Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700G paired with the Intel Arc B580 is a mid-pack combination for Microsoft Flight Simulator, ranking 2830th out of 3714 tested combos. This places it in the lower half of the database, but the measured frame rates tell a more nuanced story: the combo delivers playable performance at 1080p and 1440p with Medium settings, while 4K remains out of reach. The data indicates this is a capable 1080p/1440p machine for the simulator, not a high-refresh or 4K powerhouse.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 2830 out of 3714 tested combinations places it in the 24th percentile overall, meaning roughly three-quarters of tested systems outperform it in this specific title. This is a modest standing, but the rank alone undersells the practical results. The CPU, AMD Ryzen 7 5700G, sits at the 79th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 27051. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-9900K (avg score 27097, delta of -0.2%) and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 (avg score 26936, delta of +0.4%), showing the 5700G is essentially performance-equivalent to those older and newer chips.

The GPU, Intel Arc B580, holds the 68th percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 23021. Its closest competitors are the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (delta -0.2%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (delta +0.6%), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 (delta -0.7%). The near-zero deltas mean the Arc B580 trades blows with these very different GPUs in synthetic benchmarks, but in Microsoft Flight Simulator, the actual FPS data shows the combo’s real-world limits.

Given the CPU’s 79th percentile and the GPU’s 68th percentile, the combo rank of 2830/3714 is lower than either component’s individual standing. This suggests the game is particularly demanding on the whole system, or that the pairing introduces a bottleneck. The measured FPS across resolutions confirms this: the combo struggles at 4K, with only Low settings approaching playability (58.2 FPS average), while 1080p and 1440p show more reasonable headroom.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear pattern: at 3840x2160, the GPU is the dominant constraint, while at lower resolutions, the CPU’s role becomes more significant but still secondary. At 4K, the average FPS drops from 58.2 on Low to 28.9 on Ultra, a 29.3 FPS swing (about 50%) from the least to most demanding preset. This steep decline indicates the Arc B580’s rendering capacity is the limiting factor—the GPU cannot keep up with the pixel workload at higher settings.

At 2560x1440, the scaling is similar but slightly less severe: Low runs at 75.3 FPS, Medium at 62.3 FPS, High at 43.5 FPS, and Ultra at 40.3 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is just 3.2 FPS, suggesting that Ultra’s additional effects tax the GPU heavily without proportional visual gains. At 1920x1080, the pattern shifts: Low hits 97.9 FPS, Medium 72.3 FPS, High 57.6 FPS, and Ultra 55.5 FPS. Here, the CPU’s Zen 3 architecture with 8 cores and 16 threads (base 3.80 GHz, boost 4.60 GHz) can feed the GPU sufficiently at lower resolutions, but the GPU still bottlenecks at High and Ultra.

The resolution scaling from 1080p to 4K shows the GPU’s role growing: at Low settings, FPS drops from 97.9 at 1080p to 58.2 at 4K (a 40% reduction), while at Ultra, it drops from 55.5 to 28.9 (a 48% reduction). This means higher presets amplify the GPU bottleneck. The CPU’s 16 MB of L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s are adequate for the simulator’s single-threaded and multi-threaded demands, as evidenced by the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 12830.5 and single-core score of 1494. However, the game’s reliance on GPU compute at higher presets means the Arc B580’s 13.67 TFLOPS FP32 and 456 GB/s memory bandwidth become the decisive factors.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves the playable threshold of 60 FPS. The closest is Low with an average of 58.2 FPS, which falls just short. Medium (46.8 FPS), High (33.6 FPS), and Ultra (28.9 FPS) are all below playable. The verdict data confirms: no playable settings exist at 4K.

At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is Medium, which delivers 62.3 FPS average. Low runs faster at 75.3 FPS, but Medium is the highest preset that stays above 60 FPS. High (43.5 FPS) and Ultra (40.3 FPS) are not playable. This means 1440p users can enjoy Medium quality without sacrificing smoothness.

At 1920x1080, the best playable setting is also Medium, at 72.3 FPS average. Low runs at 97.9 FPS, but Medium provides a better visual experience while staying well above the 60 FPS threshold. High (57.6 FPS) and Ultra (55.5 FPS) both miss the mark, so they are not recommended for consistent playability.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS is 58.2 on Low settings, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium (46.8 FPS), High (33.6 FPS), and Ultra (28.9 FPS) all fall further behind.

Q: What is the best preset for 1440p?

A: Medium is the best playable setting at 2560x1440, delivering 62.3 FPS average. Low runs at 75.3 FPS, but Medium is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS. High (43.5 FPS) and Ultra (40.3 FPS) are not playable.

Q: How does the combo perform at 1080p?

A: The best playable setting is Medium at 72.3 FPS average. Low achieves 97.9 FPS for higher frame rates, but High (57.6 FPS) and Ultra (55.5 FPS) drop below 60 FPS, making them unplayable by the threshold.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bigger bottleneck?

A: The GPU is the primary constraint, especially at higher resolutions and presets. At 4K, FPS drops from 58.2 on Low to 28.9 on Ultra, a 50% reduction, indicating the Arc B580’s rendering limits. The CPU’s 8-core Zen 3 design (Cinebench R23 multicore 12830.5) is sufficient, but the GPU’s 13.67 TFLOPS FP32 cannot sustain high settings at demanding resolutions.

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

A: In synthetic benchmarks, the Arc B580 (avg score 23021) is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (delta -0.2%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (delta +0.6%), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 (delta -0.7%). These deltas are within 1%, meaning the B580 matches those GPUs in general compute, but the in-game FPS data shows how it handles Flight Simulator specifically.

Q: Is this combo worth considering for flight sim enthusiasts?

A: For 1080p or 1440p gaming at Medium settings, the combo delivers playable frame rates. It is not suitable for 4K or for high/ultra presets at any resolution. The CPU’s 79th percentile ranking and GPU’s 68th percentile ranking suggest a balanced mid-range system, but the game’s demands limit it to medium-fidelity play.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the combo produces the following average FPS: Low at 58.2, Medium at 46.8, High at 33.6, and Ultra at 28.9. No minimum or maximum FPS values were recorded, so only averages are available. The gap between Low and Ultra is 29.3 FPS, showing a steep performance cliff as settings increase.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low at 75.3, Medium at 62.3, High at 43.5, and Ultra at 40.3. The difference between High and Ultra is just 3.2 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the highest preset. Low to Medium delivers a 13 FPS drop, which is manageable.

At 1920x1080, the averages are: Low at 97.9, Medium at 72.3, High at 57.6, and Ultra at 55.5. The spread from Low to Ultra is 42.4 FPS, the largest across all resolutions. High and Ultra both fall below 60 FPS, making Medium the sweet spot for playable performance with better visuals than Low.

The data shows a consistent pattern: each resolution’s Low preset is always playable, Medium is playable at 1080p and 1440p, and High/Ultra are never playable. The 1080p Low result of 97.9 FPS is the highest recorded, while 4K Ultra at 28.9 FPS is the lowest.

The Verdict

This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, but only under specific conditions. The verdict data lists playable settings as Low and Medium at 2560x1440, with Medium being the best at 62.3 FPS average. At 1920x1080, Low and Medium are playable, with Medium at 72.3 FPS as the best. At 3840x2160, no settings are playable, and the best possible result is 58.2 FPS on Low — just 1.8 FPS short of the 60 FPS threshold.

For practical use, this combo is a solid 1080p and 1440p Medium-settings machine for Microsoft Flight Simulator. The CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads provide ample processing power, as shown by its 79th percentile ranking, but the GPU’s 68th percentile and the game’s heavy rendering demands cap performance at mid-level quality. Users who prioritize frame rate over fidelity can run Low at 1080p for nearly 100 FPS, but those wanting visual detail will need to accept the 60-72 FPS range on Medium. The 4K results are a clear no-go, with even Low settings failing to hit the playable mark. This is a verdict of conditional success: playable, but not at high quality, and not at 4K.