Microsoft Flight Simulator

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for this combination in Microsoft Flight Simulator shows a consistent pattern: the AMD Ryzen 5 4600G paired with the Intel Arc B370 delivers playable performance only at the lowest settings, and even then it falls short of the 60 FPS threshold. At 3840x2160, the average frame rates are 18 FPS on High, 23 FPS on Medium, 17 FPS on Ultra, and 30 FPS on Low. The Medium preset includes min/max figures of 20 and 27 FPS respectively, meaning the frame time variance is narrow but consistently low. Every 4K measurement sits well below the playable threshold.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages improve but remain sub-60: High produces 24 FPS, Ultra produces 23 FPS, Low reaches 41 FPS, and Medium lands at 32 FPS with a min of 27 and max of 36. The step from 4K to 1440p yields a meaningful gain in the Low preset, roughly a 37% increase in average frame rate, which suggests the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. At 1920x1080, the same settings hierarchy appears: Low averages 50 FPS, Medium averages 39 FPS with min 33 and max 45, High averages 30 FPS, and Ultra averages 28 FPS. The 1080p Low result is the closest this combo comes to the 60 FPS target, but it still misses by 10 FPS on average.

The min/max data for Medium at all three resolutions shows a consistent frame pacing pattern: the spread between minimum and maximum is roughly 7 to 9 FPS, which indicates that the scene complexity in Microsoft Flight Simulator causes moderate frame time spikes but no catastrophic stuttering. The absence of min/max values for Low, High, and Ultra presets in the database means those measurements were not recorded, so only the Medium preset provides a full picture of frame delivery consistency.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this CPU/GPU pairing ranks 3428 out of 3714 total combos. That places it in the bottom 8% of all tested configurations, which is a strong indicator that this is not a competitive setup for this particular title. The percentile data for the individual components reinforces this: the CPU sits at the 71st percentile among all processors, while the GPU sits at only the 5th percentile among all graphics cards. The massive gap between those two percentiles suggests the Intel Arc B370 is the dominant bottleneck in this pairing, dragging down what would otherwise be a mid-range capable CPU.

The rank of 3428 out of 3714 means there are 285 other combinations that perform worse in this game, but there are 3427 combinations that perform better. This is not a subtle difference; the combo is firmly in the lower tail of the distribution. When interpreting this rank, it is important to note that the game has a clear 60 FPS playability threshold, and none of the tested settings at any resolution reach that threshold. The ranking reflects a system that can run the game but cannot deliver smooth gameplay at any preset.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data shows a clear division of labor between the CPU and GPU in this game. The CPU, AMD Ryzen 5 4600G, is a 6-core, 12-thread Zen 2 part with a 65 W TDP and a 3.70 GHz base clock that boosts to 4.20 GHz. Its benchmark scores are respectable for its class: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 13593 and a single-core score of 1919, plus a Geekbench multi-core of 6637 and single-core of 1460. In contrast, the Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution in the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) family, with a 25 W TDP, 1280 shading units, and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. Its only recorded benchmark, 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, scores 1184, which places it at the 5th percentile of all GPUs.

The scaling between resolutions reveals which component matters more. From 1080p Low to 1440p Low, the average FPS drops from 50 to 41, a decline of 18%. From 1440p Low to 4K Low, the average drops from 41 to 30, another 27% decline. This consistent degradation as resolution increases points to the GPU as the primary limiter. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect frame rates to remain relatively flat across resolutions, since the CPU workload in a flight simulator is largely physics and scenery loading, which does not scale linearly with pixel count. Instead, the steady FPS drop with each resolution step confirms that the Arc B370's rendering throughput is insufficient for this game's demands.

The settings scaling tells a similar story. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium costs 11 FPS (50 to 39), Low to High costs 20 FPS (50 to 30), and Low to Ultra costs 22 FPS (50 to 28). The proportional drop from Low to Ultra is 44% at 1080p. At 1440p, the same Low-to-Ultra drop is 41 to 23, a 44% reduction. This consistency across resolutions indicates that the GPU's shading and texture units are saturated by the increased settings load, not the CPU's ability to feed them. The CPU's 8 MB shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support at 51.2 GB/s are likely sufficient for the game's single-threaded and multi-threaded demands, given that the CPU ranks in the 71st percentile overall.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Microsoft Flight Simulator? The answer is technically yes, but not in a way that meets the standard 60 FPS playability threshold. The verdict data shows that no resolution, from 3840x2160 down to 1920x1080, has any playable settings listed. The best case scenario is 1080p Low, which averages 50 FPS, 10 FPS short of the target. At 1440p, the best is Low at 41 FPS. At 4K, the best is Low at 30 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1080p averages 28 FPS, which is below even the 30 FPS minimum for a "playable" experience in many games, though the database's threshold is explicitly 60 FPS.

For a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for its demanding rendering of terrain, weather, and aircraft detail, this combination is not suitable for smooth gameplay. The recorded data indicates that users would have to accept frame rates in the 30 to 50 FPS range on Low settings at 1080p, which may be tolerable for casual flying but will not provide a fluid experience. The min FPS of 33 on Medium at 1080p shows that even the mid-range preset can dip below 40 FPS, and the 27 FPS minimum at 1440p Medium suggests that any higher settings will cause noticeable frame drops.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the CPU, based on average benchmark scores, provide context for what other processors would behave similarly in this pairing. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE has an average score of 17482, a delta of 0.1% from the Ryzen 5 4600G's 17507. The Intel Core 7 150U scores 17395, a 0.6% difference. The AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE scores 17614, a -0.6% difference, and the Intel Core i3-14100T scores 17648, a -0.8% difference. All four are within 0.8% of the 4600G, meaning any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in this game when paired with the same Intel Arc B370.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are all much older or weaker parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186, a -0.2% delta from the Arc B370's 1184. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, a -0.5% delta. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, a -0.7% delta, and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, a 1.4% delta. These are all integrated or low-end discrete GPUs from over a decade ago, which underscores how limited the Arc B370 is in this context. Anyone considering this combo should expect performance in line with those older parts, not with modern discrete graphics cards.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo can achieve in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest recorded average is 50 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. No settings at any resolution exceed 50 FPS.

Q: Does this combination reach 60 FPS at any resolution or setting?

A: No. The database shows no playable settings at 3840x2160, 2560x1440, or 1920x1080. The 60 FPS threshold is never met, with the closest result being 50 FPS at 1080p Low.

Q: How does the CPU rank compared to other processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G sits at the 71st percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17507. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE, scores 17482, a 0.1% difference.

Q: How does the GPU rank compared to other graphics cards?

A: The Intel Arc B370 is at the 5th percentile of all GPUs, with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184. Its nearest rival, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, scores 1186, a -0.2% difference.

Q: What is the frame consistency on Medium settings at 1080p?

A: At 1080p Medium, the average is 39 FPS, with a minimum of 33 and a maximum of 45. This gives a frame range of 12 FPS, indicating moderate variance.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for the low frame rates?

A: The GPU is the primary bottleneck. The FPS drops steadily as resolution increases (50 at 1080p Low, 41 at 1440p Low, 30 at 4K Low), which is characteristic of a GPU-limited scenario. The CPU's 71st percentile ranking is far higher than the GPU's 5th percentile.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The best recorded average is 30 FPS on Low, which is half the target. Since the playable threshold is 60 FPS and no settings are listed as playable, there is no recommended preset for 4K.

At 2560x1440, the situation is similar. Low averages 41 FPS, Medium averages 32 FPS, High averages 24 FPS, and Ultra averages 23 FPS. None reach 60 FPS, so no preset qualifies as playable. The lowest settings, Low, offers the highest average but still falls short.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 50 FPS, which is the best result across all resolutions and settings. Medium averages 39 FPS, High averages 30 FPS, and Ultra averages 28 FPS. The 50 FPS on Low is the most demanding preset that comes closest to the 60 FPS target, but it still does not clear the threshold. For users willing to accept sub-60 frame rates, Low at 1080p is the optimal choice, as it offers the highest average FPS and avoids the deeper dips seen on Medium, where the minimum drops to 33 FPS.