Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600 + Intel Arc B580 combination is a capable 1080p and 1440p machine for Microsoft Flight Simulator, but it cannot maintain a playable 60 FPS at 4K. Benchmark data shows the system achieves its best playable experience at Medium settings in both 1080p and 1440p, while 4K requires dropping to Low settings just to approach playability, and even then it falls short. The measured FPS figures reveal a clear pattern: the simulator is demanding, and this hardware pairing has a distinct performance ceiling that varies significantly across resolutions and presets.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured data provides a complete picture of how this system handles Microsoft Flight Simulator across three resolutions and four quality presets. All figures are average FPS, as minimum and maximum values were not recorded in the dataset.

At 1920x1080, the system shows its strongest performance. With Low settings, the average FPS is 95.1, which is well above the 60 FPS playable threshold and leaves substantial headroom. Moving to Medium settings, the average drops to 76.4, still comfortably playable. High settings reduce the average to 56.1, which is below the 60 FPS threshold but not by a large margin. The most demanding Ultra preset yields an average of 51.6, a significant drop from Medium but still above 50 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra represents a 45.8% performance loss, showing that the preset choice has a major impact on frame rates at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the performance curve shifts downward. Low settings produce an average of 75.2, which is still playable. Medium settings average 61.6, just barely clearing the 60 FPS threshold. High settings drop to 46.2, a noticeable step down that makes the game feel less fluid. Ultra settings average 41.4, which is the lowest figure at this resolution. The jump from Medium to High represents a 25.0% performance drop, indicating that the High preset is a significant burden on the system at 1440p. The difference between Low and Medium is 18.1%, while the full range from Low to Ultra is 44.9% — a similar overall scaling to 1080p, but starting from a lower baseline.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playable frame rates. Low settings average 54.6, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings average 41.6, a substantial drop from Low. High settings average 32.7, and Ultra settings average 33.3. Interestingly, the Ultra preset performs slightly better than High at this resolution, with a 1.8% higher average. This anomaly suggests that at 4K, the bottleneck shifts in a way that makes the High and Ultra presets behave similarly. The scaling from Low to Medium is a 23.8% drop, while the jump from Medium to High is 21.4%. Across all presets, 4K performance is consistently below playable levels, with even the best case (Low) falling 5.4 FPS short of the 60 FPS target.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 60 FPS on a 1080p monitor?

A: Yes, but only with Low or Medium settings. The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 is 95.1 on Low and 76.4 on Medium, both above the 60 FPS threshold. High settings average 56.1, which falls short.

Q: What is the best playable preset at 2560x1440?

A: Medium settings, with an average of 61.6 FPS, is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS. Low settings also work at 75.2 FPS, but Medium provides better visual quality while still clearing the threshold.

Q: Is 4K gaming possible with this hardware?

A: No. Even at Low settings, the average FPS at 3840x2160 is 54.6, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium (41.6), High (32.7), and Ultra (33.3) all fall significantly short.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7600 has an average benchmark score of 26324 and ranks in the 78th percentile among all CPUs. Its closest rival is the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, which scores 26274, a 0.2% difference. The Intel Core i9-11900KF scores 26212 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 5 8540U scores 26187 (0.5% higher). This means the Ryzen 5 7600 sits at the top of its immediate performance class.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B580 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Intel Arc B580 has an average benchmark score of 23021 and ranks in the 68th percentile among all GPUs. Its closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP, which scores 23061, a -0.2% difference. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 scores 23172 (-0.7%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 scores 22895 (0.6%), and the NVIDIA P106-100 scores 23249 (-1%). The B580 performs within a narrow band of these cards.

Q: What happens to performance when moving from 1080p to 1440p at the same settings?

A: The average FPS drops noticeably. At Low settings, the drop is from 95.1 to 75.2, a 20.9% reduction. At Medium, it goes from 76.4 to 61.6, a 19.4% reduction. At High, it drops from 56.1 to 46.2, a 17.6% reduction. At Ultra, it falls from 51.6 to 41.4, a 19.8% reduction. The consistent ~20% penalty indicates a resolution-bound scaling pattern.

Q: Which component is more important for this game at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher presets, while the CPU remains relevant for lower presets. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 95.1 FPS, which is high enough that CPU performance likely matters more. At Ultra, the 51.6 FPS figure is closer to GPU-bound behavior, given the significant preset-dependent scaling.

CPU and GPU Roles

The performance data reveals how the CPU and GPU divide responsibilities across resolutions and presets. At 1920x1080, the CPU's single-threaded strength (Geekbench single-core score of 2521, 3DMark single-thread score of 999) appears sufficient to feed the GPU, as evidenced by the high 95.1 FPS at Low settings. However, as settings increase, the GPU's workload scales dramatically — from Low to Ultra, FPS drops 45.8% — which points to the GPU becoming the primary constraint at higher presets. The Intel Arc B580's specifications (2560 shading units, 13.67 TFLOPS FP32, 456.0 GB/s memory bandwidth) are modest for a flight simulator that heavily taxes pixel throughput, and the measured data confirms this at High and Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the balance shifts further toward the GPU. The 75.2 FPS at Low settings indicates the CPU can still drive high frame rates, but the 25.0% drop from Medium to High (61.6 to 46.2) shows the GPU struggling with increased pixel count and shading complexity. The fact that Medium clears 60 FPS while High does not suggests the GPU's 80 ROPs and 160 TMUs become a limiting factor at this resolution. The CPU's multi-threaded performance (Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12735, PassMark multi-thread score of 27058) is adequate for the simulator's simulation logic, but it is not the primary bottleneck here.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the dominant constraint. Even Low settings average 54.6 FPS, which is below playable, and all presets fall within a 21.9 FPS range (32.7 to 54.6). The unusual result that Ultra (33.3) slightly outperforms High (32.7) indicates that at 4K, the GPU is so heavily loaded that preset differences matter less than at lower resolutions. The CPU's role diminishes because the frame rate is capped by the GPU's rendering throughput, not by simulation logic. The 12 GB GDDR6 memory and 192-bit bus (456.0 GB/s bandwidth) are sufficient for the data, but the raw compute power is insufficient for 4K at any preset.

The Verdict

This system can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, but the playable experience depends entirely on resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, the system is fully playable with Low (95.1 FPS) and Medium (76.4 FPS) settings, both clearing the 60 FPS threshold. High (56.1 FPS) and Ultra (51.6 FPS) fall short, so users must settle for Medium to maintain smooth gameplay. At 2560x1440, the playable options are Low (75.2 FPS) and Medium (61.6 FPS), with Medium being the highest playable preset. High (46.2 FPS) and Ultra (41.4 FPS) are not recommended for a 60 FPS target. At 3840x2160, no preset is playable; the best result is Low at 54.6 FPS, which is still 5.4 FPS below the threshold. The verdict by resolution is clear: 1080p Medium is the sweet spot, 1440p Medium is borderline but acceptable, and 4K is not viable.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU each have closely matched rivals that would produce similar gameplay results. For the AMD Ryzen 5 7600, the nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX (average score 26274, 0.2% higher than the 7600's 26324), the AMD Ryzen 7 7435HS (26402, -0.3%), the Intel Core i9-11900KF (26212, 0.4%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 8540U (26187, 0.5%). All four are within 0.5% of the 7600's performance, meaning any of them would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The 7600's 78th percentile ranking among all CPUs puts it in a solid mid-to-upper tier, but its rivals show that the performance envelope is tight.

For the Intel Arc B580, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (average score 23061, -0.2% relative to the B580's 23021), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (22895, 0.6%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 (23172, -0.7%), and the NVIDIA P106-100 (23249, -1%). The B580 sits in the 68th percentile of all GPUs, and its rivals all fall within a 1% performance band. Notably, the RTX 3080 — a much more expensive card — scores only 0.7% higher on average, which suggests the B580's benchmark performance is competitive despite its lower tier. In practice, swapping the B580 for any of these rivals would yield similar FPS results in Flight Simulator, within a margin of a few frames per second.

Best Settings per Resolution

The most demanding preset that maintains at least 60 FPS at each resolution is as follows:

• 1920x1080: Medium settings, averaging 76.4 FPS. This is the highest playable preset, with Low at 95.1 FPS as a lower-quality alternative. High (56.1) and Ultra (51.6) do not meet the 60 FPS target.
• 2560x1440: Medium settings, averaging 61.6 FPS. This is the highest playable preset, and it barely clears the threshold. Low at 75.2 FPS offers more headroom but lower visual fidelity. High (46.2) and Ultra (41.4) are not playable.
• 3840x2160: No preset is playable. The closest option is Low at 54.6 FPS, which falls short of the 60 FPS target. Users at this resolution would need to reduce resolution or accept sub-60 FPS performance.

The data indicates that Medium settings provide the best balance of visual quality and performance for this system at 1080p and 1440p, while 4K remains out of reach regardless of settings.