 FPS, which is just below the 52.8 FPS of the "High" preset at the same resolution. The difference between Ultra and High at 4K is minimal (50.6 vs 52.8 FPS), suggesting that the additional graphical load of Ultra does not translate into a meaningful performance penalty, but neither does it offer a smooth experience. For a flight simulator where frame pacing matters for immersion, the data recommends the "High" preset as the best balance at 4K, as it provides the highest average FPS (52.8) among the realistic settings, with Ultra only marginally behind.

At 2560x1440, the "High" preset delivers 72.4 FPS, while "Ultra" yields a nearly identical 72.3 FPS. This is a notable finding: the performance cost of moving from High to Ultra at 1440p is effectively zero, yet the average FPS remains below the 96.9 FPS of the "Medium" preset. For users with a 1440p display, the data suggests that "High" is the optimal choice because it offers the same performance as Ultra but with a slightly lower graphical overhead, while "Medium" provides a significant jump to 96.9 FPS for those who prefer higher frame rates. The "Low" preset at 119.8 FPS is the only option that approaches standard 120 Hz refresh rates, but it comes with a substantial visual compromise.

At 1920x1080, the pattern shifts. The "High" preset delivers 92.8 FPS, and "Ultra" drops only slightly to 90.8 FPS. The "Medium" preset, however, jumps to 119.8 FPS, which is identical to the "Low" preset at 1440p. This suggests that at 1080p, the CPU becomes more relevant, as the RTX 3080 has enough headroom to push beyond 120 FPS on "Low" (131.1 FPS) but is held back by the processor on higher presets. The best experience per the measured rows is the "Medium" preset at 1080p, offering 119.8 FPS, which is a 29% increase over "High" (92.8 FPS) while maintaining a playable frame rate. The "High" preset at 1080p is acceptable but leaves performance on the table, and "Ultra" offers no advantage over "High" in terms of FPS.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is the dominant component in this combo, as evidenced by its 80th percentile ranking among all GPUs and its average benchmark score of 35787. The GPU’s 10 GB of GDDR6X memory and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth are substantial, but the measured FPS data shows that the GPU is not always the bottleneck. At 3840x2160, the RTX 3080 scales from 91.7 FPS on "Low" to 50.6 FPS on "Ultra", a drop of 45%. This indicates that at 4K, the GPU is heavily taxed by the higher settings, and the 10 GB VRAM capacity may be a limiting factor for texture-heavy scenes, though the data does not specify VRAM usage.

The GPU’s boost clock of 1710 MHz and its 8704 shading units provide the raw compute power, but the benchmark results show that the RTX 3080 performs best when the CPU can keep up. At 2560x1440, the GPU delivers 119.8 FPS on "Low" and 72.4 FPS on "High", demonstrating a similar scaling pattern to 4K but with higher absolute values. The 1440p "Ultra" preset at 72.3 FPS is nearly identical to "High" (72.4 FPS), which suggests that the GPU is not the limiting factor at this resolution for those two presets; instead, the CPU’s capabilities are beginning to cap the frame rate.

Comparing to its nearest rivals, the RTX 3080’s average benchmark score of 35787 is 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon Pro Duo (35860) and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon 880M (35646). The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile sits 1% behind at 35435. These deltas are small, indicating that the RTX 3080 is a capable card, but its performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator is more dependent on the resolution and settings than on raw benchmark scores. The GPU’s FP32 performance of 29.77 TFLOPS and texture rate of 465.1 GTexel/s are theoretical figures; the measured FPS data shows that at 1080p "Low", the card can reach 131.1 FPS, but at 4K "Ultra", it falls to 50.6 FPS, highlighting the game’s heavy reliance on GPU compute for rendering.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a six-core, six-thread processor with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. Its benchmark results place it in the 50th percentile among all CPUs, with an average score of 2305. The nearest rivals show a tight grouping: the Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2300 (0.2% ahead), the Intel Core i3-1125G4 scores 2299 (0.2% ahead), and the Intel Xeon E-2134 scores 2295 (0.4% ahead). The Intel Core i7-8809G is the only rival that is slower, with a score of 2319 (0.6% behind this CPU). This data indicates that the i5-9400 is a mid-range processor that does not excel in multi-threaded workloads, but it is not a weak link either.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU’s role becomes apparent when examining the FPS differences across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the "Low" preset achieves 131.1 FPS, which is the highest measured value in the dataset. However, moving to "Medium" drops the FPS to 119.8, and "High" falls to 92.8. This steep decline suggests that the CPU cannot maintain high frame rates as the settings increase, likely due to its six threads being saturated by the game’s simulation logic. The 4.10 GHz boost clock helps, but the lack of hyper-threading (6 threads vs. 12 on some rivals) is a clear constraint.

At 2560x1440, the CPU’s impact is less pronounced because the GPU is more heavily loaded. The "Low" preset drops from 131.1 FPS at 1080p to 119.8 FPS at 1440p, a 9% decrease, while "High" drops from 92.8 to 72.4 FPS, a 22% decrease. This indicates that at higher resolutions, the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck, and the CPU’s six cores are sufficient to feed the RTX 3080 at lower settings. At 3840x2160, the CPU’s role is further diminished, as the "Low" preset still manages 91.7 FPS, but "High" falls to 52.8 FPS, showing that the GPU is now the limiting factor. The data suggests that the i5-9400 is adequate for 4K gaming with this GPU, but at 1080p, users would benefit from a processor with more threads to unlock higher frame rates on "High" and "Ultra" presets.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 ranks 616th out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the 66th percentile of all configurations, meaning it outperforms roughly two-thirds of the tested systems. The rank is a composite reflection of the CPU’s mid-tier status (50th percentile) and the GPU’s high-tier status (80th percentile), with the GPU carrying most of the performance weight.

Given the CPU’s average benchmark score of 2305, which is within 0.6% of its nearest rivals, the combo’s rank is likely held back by the processor’s six-thread limitation. The RTX 3080’s 80th percentile ranking suggests that pairing it with a stronger CPU would boost the combo’s rank, but the data does not include such a configuration. The measured FPS values support this interpretation: at 1080p "High", the combo achieves 92.8 FPS, which is respectable but not exceptional for a top-tier GPU, suggesting the CPU is capping performance. At 4K "Ultra", the 50.6 FPS is more indicative of the GPU’s limits, as the CPU has less influence at higher resolutions. The rank of 616 out of 1795 indicates a solid, but not top-tier, pairing, with the RTX 3080 providing the majority of the performance headroom.

FAQ

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

A: The highest measured average FPS is 131.1, achieved at 1920x1080 with the "Low" preset.

Q: How does the "High" preset at 2560x1440 compare to "Ultra" at the same resolution?

A: The "High" preset averages 72.4 FPS, while "Ultra" averages 72.3 FPS, a difference of only 0.1 FPS, indicating that the two presets perform identically in practice.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the bottleneck at 1920x1080?

A: The data suggests the CPU is the bottleneck at 1080p, as the "Low" preset reaches 131.1 FPS but "High" drops to 92.8 FPS, a 30% decrease that cannot be explained by GPU load alone.

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 616th out of 1795 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Q: How does the RTX 3080's average benchmark score compare to its closest rival?

A: The RTX 3080's average score of 35787 is 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon Pro Duo (35860) and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon 880M (35646).

Q: At which resolution does the "Medium" preset exceed 100 FPS?

A: The "Medium" preset exceeds 100 FPS only at 1920x1080, with an average of 119.8 FPS. At 2560x1440, it falls to 96.9 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the combo’s performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. The table below summarizes the average FPS for each configuration, with no minimum or maximum values reported in the dataset.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 91.7 FPS
• Medium: 71.3 FPS
• High: 52.8 FPS
• Ultra: 50.6 FPS

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 119.8 FPS
• Medium: 96.9 FPS
• High: 72.4 FPS
• Ultra: 72.3 FPS

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 131.1 FPS
• Medium: 119.8 FPS
• High: 92.8 FPS
• Ultra: 90.8 FPS

The data shows a consistent pattern: at each resolution, the "Low" preset delivers the highest FPS, and the "Ultra" preset delivers the lowest. The gap between "Low" and "Ultra" narrows as resolution increases. At 1080p, the gap is 40.3 FPS (131.1 vs 90.8), at 1440p it is 47.5 FPS (119.8 vs 72.3), and at 4K it is 41.1 FPS (91.7 vs 50.6). This indicates that the GPU’s performance ceiling is reached at 4K "Ultra" (50.6 FPS), while the CPU’s limitations are most visible at 1080p "Ultra" (90.8 FPS), where the RTX 3080 could theoretically render faster if the processor allowed it. The "High" and "Ultra" presets are nearly identical at 1440p (72.4 vs 72.3 FPS) and close at 1080p (92.8 vs 90.8 FPS), suggesting that the game’s "Ultra" preset adds minimal visual complexity for this combo, likely due to the CPU’s inability to feed the GPU with additional draw calls.