Microsoft Flight Simulator

Measured FPS Breakdown

Microsoft Flight Simulator is notoriously demanding, and the recorded data for the AMD Ryzen 5 3600 paired with the Intel Arc B570 confirms that this combination requires careful attention to settings and resolution. The measurements cover three resolutions and four quality presets, and the results reveal a wide spread of performance depending on how the workload is configured.

At 3840x2160, the highest resolution tested, the system struggles to maintain smooth frame rates across the board. The Low preset delivers an average of 51 FPS, while Medium drops to 40 FPS with a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS. High falls to 30 FPS on average, and Ultra bottoms out at 28 FPS. None of these averages reach the 60 FPS playable threshold, meaning that 4K is effectively out of reach for this hardware when seeking a fluid experience. The data shows a steady decline of roughly 11 FPS between Low and Medium, then another 10 FPS between Medium and High, followed by a smaller 2 FPS drop to Ultra. The margin between High and Ultra is narrow, which suggests that the most demanding preset does not impose a dramatically heavier load than High at this resolution, though both remain far below playable levels.

At 2560x1440, the situation improves considerably. The Low preset produces an average of 69 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold with a modest buffer. Medium averages 54 FPS, with a minimum of 46 FPS and a maximum of 62 FPS, so while the average is below the threshold, the frame rate does occasionally cross above 60 FPS. High averages 41 FPS, and Ultra averages 39 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 15 FPS, while the difference between Medium and High is 13 FPS, and High to Ultra is only 2 FPS. This pattern indicates that the step from Low to Medium is the most punishing, while the jump from High to Ultra is comparatively minor in terms of average frame rate impact.

At 1920x1080, the system finally shows its strongest performance. The Low preset averages 86 FPS, which is comfortably above the playable threshold. Medium averages 67 FPS, with a minimum of 57 FPS and a maximum of 77 FPS, so it also clears the 60 FPS mark on average. High averages 50 FPS, and Ultra averages 48 FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium costs 19 FPS on average, while Medium to High costs 17 FPS, and High to Ultra costs only 2 FPS. This mirrors the pattern seen at other resolutions: the highest preset tier adds relatively little extra demand compared to High, but the transition from Medium to High is substantial.

The min and max FPS data available only for the Medium preset at each resolution provides useful context on frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the spread between minimum and maximum is 20 FPS, at 1440p Medium the spread is 16 FPS, and at 2160p Medium the spread is 12 FPS. The narrower spread at higher resolutions suggests that frame pacing becomes more stable as resolution increases, even though the absolute frame rates are lower. Inversely, the lower resolution with the widest spread between min and max indicates that the workload varies more dramatically second to second, likely due to varying scene complexity inherent in a flight simulator.

FAQ

Q: Can this combination run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 1920x1080 with Medium settings?

A: Yes, the recorded data shows an average of 67 FPS at 1920x1080 Medium, with a minimum of 57 FPS and a maximum of 77 FPS. Since the average exceeds the 60 FPS playable threshold, Medium is considered playable at this resolution.

Q: What is the best playable settings preset at 2560x1440 for this hardware?

A: At 2560x1440, the only settings preset that stays at or above 60 FPS on average is Low, delivering 69 FPS. Medium falls to 54 FPS, High to 41 FPS, and Ultra to 39 FPS, so Low is the best playable choice at this resolution.

Q: Is 3840x2160 playable with any settings on this system?

A: No settings preset at 3840x2160 reaches the 60 FPS playable threshold in the recorded data. Low averages 51 FPS, Medium 40 FPS with min 34 FPS and max 46 FPS, High 30 FPS, and Ultra 28 FPS, none of which clear the 60 FPS target.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B570 compare to nearby graphics hardware in terms of average benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Arc B570 has an average benchmark score of 20556, which is 0.1% higher than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile at 20534, 0.4% higher than NVIDIA Quadro M4000M at 20480, and 0.1% lower than Intel Arc A750 at 20582. It is 0.5% lower than AMD Radeon R9 M390X at 20662. The closest rival in average score performance is the Intel Arc A750, differing by 0.1%.

Q: What is the playable settings determination based on the recorded FPS measurements and the verdict by resolution?

A: The playable threshold is set at 60 FPS. At 1920x1080, the playable settings include Low and Medium, with Medium as best settings at 67 FPS. At 2560x1440, Low is the single playable setting at 69 FPS, while at 3840x2160, no playable settings were recorded as none of them reach the 60 FPS threshold.

Best Settings per Resolution

The best settings per resolution is defined as the most demanding settings preset that stays at or above 60 FPS on average at that given resolution, based on the recorded FPS data. At 1920x1080, the best settings preset that clears the 60 FPS threshold is Medium, with an average of 67 FPS recorded. Since Medium averages 67 FPS, it is above the playable threshold, while High drops to 50 FPS and Low averages 86 FPS, so Medium is the highest settings preset that remains playable at 1080p.

At 2560x1440, the best settings preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Low, with an average of 69 FPS. The next step, Medium, drops to 54 FPS average, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold, making Low the only playable preset at 1440p and thus the best settings for this resolution.

At 3840x2160, no settings preset reaches an average of 60 FPS. The highest recorded average is 51 FPS at Low, followed by 40 FPS at Medium, 30 FPS at High, and 28 FPS at Ultra. Because none of these meet the 60 FPS threshold, there is no best settings preset at this resolution according to the recorded data.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 3600 combined with the Intel Arc B570 ranks 2988 out of 3714 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the lower portion of the database. This rank reflects the demanding nature of the flight simulator, which requires strong single-thread performance and substantial graphics capability to maintain high frame rates. The rank of 2988 out of 3714 means this combo sits below the median of tested combinations, which aligns with the measured frame rates showing that 4K is unplayable and even 1440p only supports Low settings for playable performance.

The rank is a combination of both the CPU and GPU performance in this specific game. The CPU, AMD Ryzen 5 3600, has a percentile of 71 against all CPUs in the database, indicating it performs better than most CPUs in general benchmark workloads. The GPU, Intel Arc B570, has a percentile of 65 against all GPUs, which is slightly lower than the CPU percentile. In this game, the combination ranks lower than both individual percentiles might suggest, indicating that Microsoft Flight Simulator's particular demands do not fully align with the strengths of either component, or that the combination of these two components yields a result that is less than the sum of their general benchmark scores.

The rank of 2988 out of 3714 also contextualizes the measured FPS numbers. With a rank below the median, it is expected that only lower resolutions and lower settings would achieve playable frame rates, which is exactly what the measured FPS data shows. The CPU is a mid-range desktop processor from the 3000 series, while the GPU is a mid-range Intel Arc offering, and their combined performance in this simulation falls in the lower half of the tested combinations, though not at the very bottom. The percentile of 71 for the CPU shows that in general CPU benchmarks, this processor is above average, but in Microsoft Flight Simulator, the combination with this GPU does not translate into a high rank, as the game's heavy graphics load is likely the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the AMD Ryzen 5 3600, based on average benchmark scores, include the Intel Core i7-1260P with an average score of 17007 and a delta of 0.2% compared to the Ryzen 5 3600's average score of 17035, the Intel Core i5-11400 at 17067 with a delta of -0.2%, the AMD EPYC 7573X at 17070 with a delta of -0.2%, and the AMD EPYC 7742 at 16998 with a delta of 0.2%. These CPUs all exhibit very similar average benchmark scores, with the Ryzen 5 3600 sitting almost exactly in the middle of this group. In practical terms, a system built with any of these processors would likely produce nearly identical frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator when paired with the same GPU, because their overall benchmark performance differs by less than 1% in each case.

For the Intel Arc B570, the nearest GPU rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile with an average score of 20534 and a delta of 0.1% compared to the Arc B570's average score of 20556, the Intel Arc A750 at 20582 with a delta of -0.1%, the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M at 20480 with a delta of 0.4%, and the AMD Radeon R9 M390X at 20662 with a delta of -0.5%. The differences among these GPUs are similarly small, all within 0.5% of the Arc B570. This means that swapping the Arc B570 for any of these alternatives would likely result in very similar performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator, assuming the rest of the system remains unchanged.

If a user were to pair the Ryzen 5 3600 with any of these rival GPUs, the measured frame rates would likely fall within a narrow range of the values recorded for the Arc B570. The closest GPU rival, the Intel Arc A750, differs by only 0.1% in average score, so the performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator would be nearly indistinguishable. The NVIDIA RTX 3070 Mobile, being a mobile part, may have different power characteristics, but its benchmark score is essentially the same as the Arc B570, suggesting similar gaming performance in this title. The AMD Radeon R9 M390X is an older mobile GPU with a score slightly higher than the Arc B570, though the 0.5% delta is negligible in real-world gaming. The Quadro M4000M is a workstation GPU, but its average score is close enough that gaming performance would be comparable as well.

The Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 5 3600 combined with the Intel Arc B570 can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 1920x1080 with Low and Medium settings, as well as at 2560x1440 with Low settings, according to the recorded data. At 1920x1080, the best playable settings preset is Medium with an average of 67 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. Low at 1080p averages 86 FPS, providing an even more comfortable margin. At 2560x1440, Low is the only playable preset with an average of 69 FPS, while Medium falls to 54 FPS, which is below the threshold. At 3840x2160, no preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold, with the highest average being 51 FPS at Low, so 4K is not playable with this hardware.

The verdict by resolution clearly shows that this combination is best suited for 1080p gaming, where Medium settings deliver playable performance. At 1440p, users must drop to Low settings to maintain an average above 60 FPS, which may be acceptable for a flight simulator where visual fidelity is important but not necessarily at the expense of smoothness. At 4K, the hardware is insufficient for playable frame rates at any settings preset, so users with 4K displays would need to either lower their expectations, use resolution scaling, or consider different hardware.

The playable threshold of 60 FPS is a useful benchmark for determining playability, and the data shows that this system can meet that threshold at lower resolutions and settings. The Medium preset at 1080p offers a good balance of visual quality and performance, while the Low preset at 1440p allows for higher resolution but with reduced visual fidelity. For users who prioritize frame rate over resolution, 1080p Medium or Low would be the recommended configurations, and for those who prioritize resolution, 1440p Low is the only option that stays above 60 FPS on average.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals interesting insights into how the CPU and GPU each contribute to performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator at different resolutions. The measured FPS scaling between presets and resolutions suggests that the GPU becomes more of a limiting factor as resolution increases, while the CPU's role remains relatively constant across the tested configurations. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 86 at Low to 48 at Ultra, a spread of 38 FPS. At 2560x1440, the spread is from 69 at Low to 39 at Ultra, a range of 30 FPS. At 3840x2160, the spread is from 51 at Low to 28 at Ultra, a range of 23 FPS. This narrowing spread at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is increasingly the bottleneck, as the frame rate differences between presets shrink when the resolution increases.

The CPU, AMD Ryzen 5 3600, has an average benchmark score of 17035 and ranks in the 71st percentile among all CPUs. Its benchmark scores show a multicore score of 6318 in Cinebench R20 and 15045 in Cinebench R23, while single-core scores are 892 and 2124 respectively. This CPU has 6 cores and 12 threads, which is sufficient for most games, but Microsoft Flight Simulator is known for being demanding on both CPU and GPU. At lower resolutions like 1080p, the CPU may be more of a factor, as the GPU has less work to do and frame rates are higher, but the data shows that even at 1080p Low, the system achieves 86 FPS, which is well above the playable threshold.

As resolution increases, the GPU's workload grows, and the Intel Arc B570 with its 10 GB of GDDR6 memory and 380.0 GB/s bandwidth becomes the primary constraint. The GPU's average benchmark score is 20556, and it ranks in the 65th percentile among all GPUs. At 4K, even the Low preset only achieves 51 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is heavily loaded at this resolution. The fact that the FPS difference between High and Ultra is only 2 FPS at all three resolutions suggests that the Ultra preset does not add much additional GPU load compared to High, or that the system is already bottlenecked elsewhere at those higher settings.

The scaling between resolutions at the same settings preset also indicates the GPU's role. For example, at Low settings, the FPS drops from 86 at 1080p to 69 at 1440p to 51 at 4K, a reduction of roughly 20% and 26% respectively. At Medium settings, the FPS drops from 67 at 1080p to 54 at 1440p to 40 at 4K, a reduction of about 19% and 26%. At High settings, the FPS drops from 50 at 1080p to 41 at 1440p to 30 at 4K, a reduction of 18% and 27%. At Ultra settings, the FPS drops from 48 at 1080p to 39 at 1440p to 28 at 4K, a reduction of 19% and 28%. The consistent percentage drops across presets suggest that the GPU is the dominant factor in resolution scaling, as the frame rate decreases by roughly the same proportion regardless of the settings preset.

In summary, the CPU plays a significant role at lower resolutions where frame rates are higher and the GPU has less work to do, but the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck as resolution increases. The data shows that the Intel Arc B570 is capable of delivering playable performance at 1080p Medium and 1440p Low, but falls short at 4K and at higher presets. The Ryzen 5 3600 provides sufficient CPU performance for this game, as evidenced by the fact that at 1080p Low, the system achieves 86 FPS, which is well above the playable threshold and suggests that the CPU is not the limiting factor at that resolution and settings combination. At higher resolutions, the GPU's limitations become more apparent, and the CPU's performance becomes less relevant to the overall frame rate.