Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a uniquely demanding title, and the data for this pairing of an Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER shows a system that behaves differently depending on where you point it. At lower resolutions, the CPU is the bottleneck; at 4K, the GPU finally takes over. The measured FPS across all settings and resolutions indicates that this is a combo capable of high frame rates, but the experience is defined by the relationship between the processor's six threads and the GPU's massive rendering power.

Resolution Scaling

The most significant finding in the data is how the frame rate scales from 1080p to 4K. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system produces 128 FPS on average. When you move up to 2560x1440 at the same Low settings, the average only drops to 119 FPS. This is a mere 7% reduction in performance, which strongly suggests that the CPU is the limiting factor at these resolutions. The graphics card is not being fully utilized because the processor cannot feed it data fast enough. This is typical for a flight simulator, which is heavily reliant on single-threaded performance for simulation logic.

The trend becomes more pronounced when you jump to 4K. At 3840x2160 with Low settings, the average FPS falls to 108. That is a 16% drop from 1440p and a 15.6% drop from 1080p. The gap between 1080p and 1440p is much smaller than the gap between 1440p and 4K, which is a clear sign that the rendering load is finally shifting to the GPU at the higher pixel count. The RTX 4080 SUPER, with its 16 GB of memory and 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth, is starting to hit its limits, but the transition is gradual.

Looking at the High settings, the pattern holds. At 1080p, the average is 105 FPS. At 1440p, it is 98 FPS—a 6.7% drop. At 4K, it drops to 73 FPS, a 25.5% drop from 1440p. This is a much steeper decline than what we see at Low settings, which indicates that the GPU is becoming more of a factor as the visual complexity increases. The 4K High result shows a system that is balanced enough to stay playable, but the performance cost of pushing those pixels is evident. The data shows that at 1080p and 1440p, the i5-9400's six cores and six threads are the primary constraint, while at 4K, the RTX 4080 SUPER's capabilities are being tested more thoroughly.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows offer a clear picture of how each preset impacts performance. At 4K, the difference between Low and Ultra is significant. The Low preset averages 108 FPS, while Ultra averages 69 FPS. That is a 39 FPS spread, which is substantial. However, the Medium preset at 4K achieves an average of 97 FPS, which is only 11 FPS below Low. This suggests that the Medium preset is a very efficient step up in visual quality for a relatively small performance penalty. The High preset at 4K yields 73 FPS, which is a more noticeable drop from Medium.

For a smooth experience at 4K, the data supports Medium or High as the target. The Medium preset's 97 FPS average with a minimum of 82 FPS is a strong option for maintaining fluid motion. If you prefer higher fidelity, High still provides a playable 73 FPS average, but you are giving up 24 FPS compared to Medium. The Ultra preset's 69 FPS average is the most demanding, and while it is not unplayable, the performance cost is steep relative to the step from High to Ultra.

At 1440p, the recommendations shift. The Low preset hits 119 FPS, Medium hits 109 FPS, High hits 98 FPS, and Ultra hits 94 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 25 FPS. Here, the Medium preset at 109 FPS offers a good balance, but High at 98 FPS is also a solid choice for those with a 144Hz monitor, as it stays close to the refresh rate. The Ultra preset at 94 FPS is acceptable but offers diminishing returns over High. For 1080p, even the most demanding settings are highly playable. The Ultra preset averages 104 FPS, which is only 24 FPS behind the Low preset's 128 FPS. At this resolution, players can safely use Ultra settings to get the best visual experience without sacrificing significant performance.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a six-core, six-thread processor from the Coffee Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. In the context of this game, the data indicates that this CPU is the primary bottleneck at lower resolutions. The fact that 1080p Low (128 FPS) and 1440p Low (119 FPS) are so close in performance is a direct result of the CPU's limits. The processor is working at its maximum capacity, and the GPU is waiting for instructions.

The CPU's benchmark scores provide context. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 6629, and its single-core score is 935. The Geekbench multi-core score is 5141, with a single-core score of 1389. These scores show a processor that is competent but not top-tier. Its percentile vs. all CPUs is 47, meaning it sits just below the median. Its nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i7-10710U with a deltaPct of 0.3, are extremely close in average benchmark score, indicating that the i5-9400 is a mid-pack performer.

In this game, the CPU's six threads are likely insufficient to fully leverage the RTX 4080 SUPER's power at 1080p and 1440p. A flight simulator like Microsoft Flight Simulator has a significant amount of simulation logic that runs on the CPU, and the data suggests that the i5-9400 is not fast enough to keep up with the GPU's rendering capabilities at these resolutions. The result is that the frame rate is capped by the processor, not the graphics card. The game is likely limited by the CPU's single-thread performance, which is a common issue for flight simulators that rely on complex physics and AI calculations.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER has a combo rank of 779 out of 3714 tested combos in this game. This places it in the top 21% of all tested systems. This is a respectable ranking, but it is important to note that it is not a top-tier result. The high rank is likely due to the strength of the GPU, which is an excellent performer on its own.

However, the ranking also reflects the CPU's limitations. If the system were paired with a more powerful processor, the rank would likely be higher. The data shows that the combo is held back by the i5-9400, particularly at lower resolutions. The fact that the combo ranks in the 779th position out of 3714 suggests that there are many other systems that can achieve better performance in this specific game. The RTX 4080 SUPER is a top-tier GPU, but its potential is not fully realized in this configuration.

The GPU's own benchmarks show it is a powerhouse. Its Passmark G3D score is 34245, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 6600. Its percentile vs. all GPUs is 86, indicating it is in the top 14% of all graphics cards. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, has a deltaPct of -0.1, showing that the SUPER variant is nearly identical in raw performance. Despite this GPU strength, the combo rank is still only 779, which reinforces the idea that the CPU is the limiting factor in this pairing.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER is a high-end graphics card with 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and a 256-bit memory bus, providing 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 2295 MHz, with a boost clock of 2550 MHz. It has 10240 shading units and 80 RT cores. In this game, the GPU's role becomes more important as the resolution increases. At 4K, the GPU is finally the main driver of performance, as evidenced by the larger FPS drops between settings.

At 4K, the difference between Low and Ultra is 39 FPS. This is a clear sign that the GPU is being stressed. The 16 GB of VRAM is likely sufficient for the game's textures, even at 4K Ultra, but the raw compute power is being taxed. The RTX 4080 SUPER's 52.22 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is being utilized to a greater degree at this resolution. The data shows that the GPU can handle the load, but it is not able to maintain the same high frame rates as it would with a more capable CPU.

At 1080p and 1440p, the GPU is not the bottleneck. The RTX 4080 SUPER is capable of producing much higher frame rates than the CPU allows. For example, at 1080p Low, the average FPS is 128. This is likely the CPU's maximum, not the GPU's. The GPU is being held back, and its full potential is not being realized. This is a classic case of a GPU being constrained by the CPU. The GPU's high memory bandwidth and large VRAM pool are not being fully utilized at lower resolutions, as the processor cannot supply data quickly enough.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at the system's performance across all settings and resolutions. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 104 on Ultra to 128 on Low. The Medium preset averages 117 FPS, with a minimum of 99 and a maximum of 134. The High preset averages 105 FPS. This shows that at 1080p, the system is capable of exceeding 100 FPS on all settings, making it suitable for high-refresh-rate displays.

At 2560x1440, the averages are slightly lower. The Low preset averages 119 FPS, Medium averages 109 FPS (with a min of 92 and max of 125), High averages 98 FPS, and Ultra averages 94 FPS. The performance is still very playable, but the gap between settings is more noticeable. The Medium preset's minimum of 92 FPS is a good indicator of the worst-case scenario, which is still smooth. At 3840x2160, the averages drop further. The Low preset averages 108 FPS, Medium averages 97 FPS (with a min of 82 and max of 111), High averages 73 FPS, and Ultra averages 69 FPS. The 4K results show that the system is still capable of playable frame rates, but the Ultra preset is the most demanding, and the High preset is a significant step down from Medium.

The data shows a clear trend: the system is overkill for 1080p and 1440p, where the CPU limits performance. At 4K, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and the frame rates are more dependent on the settings preset. The Medium preset at 4K offers a good balance of visual quality and performance, with an average of 97 FPS. The High and Ultra presets are more demanding, and players should expect lower frame rates if they choose those settings. The minimum FPS values at Medium (82 at 4K, 92 at 1440p, 99 at 1080p) indicate that the game remains stable, with no major stuttering, which is a positive sign for this configuration.