Microsoft Flight Simulator

FAQ

Q: What is the overall performance rank of this AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Arc B570 combination in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The recorded data places this combination at rank 2988 out of 3714 tested combos, meaning it sits in the lower-middle portion of the database for this specific title. The playable threshold is 60 FPS, and the combination clears it only at specific resolutions and presets.

Q: Does the Intel Arc B570 have enough graphics memory for Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The GPU uses 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus with 380.0 GB/s bandwidth. Benchmark results show that at 3840x2160 Ultra settings the average frame rate drops to 28 FPS, which indicates the memory subsystem and rendering load at 4K exceed what this configuration can handle for smooth play.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 8400F compare to its closest CPU rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score is 25005. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F scores 24964, a 0.2% difference. The Intel Core i7-11850H scores 24935 (0.3% ahead of the 8400F), and the Intel Core i7-13620H scores 24911 (0.4% ahead). The AMD EPYC 9474F scores 25103, which is 0.4% higher. These deltas are all within a fraction of a percent, so the 8400F performs nearly identically to all four rivals.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all graphics cards?

A: The Intel Arc B570 scores in the 65th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score is 20556. The closest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, scores 20534, which is 0.1% lower, while the Intel Arc A750 scores 20582, 0.1% higher.

Q: At which resolution does the system first achieve a playable average FPS?

A: At 2560x1440 with Low settings, the average FPS is 69, which clears the 60 FPS threshold. At 1920x1080, both Low (86 FPS) and Medium (67 FPS) presets are playable. At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS; the highest average is 51 FPS on Low.

Q: What are the CPU's multi-threaded and single-threaded synthetic scores?

A: The Ryzen 5 8400F scores 20851 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2943 in Cinebench R23 single-core. In 3DMark, the max-thread score is 6165 and the single-thread score is 951. PassMark multi-thread is 24389 and single-thread is 3685. The CPU is in the 77th percentile among all CPUs.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data indicates that in Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU becomes the dominant constraint as resolution increases, while the CPU's influence is more visible at lower resolutions where frame rates are higher. At 1920x1080, the system produces 86 FPS on Low settings and 67 FPS on Medium, showing that the rendering load at this resolution is manageable. The drop from Low to Medium is 19 FPS (a 22% reduction), and from Medium to High it falls to 50 FPS (a 25% reduction from Medium). These scaling steps suggest that the graphics card is already limiting performance at 1080p when settings move past Medium.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts. Low settings yield 69 FPS, Medium drops to 54 FPS, and High falls to 41 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 15 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is 13 FPS. The CPU's 12 threads and 16 MB shared L3 cache can feed the GPU at these settings, but the Arc B570's 10 GB memory and 11.52 TFLOPS FP32 throughput begin to show limits. The recorded data shows the GPU's PassMark G3D score is 14195, which positions it well below the top-tier cards needed for high-refresh 1440p in this simulation.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the bottleneck. Low settings produce 51 FPS, Medium drops to 40 FPS, High falls to 30 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 28 FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium is a 22% drop, from Medium to High a 25% drop, and from High to Ultra an 7% drop. The near-flat line between High and Ultra indicates that the GPU is saturated and additional settings headroom does not translate into meaningful frame rate changes. The CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads, while not top-tier, are not the limiting factor at 4K; the GPU's 2304 shading units and 80 ROPs simply cannot sustain 60 FPS at this pixel count.

Comparing resolution scaling at the same preset clarifies the split. On Low settings, 1080p delivers 86 FPS, 1440p delivers 69 FPS, and 4K delivers 51 FPS. That is a 20% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 26% drop from 1440p to 4K. On Medium settings, 1080p delivers 67 FPS, 1440p delivers 54 FPS, and 4K delivers 40 FPS. The percentage drops are 19% and 26%, respectively. The consistent 26% penalty from 1440p to 4K across both presets points directly at the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth as the governing factor.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the recorded data shows the following average frame rates: Low settings deliver 86 FPS, Medium delivers 67 FPS with a minimum of 57 and a maximum of 77, High delivers 50 FPS, and Ultra delivers 48 FPS. The Medium preset is the only one that provides both an average above 60 FPS and a minimum above 57 FPS, making it the most demanding playable setting at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, Low settings deliver 69 FPS, Medium delivers 54 FPS with a minimum of 46 and a maximum of 62, High delivers 41 FPS, and Ultra delivers 39 FPS. Only the Low preset clears the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset's minimum of 46 FPS confirms that the system cannot sustain playable frame rates when settings increase, even though the average is close to the threshold.

At 3840x2160, Low settings deliver 51 FPS, Medium delivers 40 FPS with a minimum of 34 and a maximum of 46, High delivers 30 FPS, and Ultra delivers 28 FPS. No preset reaches 60 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 11 FPS, between Medium and High is 10 FPS, and between High and Ultra is only 2 FPS. The Ultra preset's 28 FPS average represents the worst case in the entire measurement set.

Across all resolutions, the Low preset consistently shows the highest frame rates, and the Ultra preset consistently shows the lowest. The delta between Low and Ultra is 38 FPS at 1080p, 30 FPS at 1440p, and 23 FPS at 4K. The shrinking delta at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU's workload ceiling compresses the settings range, which is typical for a graphics-bound simulation.

The Verdict

The recorded verdict data states that this system can run Microsoft Flight Simulator at playable frame rates only at specific resolutions and presets. At 3840x2160, no settings combination produces an average of 60 FPS or higher. The best result at 4K is 51 FPS on Low settings, which falls short of the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the playable settings list contains only Low. The average FPS at Low is 69, which clears the threshold with a 9 FPS margin. Medium and above do not qualify, with Medium averaging 54 FPS and High dropping to 41 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the playable settings list includes Low and Medium. Low averages 86 FPS and Medium averages 67 FPS. The best playable setting is Medium, which delivers 67 FPS with a minimum of 57 FPS. High and Ultra both fall below 60 FPS, with averages of 50 and 48 respectively.

The overall picture is clear: this combination is a 1080p and light 1440p machine for Microsoft Flight Simulator. The GPU's 10 GB memory and 65th percentile ranking among all GPUs place it below the hardware needed for high preset play at 1440p or any preset at 4K. The CPU, ranked in the 77th percentile among all CPUs, is not the limiting factor at higher resolutions. Users targeting 60 FPS should run the game at 1920x1080 with Medium settings or at 2560x1440 with Low settings. No configuration at 3840x2160 is viable.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals in the database are all within 0.4% of its average benchmark score. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F scores 24964, which is 0.2% lower than the 8400F's 25005. The Intel Core i7-11850H scores 24935 (0.3% lower), and the Intel Core i7-13620H scores 24911 (0.4% lower). The AMD EPYC 9474F scores 25103, which is 0.4% higher. In practical terms, any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator when paired with the same GPU, since the synthetic benchmark deltas are negligible.

The GPU's nearest rivals show a similar pattern. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20534, which is 0.1% lower than the Arc B570's 20556. The Intel Arc A750 scores 20582, which is 0.1% higher. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M scores 20480 (0.4% lower), and the AMD Radeon R9 M390X scores 20662 (0.5% higher). All four GPUs fall within a 0.9% band of the Arc B570. A system using any of these GPUs with a comparable CPU would deliver essentially the same measured FPS in this game, meaning the 1080p Medium and 1440p Low results would carry over directly.

The data also shows the CPU's 3DMark scores across thread counts: 1874 at 2 threads, 3563 at 4 threads, 5275 at 8 threads, 6091 at 16 threads, and 6165 at max threads. The small jump from 16 threads to max threads indicates that the 12-thread CPU is fully utilized by the 16-thread test, which aligns with the game's moderate thread scaling. The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 2649, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 96844, both of which place it in the same performance league as the rivals listed above.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS or higher. The highest recorded average is 51 FPS on Low settings, so there is no recommended setting for this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Low, with an average of 69 FPS. Medium drops to 54 FPS, so it does not qualify. The Low preset provides a comfortable margin above the threshold, though the next step up fails by 6 FPS on average.

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, with an average of 67 FPS and a minimum of 57 FPS. The minimum falls slightly below 60, but the average is above the threshold. Low delivers 86 FPS as a fallback option, while High drops to 50 FPS and Ultra to 48 FPS, both clearly below the playable line.

The recommended configurations are therefore: 1920x1080 with Medium settings for the best visual quality that remains playable, and 2560x1440 with Low settings for users who prioritize resolution over detail. At 4K, the system cannot sustain playable frame rates under any settings combination, and the recorded data does not list a best setting for that resolution.