Aircraft Benchmarking & Performance Analysis
Estimated Lesson Time: 45 Minutes
Lesson Overview
So far, we’ve explored how airports influence performance and why every benchmark should be repeatable.
In this lesson, we’re going to examine another major factor in Microsoft Flight Simulator performance:
The aircraft itself.
One of the biggest misconceptions among Flight Simulator users is that every aircraft places the same demand on your PC.
In reality, two aircraft parked at the same gate, under identical weather conditions, can produce dramatically different performance results.
Why?
Because every aircraft has its own level of systems complexity, avionics, cockpit displays, electrical logic and simulation depth.
Some aircraft place relatively little demand on the CPU, while others simulate thousands of systems every second.
By the end of this lesson, you’ll understand why aircraft performance varies and how to benchmark different aircraft professionally.
Lesson Objectives
By the end of this lesson you will understand:
Why aircraft affect performance.
Systems complexity.
Glass cockpit workload.
CPU usage.
GPU usage.
How different aircraft compare.
How to benchmark aircraft fairly.
Why Aircraft Matter
When benchmarking Microsoft Flight Simulator, changing the aircraft changes the workload on your PC.
Every aircraft contains different:
- Flight models.
- Avionics.
- Navigation systems.
- Flight management computers.
- Hydraulic systems.
- Electrical systems.
- Display refresh rates.
- Cockpit animations.
- Lighting systems.
Some aircraft simulate thousands of calculations every second.
Others simulate far fewer.
This directly affects performance.
Systems Complexity
Not all aircraft are built to the same standard.
Aircraft generally fall into three categories.
Basic Aircraft
Examples:
- Cessna 172
- Cub
- Default GA aircraft
These typically simulate:
- Basic avionics.
- Simple flight models.
- Fewer background calculations.
CPU workload is generally lower.
Intermediate Aircraft
Examples:
- Default A320
- Boeing 737 MAX
These introduce:
- Larger glass cockpits.
- More systems.
- Additional navigation logic.
- Increased display processing.
CPU demand increases.
High-Fidelity Aircraft
Examples:
- PMDG 737
- Fenix A320
- iniBuilds A350
These aircraft simulate many real-world systems in significant detail, including:
- Electrical systems.
- Hydraulics.
- Fuel systems.
- Pressurisation.
- Flight management computers.
- Navigation databases.
- Flight directors.
- Autopilot logic.
- Warning systems.
- Multiple cockpit displays.
This dramatically increases CPU workload.
PMDG 737
The PMDG 737 is one of the most detailed airliners available.
It models a wide range of aircraft systems with high fidelity.
CPU Workload
High.
The CPU continuously calculates:
- FMC.
- Flight systems.
- Hydraulic logic.
- Electrical systems.
- Cockpit displays.
GPU Workload
Moderate to High.
The GPU renders:
- High-resolution cockpit textures.
- Glass displays.
- Dynamic lighting.
- Shadows.
- Exterior model.
The PMDG often becomes MainThread limited before it becomes GPU limited on high-end systems.
Fenix A320
The Fenix A320 is widely recognised for its highly detailed systems simulation.
It models numerous aircraft systems in depth and is often considered one of the most demanding aircraft available.
CPU Workload
Very High.
The aircraft performs extensive background calculations, making it particularly demanding in busy airports.
GPU Workload
High.
The cockpit contains several high-resolution displays and detailed visual effects.
Combined with complex airports, this aircraft can heavily load both the CPU and GPU.
iniBuilds A350
The iniBuilds A350 combines:
- Long-haul systems.
- Advanced displays.
- High-detail modelling.
- Modern avionics.
CPU
High.
The aircraft contains numerous systems operating simultaneously.
GPU
High.
Large cockpit displays, detailed textures and advanced lighting effects increase GPU demand.
Default A320
The default A320 offers a more accessible simulation.
Compared with high-fidelity aircraft:
- Fewer background calculations.
- Simpler systems.
- Reduced CPU demand.
This often results in higher FPS.
However, it still introduces a meaningful glass cockpit workload.
Cessna 172
The Cessna 172 is one of the least demanding aircraft in the simulator.
CPU
Lower.
Fewer systems require continuous simulation.
GPU
Lower.
The cockpit contains fewer complex displays and generally fewer graphical effects.
This makes the C172 an excellent benchmark aircraft for establishing a baseline.
Glass Cockpit Load
One of the biggest performance differences between aircraft is the cockpit itself.
Modern glass cockpits update multiple displays every second.
Examples include:
- Primary Flight Display (PFD).
- Navigation Display (ND).
- Engine Indication and Crew Alerting System (EICAS).
- Electronic Flight Bag (EFB).
- Multifunction Display (MFD).
Every update requires CPU processing before the GPU renders the result.
Higher display refresh rates increase CPU workload.
CPU Usage
The CPU processes:
- Aircraft systems.
- Flight model calculations.
- Navigation.
- Glass cockpit logic.
- FMC updates.
- AI.
- Simulator logic.
The more detailed the aircraft, the greater the CPU workload.
This is why highly detailed aircraft frequently become MainThread limited at busy airports.
GPU Usage
The GPU renders:
- Cockpit textures.
- Displays.
- Aircraft model.
- Reflections.
- Lighting.
- Shadows.
Although GPU demand increases with aircraft detail, the increase is often smaller than the additional CPU workload caused by advanced systems simulation.
Comparing Aircraft
Example benchmark:
Cessna 172
Average FPS:
108
MainThread:
Low utilisation.
GPU:
96%
Smooth performance.
Default A320
Average FPS:
86
MainThread:
Moderate.
GPU:
97%
PMDG 737
Average FPS:
71
MainThread:
Frequently Limited.
GPU:
94%
Fenix A320
Average FPS:
63
MainThread:
Heavily Limited.
GPU:
90%
iniBuilds A350
Average FPS:
67
MainThread:
High utilisation.
GPU:
95%
The exact numbers will vary depending on your hardware, graphics settings and airport.
The important lesson is why those differences occur.
Why Fair Benchmarking Matters
Imagine you compare:
PMDG 737
↓
Cessna 172
Different airport.
Different weather.
Different graphics settings.
The comparison is meaningless.
To isolate aircraft performance:
Keep everything identical except the aircraft.
Only then can you measure the aircraft’s true impact.
Common Mistakes
Comparing different aircraft at different airports.
Using Live Weather.
Changing graphics settings between tests.
Ignoring glass cockpit refresh rate.
Judging performance only by Average FPS.
Forgetting to monitor MainThread status.
Student Exercise
Today you’re going to benchmark multiple aircraft.
Step 1
Load your permanent benchmark flight.
Keep exactly the same:
- Airport.
- Parking stand.
- Weather.
- Time of day.
- Graphics settings.
Step 2
Fly the benchmark using:
- PMDG 737.
- Fenix A320.
- iniBuilds A350.
- Default A320.
- Cessna 172 (or another simple GA aircraft if preferred).
Step 3
For each aircraft, record:
Performance
- Average FPS.
- Minimum FPS.
- 1% Lows.
- Frame pacing.
CPU
- MainThread status.
- CPU utilisation.
GPU
- GPU utilisation.
- VRAM usage.
- GPU temperature.
Notes
Record:
- Cockpit responsiveness.
- Taxi performance.
- Take-off performance.
- Approach performance.
- Landing smoothness.
Step 4
Compare your results.
Ask yourself:
- Which aircraft placed the greatest load on the CPU?
- Which aircraft used the most VRAM?
- Which aircraft had the smoothest frame pacing?
- Which aircraft became MainThread limited?
- Which aircraft best represents your normal flying?
Student Checklist
Five aircraft benchmarked.
Same benchmark flight used.
CPU behaviour analysed.
GPU behaviour analysed.
MainThread status recorded.
VRAM monitored.
Results compared.
Lesson Summary
Congratulations.
You now understand why aircraft selection has such a significant impact on Microsoft Flight Simulator performance.
Remember:
- Every aircraft simulates a different level of systems complexity.
- High-fidelity aircraft place substantially greater demands on the CPU because of their advanced avionics and systems modelling.
- Glass cockpits require continuous processing and can become a major source of MainThread load.
- GPU workload increases with aircraft detail, but CPU limitations often become the primary bottleneck in complex airliners.
- Fair benchmarking requires all test conditions to remain identical except for the aircraft being compared.
- Understanding how different aircraft affect your hardware allows you to interpret benchmark results accurately and choose the most appropriate optimisation strategy for the way you fly.
Knowledge Check
- Why do different aircraft produce different benchmark results?
- What is meant by “systems complexity”?
- Why do glass cockpits increase CPU workload?
- Why are high-fidelity aircraft often MainThread limited?
- How does GPU workload differ from CPU workload when changing aircraft?
- Why is the Cessna 172 often a useful baseline aircraft for benchmarking?
- What conditions should remain identical when comparing aircraft performance?
- Based on your benchmark results, which aircraft places the greatest demand on your system, and what evidence supports your conclusion?