Microsoft Flight Simulator

FAQ

Q: Can this AMD Ryzen 5 5600G + Intel Arc B570 combo run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 1080p?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080, the combo clears the 60 FPS threshold on Low (86 avg FPS) and Medium (67 avg FPS) settings. High and Ultra presets fall below 60, with 50 and 48 avg FPS respectively.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1440p?

A: Only Low settings hit 60 FPS at 2560x1440, with an average of 69 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all sit below the playable threshold at 54, 41, and 39 avg FPS.

Q: Is 4K viable with this hardware?

A: No. At 3840x2160, even Low settings only reach 51 avg FPS, and Medium drops to 40 avg FPS. High and Ultra are below 30 avg FPS, making 4K unplayable across all presets.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 5 5600G scores 21088 on average benchmarks, sitting 0.1% above the Intel Core i3-1220P and 0.1% below the Intel Core Ultra 7 256V. It trails the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U by 0.2% and the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U by 0.4%.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Arc B570 scores 20556 on average benchmarks, placing 0.1% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile and 0.1% below the Intel Arc A750. It leads the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M by 0.4% and trails the AMD Radeon R9 M390X by 0.5%.

Q: Where does this combo rank among all tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 2988 out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the lower half of the tested pool for this specific title.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data shows that Microsoft Flight Simulator scales heavily with resolution, which indicates the GPU becomes the dominant bottleneck as pixel count rises. At 1920x1080 Low, the combo produces 86 avg FPS; dropping to 2560x1440 Low cuts that to 69 avg FPS (-19.8%), and at 3840x2160 Low it falls further to 51 avg FPS (-26.1% from 1440p). This steep scaling across the three resolutions points to the Intel Arc B570 being the limiting factor at higher pixel densities.

Preset scaling reinforces the GPU-bound nature at 4K. From Low to Medium at 3840x2160, the average drops from 51 to 40 FPS, then to 30 at High and 28 at Ultra. That is a 45% reduction from Low to Ultra. At 1080p, the same preset sweep moves from 86 to 67 to 50 to 48 FPS — a 44% drop, nearly identical. The CPU's role appears more prominent at lower resolutions and higher presets, where the frame rate gap between Medium and High at 1080p (67 to 50) is proportionally larger than the same gap at 4K (40 to 30), suggesting the Ryzen 5 5600G's six cores and twelve threads can feed the GPU adequately at 1080p, but the GPU's raw throughput caps performance as resolution climbs.

The CPU's benchmark profile supports this interpretation. With a 3DMark max-threads score of 5455 and a single-thread score of 872, the 5600G is a capable mid-range part, but its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 10551 and single-core score of 1409 indicate it is not a top-tier processor. For a simulation title like Flight Simulator, which often relies on single-threaded performance for physics and scenery streaming, the CPU's 0.1% delta against the Intel Core i3-1220P in average benchmarks suggests it is not a weak link, but it is not a strong one either. The verdict data confirms that no resolution and preset combination above 1080p Medium clears 60 FPS, and even 1440p only works on Low — a pattern typical of a GPU-limited system at higher settings, with the CPU holding its own at lower resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080: The combo delivers its best results at this resolution. Low settings produce 86 avg FPS, comfortably above the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium settings hit 67 avg FPS with a minimum of 57 and a maximum of 77, meaning frame times can dip slightly below the threshold during heavy scenery loads. High settings fall to 50 avg FPS, and Ultra drops to 48 avg FPS — both below playable territory. The gap between Medium and High is 17 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 2 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the top end.

2560x1440: At 1440p, only Low settings clear the 60 FPS bar, with 69 avg FPS. Medium drops to 54 avg FPS, with a minimum of 46 and a maximum of 62 — the max exceeds 60, but the average does not. High sits at 41 avg FPS, and Ultra at 39 avg FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium is a 15 FPS loss, while High to Ultra is just 2 FPS. This resolution shows the GPU struggling to maintain playable frame rates beyond the lowest preset.

3840x2160: 4K is not playable at any setting. Low produces 51 avg FPS, Medium 40 avg FPS (with a minimum of 34 and maximum of 46), High 30 avg FPS, and Ultra 28 avg FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 11 FPS, from Medium to High is 10 FPS, and High to Ultra is 2 FPS. The minimum of 34 FPS on Medium highlights how frame pacing can become erratic at 4K, with occasional dips well below the average.

The data shows a consistent pattern: the Intel Arc B570's 10 GB GDDR6 memory and 380.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for the high-resolution textures and dense scenery of Flight Simulator beyond 1080p Medium. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2649 and Passmark G3D score of 14195 place the GPU in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, which explains the mid-range performance ceiling.

Similar Performance Alternatives

CPU side: The Ryzen 5 5600G sits in a tight cluster of rivals. The Intel Core i3-1220P is the closest match, with an average benchmark score of 21066 versus the 5600G's 21088 — a delta of just 0.1%. In practical terms, these two would behave nearly identically in Flight Simulator, meaning the i3-1220P would likely produce the same FPS numbers at the same settings and resolutions. The Intel Core Ultra 7 256V (21112, -0.1% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U (21133, -0.2% delta) are also within 0.2% of the 5600G, so any of these CPUs paired with the same GPU would yield virtually indistinguishable frame rates. The Intel Core Ultra 7 155U trails by 0.4%, still a negligible difference for this game.

GPU side: The Intel Arc B570's nearest rival is the Intel Arc A750, which scores 20582 versus the B570's 20556 — a 0.1% gap. In Flight Simulator, the A750 would produce nearly the same FPS at every resolution and preset, meaning the same playable settings: 1080p Low and Medium, 1440p Low, and no 4K. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (20534, +0.1% delta) is effectively tied as well, so users with that mobile GPU would see similar performance. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (20480, +0.4%) and AMD Radeon R9 M390X (20662, -0.5%) are also within half a percent, but these are older parts with different feature sets; the M4000M lacks modern DirectX 12 Ultimate support, while the R9 M390X is a legacy GCN card, so actual driver behavior in a DX12 title like Flight Simulator may differ despite similar compute scores.

For a builder considering alternatives, the data suggests that swapping the 5600G for any of its nearest rivals would not change the verdict at any resolution. Similarly, choosing an Arc A750 or RTX 3070 Mobile instead of the B570 would keep the same playable settings, assuming the rest of the system remains unchanged.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 2988 out of 3714 tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the 19th percentile of tested systems. This is a low ranking, but it must be interpreted in context: the tested pool likely includes high-end CPUs and GPUs that are far beyond this mid-range pairing. The rank reflects that this system is not built for maxing out a demanding flight simulator, but rather for playable performance at moderate settings.

The CPU's percentileVsAllCpus of 74 and the GPU's percentileVsAllGpus of 65 show that both components are above average in their respective categories, but neither is exceptional. The combination of a 74th-percentile CPU with a 65th-percentile GPU does not translate into a high game-specific rank because Flight Simulator is particularly demanding on both fronts — it needs strong single-threaded CPU performance for simulation logic and substantial GPU memory bandwidth for terrain rendering. The 5600G's 16 MB L3 cache and 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth are adequate but not generous, and the B570's 10 GB VRAM and 160-bit bus are the likely bottlenecks at higher resolutions.

The rank of 2988 out of 3714 means roughly 80% of tested combos outperform this one in this game. However, the verdict data shows that the system still achieves playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p Low, which is the practical takeaway for a builder on a mid-range budget.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Microsoft Flight Simulator? Yes, but with clear limits. The verdictByResolution data specifies exactly which presets clear the 60 FPS playable threshold:

• 3840x2160: No playable settings. All presets fall below 60 FPS, with the best option (Low) averaging 51 FPS.
• 2560x1440: Only Low settings are playable, with an average of 69 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fail the 60 FPS test.
• 1920x1080: Low (86 avg FPS) and Medium (67 avg FPS) are playable. High (50 avg FPS) and Ultra (48 avg FPS) are not.

The best playable experience is at 1080p Medium, which averages 67 FPS with a minimum of 57 and a maximum of 77 — the minimum occasionally dips below 60, but the average clears the threshold. For a smoother experience, 1080p Low provides a comfortable 86 avg FPS with headroom for demanding scenery. At 1440p, stick to Low for 69 avg FPS. Skip 4K entirely; the hardware cannot deliver playable frame rates there.

In practical terms, this combo is suited for 1080p gaming with medium settings, or 1440p with reduced visuals. It is not a high-refresh-rate or high-resolution system for this title. The Intel Arc B570's 10 GB memory and 380 GB/s bandwidth are the primary constraints, while the Ryzen 5 5600G's 6-core/12-thread design with a 3.90 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost clock provides enough CPU headroom for the simulation's logic at these settings. If you want higher presets or 4K, you would need a more powerful GPU — and likely a more powerful CPU to feed it — based on the rank and percentile data.