Microsoft Flight Simulator

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 3600 paired with the Intel Arc B580 ranks at position 2788 out of 3714 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the combo in the lower half of the database, which is a surprising result given the individual component scores. The CPU sits at the 71st percentile among all tested processors, while the GPU holds the 68th percentile among all tested graphics cards. Despite both parts ranking above the median in their respective categories, the demanding nature of this flight simulator pulls the combined result down to the 25th percentile of tested combos.

The benchmark data shows that this system cannot sustain 60 frames per second at 4K on any settings preset. At 1440p, the combination manages playable performance on Low and Medium presets, with Medium averaging 61 FPS. At 1080p, the same two presets clear the 60 FPS threshold, with Medium reaching 76 FPS on average. The Ultra preset falls short at every resolution, and even High settings fail to reach 60 FPS at any tested resolution. This is a mid-range pairing that handles moderate settings well but struggles when the visual load increases.

The rank of 2788 out of 3714 reflects a system that is viable for this game only with careful settings selection. The data indicates that users should target Medium as the highest playable preset, and only at 1440p or 1080p. The 4K results are consistently below the playability threshold, making that resolution unsuitable for this combination.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data reveals how the balance between processor and graphics card shifts across resolutions and presets. At 1080p with Low settings, the system produces 97 FPS. This high frame rate suggests that neither component is severely bottlenecked at this light load. Moving to 1440p Low drops the average to 78 FPS, and 4K Low falls further to 58 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p Low shows a 19 FPS reduction, while the jump from 1440p to 4K Low costs another 20 FPS. This pattern indicates that the GPU becomes progressively more limiting as resolution increases, which is typical for a flight simulator with heavy terrain rendering.

The Medium preset tells a similar story. At 1080p, the average is 76 FPS. At 1440p, it drops to 61 FPS. At 4K, it falls to 45 FPS. The gap between 1080p and 1440p Medium is 15 FPS, while the gap between 1440p and 4K Medium is 16 FPS. The scaling is fairly consistent, suggesting that the rendering load scales predictably with pixel count. The minimum FPS values at Medium are 64 at 1080p, 52 at 1440p, and 38 at 4K. These minimums show that even at playable average frame rates, there are dips that could affect smoothness during complex scenes.

High settings reveal a different pattern. At 1080p High, the average is 57 FPS. At 1440p High, it drops to 46 FPS. At 4K High, it falls to 34 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 11 FPS, and from 1440p to 4K is 12 FPS. The consistent deltas across resolution changes suggest that the GPU is the primary driver of performance differences at this preset. The CPU, a 6-core 12-thread Zen 2 part with a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, appears sufficient to feed the GPU at lower resolutions, but the graphics card cannot maintain high frame rates as pixel count rises.

At Ultra settings, the averages are 54 FPS at 1080p, 44 FPS at 1440p, and 32 FPS at 4K. The differences between resolutions are 10 FPS and 12 FPS respectively. The pattern holds across all presets: resolution scaling consistently costs roughly 10 to 20 FPS per step up. This indicates that the Intel Arc B580, with its 12 GB of GDDR6 memory and 192-bit bus, is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The Ryzen 5 3600 provides enough single-thread performance, as shown by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2124, to avoid becoming the primary bottleneck in this title.

The data suggests that at 1080p, the CPU and GPU are relatively balanced. The 97 FPS result at Low settings indicates headroom in both components. At 4K, the GPU is clearly the dominant constraint, as even Low settings cannot reach 60 FPS. The CPU's role diminishes as resolution increases, which aligns with the expected behavior of a flight simulator that stresses graphics hardware with detailed scenery and weather effects.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 60 FPS on a 4K monitor?

A: No. The recorded data shows no playable settings at 3840x2160. The highest average FPS at 4K is 58 on Low settings, which falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium averages 45 FPS, High averages 34 FPS, and Ultra averages 32 FPS.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p gaming with this combo?

A: Medium is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at 2560x1440. The average FPS at Medium is 61, with a minimum of 52 and a maximum of 70. Low settings average 78 FPS, while High and Ultra fall to 46 and 44 FPS respectively.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 3600 compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 5 3600 has an average benchmark score of 17035. The Intel Core i7-1260P scores 17007, which is 0.2 percent lower. The Intel Core i5-11400 scores 17067, which is 0.2 percent higher. The AMD EPYC 7573X scores 17070, also 0.2 percent higher, and the AMD EPYC 7742 scores 16998, 0.2 percent lower. All four rivals are effectively within a rounding error of the Ryzen 5 3600.

Q: What graphics cards perform similarly to the Intel Arc B580?

A: According to the database, the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP has an average score of 23061, which is 0.2 percent lower than the Arc B580's 23021. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 scores 22895, 0.6 percent lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 scores 23172, 0.7 percent higher. The NVIDIA P106-100 scores 23249, 1 percent higher.

Q: Is the Ultra preset ever playable with this hardware?

A: No. At all three tested resolutions, Ultra settings fail to reach 60 FPS. The averages are 54 FPS at 1080p, 44 FPS at 1440p, and 32 FPS at 4K. The 1080p Ultra result is the closest to the threshold but still 6 FPS short.

Q: What frame rates can be expected at 1080p with different presets?

A: Low settings average 97 FPS. Medium settings average 76 FPS, with a minimum of 64 and a maximum of 87. High settings average 57 FPS. Ultra settings average 54 FPS. Only Low and Medium clear the 60 FPS playable threshold.

The Verdict

This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, but only under specific conditions. The verdict by resolution is clear: at 3840x2160, there are no playable settings. The best 4K result is 58 FPS on Low, which misses the 60 FPS threshold. At 2560x1440, the system is playable on Low and Medium presets. Medium is the best playable option, delivering an average of 61 FPS. At 1920x1080, Low and Medium are also the only playable presets, with Medium reaching 76 FPS on average.

The data shows that this combination is best suited for 1080p gaming with Medium settings, where the 76 FPS average provides comfortable headroom above the 60 FPS threshold. The minimum FPS of 64 at 1080p Medium indicates that even during demanding scenes, the frame rate stays above the playability line. At 1440p Medium, the average sits right at 61 FPS, which is playable but with less margin. The minimum of 52 FPS at this resolution means there will be moments where the frame rate dips below 60, though the average remains acceptable.

For users with 4K displays, this hardware is not recommended for this game. The inability to reach 60 FPS even on Low settings means that visual quality would have to be sacrificed without achieving smooth performance. The 45 FPS average at 4K Medium is the most balanced compromise but still falls short of the playable threshold. The 32 FPS result at 4K Ultra confirms that this combination lacks the graphics horsepower for maximum settings at high resolution.

The Ryzen 5 3600 holds up its end of the pairing. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15045 and single-core score of 2124 indicate solid processing power for a flight simulator that handles complex physics and AI calculations. The Intel Arc B580, with 2560 shading units and 80 ROPs, provides adequate rasterization performance for moderate settings but cannot overcome the pixel load at 4K. Users should treat this system as a 1080p Medium or 1440p Medium machine for Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals in the database all produce nearly identical average benchmark scores. The Intel Core i7-1260P comes within 0.2 percent of the Ryzen 5 3600, making it a direct substitute in terms of raw processing capability. The Intel Core i5-11400 is 0.2 percent faster on average, while the AMD EPYC 7573X and AMD EPYC 7742 are also within 0.2 percent. None of these alternatives would meaningfully change the frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator, as the differences are negligible.

On the graphics side, the Intel Arc B580's nearest rivals show a similar level of performance clustering. The AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP is 0.2 percent slower, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 is 0.6 percent slower, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is 0.7 percent faster, and the NVIDIA P106-100 is 1 percent faster. The RTX 3080, despite its higher average score, would still likely produce similar results in this specific game given the small delta. The RX 580 2048SP and RTX 2080 would behave nearly identically to the Arc B580 in this title.

For users considering alternative hardware, the data suggests that swapping the CPU for any of the four nearest rivals would not change the playable settings or frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator. Similarly, swapping the GPU for the RX 580 2048SP or RTX 2080 would keep performance within a fraction of a percent. The RTX 3080 and P106-100 offer slightly higher scores, but the 1 percent or less difference would not push any preset over the 60 FPS threshold that currently fails.

The practical takeaway is that this performance tier, whether represented by the Ryzen 5 3600 or its nearest rivals, combined with the Arc B580 or its nearest rivals, lands in the same playable envelope: 1080p Medium at 76 FPS and 1440p Medium at 61 FPS. No nearby alternative hardware would unlock High or Ultra presets at playable frame rates.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium. The measured average FPS is 76, with a minimum of 64 and a maximum of 87. This provides a comfortable margin above the playable threshold. Low settings average 97 FPS, but Medium offers a better visual experience while maintaining smooth performance.

At 2560x1440, Medium is again the best playable preset. The average FPS is 61, which just clears the 60 FPS threshold. The minimum of 52 FPS indicates occasional dips below the target, but the overall average remains playable. Low settings average 78 FPS for users who prefer a larger performance buffer.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS. The closest result is Low at 58 FPS, which falls 2 FPS short of the playable threshold. Medium averages 45 FPS, High averages 34 FPS, and Ultra averages 32 FPS. Users at this resolution would need to accept frame rates below 60 FPS or consider different hardware.

The recommended configuration for this system is 1080p Medium, delivering 76 FPS with a 64 FPS minimum, or 1440p Medium, delivering 61 FPS with a 52 FPS minimum. These are the only settings that balance visual quality with playable performance according to the recorded data.