Compare Prepar3D with MSFS 2020 and 2024 on realism, scenery, performance, add-ons, licensing and the best simulator for your flying.
Prepar3D is the better fit for structured training, specialist aircraft and controlled, add-on-built environments; Microsoft Flight Simulator is usually better for home flying, worldwide scenery and easier access. Neither is automatically more realistic: aircraft quality, configuration, hardware and the exact Prepar3D or MSFS version matter more than the platform name.
Here, Microsoft Flight Simulator means the modern MSFS 2020 and MSFS 2024 products. Compare an exact combination, such as a required aircraft on one Prepar3D generation against its native MSFS equivalent, rather than comparing two brand names.
For Prepar3D vs MSFS 2024 specifically, MSFS has the broader platform support. MSFS 2024 runs on PC, Xbox Series X|S, PS5 and PS5 Pro; MSFS 2020 remains a PC and Xbox product and was never released on PlayStation. Prepar3D is for Windows PCs.
Prepar3D and MSFS differences at a glance
The decisive difference is purpose: Prepar3D suits controlled simulation installations, while MSFS is designed as an accessible consumer flight simulator with a detailed global world.
| Criterion | Prepar3D | Microsoft Flight Simulator |
|---|---|---|
| Best suited to | Training workflows, repeatable scenarios, cockpit integration and established specialist installations | Home flying, VFR exploration, airliner simulation and consumer add-ons |
| Default scenery | Conventional, locally installed world that relies heavily on add-ons for regional detail | Streamed aerial imagery, detailed terrain and photogrammetry where available |
| Aircraft realism | Depends on the aircraft package and its support for the exact Prepar3D generation | Also aircraft-dependent; strong graphics do not guarantee complete systems modelling |
| Add-ons | Mature legacy catalogue, but compatibility is fragmented across major releases | Large consumer ecosystem, with compatibility differences between MSFS 2020 and 2024 |
| Internet and storage | Practical for a fixed local scenery stack, although activation and updates may require internet access | Can use installed offline content, but streaming supplies much of its scenery advantage |
| Platforms | Windows PC | PC and supported consoles, depending on the MSFS edition |
| Licensing | Use must comply with the applicable education, training or professional licence terms | Designed and licensed as a consumer flight simulator |
Which simulator should you use?
Most people building a new recreational setup should choose Microsoft Flight Simulator; Prepar3D makes more sense when a defined aircraft, training workflow or cockpit installation requires it.
Choose Microsoft Flight Simulator when
MSFS is the stronger general-purpose starting point for home simulation.
- You want recognisable worldwide scenery without assembling numerous regional packages.
- Your main interests are VFR exploration, recreational flying or home airliner simulation.
- You value lighting, weather presentation and visual immersion.
- You need Xbox or PlayStation support instead of a Windows simulation PC.
- No required aircraft, instructor station or specialist interface ties you to Prepar3D.
Console support comes with restrictions. File-based PC community add-ons cannot simply be copied to a console, and specialist peripherals or cockpit interfaces may lack support even when they work in Windows.
Choose Prepar3D when
Prepar3D is strongest as the foundation of a known, controlled installation rather than as the default choice for a newcomer.
- A required aircraft, instructor tool or integration explicitly supports your chosen Prepar3D version.
- Your cockpit depends on gauges, interface software or hardware drivers built around Prepar3D.
- You need repeatable scenarios and locally controlled scenery that can remain unchanged.
- You already own a substantial library of add-ons confirmed to work with that release.
- Your intended use fits the selected Prepar3D licence.
Our explanation of where Prepar3D still makes practical sense examines these specialist cases. Do not select it merely because its professional positioning sounds more realistic.
Which has better graphics and scenery?
Microsoft Flight Simulator has the stronger default world and usually wins for VFR sightseeing. Its aerial imagery, terrain data, atmospheric rendering and photogrammetry can produce recognisable locations without requiring a hand-built global scenery installation.
Prepar3D can look excellent with carefully selected terrain, airports, weather enhancements and aircraft, but that is a curated system rather than the out-of-box experience. The extra cost, storage, installation work and compatibility management belong in any fair comparison.
MSFS scenery is not flawless. Streaming interruptions, old source imagery, distorted buildings and uneven photogrammetry can affect an area. A locally installed Prepar3D training region may look less sophisticated but remain more predictable and easier to freeze in a known configuration.
Is Prepar3D more realistic than MSFS?
Prepar3D is not universally more realistic than MSFS; realism depends chiefly on the aircraft, its systems, the control setup and the task being practised.
- Visual reference flying: MSFS normally supplies the more convincing default environment.
- Aircraft systems: the individual package decides the result. A detailed Prepar3D aircraft can exceed a basic MSFS model, and the reverse is equally possible.
- Handling: assess the exact aircraft, loading condition, aerodynamic implementation and control calibration.
- Procedural practice: Prepar3D can be preferable where repeatable scenarios, specialist integrations and a controlled software configuration are required.
A mistake we see constantly is treating better ground imagery as proof of better flight dynamics, or assuming Prepar3D's positioning means every included aircraft is study-level. Neither assumption holds. Avionics depth, engine behaviour, autopilot logic, failure simulation and control response must be assessed separately.
Neither product turns an ordinary home computer into an approved flight-training device. Approval applies to the complete device, including its hardware, software, configuration, intended use and regulatory status.
Which performs better, and how much internet do they need?
Neither simulator is consistently lighter on hardware because performance depends on the aircraft, scenery, weather, traffic and settings used for the flight.
Prepar3D can be heavily affected by dense AI traffic, shadows, reflections, autogen and complex add-on airports. In MSFS, Terrain Level of Detail, render scaling, traffic, glass-cockpit displays and streamed scenery can dominate performance.
Do not compare an empty default Prepar3D airport with a busy MSFS hub and call the result a platform benchmark. Test the aircraft, airport, weather and traffic combination you intend to use. Stable frame times during an instrument approach matter more than a high frame rate over an empty runway.
MSFS needs a suitable connection to provide its best world detail, although reduced offline operation is possible with installed content. Prepar3D is easier to maintain as a fixed local environment, but a large installation can consume substantial storage and maintenance time.
Can Prepar3D add-ons be used in Microsoft Flight Simulator?
Prepar3D aircraft, scenery and utilities cannot be installed directly into MSFS. The simulators use different package structures, aircraft systems, gauges, compiled modules, effects, scenery tools and rendering technology.
A proper port generally requires the original source material, permission to use it and substantial redevelopment. Copying an aircraft folder into MSFS is not a migration method, even if some textures or model data appear reusable.
Compatibility can also fail between major Prepar3D generations. An airport may load while objects, lighting or elevation data break; compiled gauges, DLL modules and interface software are more sensitive. MSFS 2020 and 2024 packages likewise require explicit compatibility checks rather than assumptions.
Scenery brings additional technical and legal restrictions. Our guide to what can realistically be reused when moving FSX or Prepar3D scenery into MSFS explains those limits.
You can compare each ecosystem through our Prepar3D aircraft and scenery library and MSFS add-on library. Always read the stated simulator, version and platform requirements before installing a package.
What should you check before switching?
A move between Prepar3D and MSFS should be treated as a compatibility project, not as a routine simulator update.
- Define the use case. Decide whether the installation is for recreation, procedural practice, education or a formal professional requirement, then check the relevant licensing position.
- Choose the essential aircraft first. If one aircraft, instructor tool or integration is non-negotiable, establish exactly which simulator releases it supports before buying the platform.
- Audit every dependency. Check aircraft, scenery, weather tools, navigation data, panels, control software and cockpit interfaces individually. Partial loading is not proof of compatibility.
- Verify hardware and platform support. Confirm that yokes, pedals, switch panels, displays and interface software work with the target edition rather than relying on generic recognition by the operating system.
- Price the complete installation. Include replacement add-ons, storage, controls, internet requirements and any PC upgrade needed for the settings you expect to use. Comparing only the base purchase price is misleading.
- Test representative flights. Use the aircraft, weather, traffic and demanding airports that reflect your normal flying, not an empty default scenario.
- Keep the old installation intact. Do not remove a working Prepar3D or MSFS setup until its replacement has completed several representative flights without compatibility or stability problems.