Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Ryzen 7 5800X3D paired with the Intel Arc B390 delivers a very constrained experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The recorded data is clear: none of the tested resolution and preset combinations reach the 60 FPS playability threshold. The best results appear at 1920x1080 with Low settings, where the average frame rate is 56 FPS. This is the closest the combination gets to playable, but it still falls short of the 60 FPS line. Higher settings at 1080p drop further: Medium averages 43 FPS, High averages 33 FPS, and Ultra averages 31 FPS. At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 45 FPS, Medium averages 35 FPS, High averages 26 FPS, and Ultra averages 25 FPS. At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 33 FPS, Medium averages 26 FPS, and both High and Ultra settle at 19 FPS. The combination ranks 3302 out of 3714 tested combos in this game, placing it in the lower portion of the database.

Best Settings per Resolution

The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at each resolution is the core question for this hardware. The measured data shows that no preset at any resolution reaches 60 FPS, so there is no qualifying preset. The verdict by resolution confirms this: at 3840x2160, 2560x1440, and 1920x1080, the playable settings list is empty, and the best settings field is null.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset produces an average of 56 FPS. This is the highest average recorded for this combination across all tested settings. The Medium preset averages 43 FPS, with a minimum of 37 FPS and a maximum of 50 FPS. The High preset averages 33 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 31 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 13 FPS, which suggests the simulation adds meaningful load when moving from minimal to standard rendering details. The gap between High and Ultra is only 2 FPS, meaning the highest preset tier does not cost much additional performance over High, but both remain well below the target.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 45 FPS. Medium averages 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS. High averages 26 FPS, and Ultra averages 25 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium here is 10 FPS, and between High and Ultra is only 1 FPS. The 1440p results show a consistent downward shift from the 1080p numbers, but the shape of the curve is similar: Low is the only preset that comes close to a workable frame rate, and it still misses the 60 FPS mark by 15 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 33 FPS. Medium averages 26 FPS, with a minimum of 22 FPS and a maximum of 30 FPS. High and Ultra both average 19 FPS. The drop from 1440p Low to 4K Low is 12 FPS, and the drop from 1080p Low to 4K Low is 23 FPS. The data indicates that 4K is not viable for this combination at any setting, as even the lowest preset produces an average that is less than a third of the 60 FPS target.

Since no preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold, the best settings per resolution are effectively the Low preset at each resolution, as it provides the highest recorded average. However, calling Low the best settings would be misleading for playability purposes. The verdict is straightforward: this combination cannot maintain 60 FPS in Microsoft Flight Simulator at any tested resolution or preset.

CPU and GPU Roles

The roles of the CPU and GPU in this combination are best understood by examining the scaling between resolutions and presets. The CPU, an AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D, is a strong processor with 8 cores and 16 threads, a base clock of 3.40 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. Its benchmark scores are solid: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14317, a single-core score of 1452, and a Geekbench multi-core score of 11765. Its percentile ranking against all CPUs is 80, meaning it sits above the majority of tested processors. The GPU, an Intel Arc B390, is a much weaker component. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1482, and its percentile ranking against all GPUs is 9. The GPU's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, GeForce 800M, GT 625 OEM, and GT 710, all of which are low-end parts.

The data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor. At 1920x1080, moving from Low to Medium reduces the average FPS from 56 to 43, a drop of 13 FPS. This is a significant reduction for a single preset step. At 2560x1440, the same step reduces the average from 45 to 35, a drop of 10 FPS. At 3840x2160, the drop is from 33 to 26, a reduction of 7 FPS. The pattern here is that the absolute FPS cost of raising the preset decreases as resolution increases, but the relative cost remains high. This is consistent with a GPU that is heavily loaded at all resolutions.

The resolution scaling further confirms the GPU bottleneck. From 1080p Low to 1440p Low, the average drops from 56 to 45, a reduction of 11 FPS. From 1440p Low to 4K Low, the average drops from 45 to 33, a reduction of 12 FPS. The near-linear reduction in FPS as resolution increases is typical of a system where the GPU is saturated. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates would cluster closer together across resolutions, because the CPU workload in flight simulation is largely independent of resolution. The fact that the average FPS falls steadily from 56 at 1080p Low to 33 at 4K Low indicates that the Arc B390 cannot keep up with the rendering demands.

The CPU's role is more visible in the preset scaling. Microsoft Flight Simulator is known for CPU-heavy simulation logic, and the Ryzen 7 5800X3D has a large L3 cache of 96 MB shared, which helps with the game's data streaming. The CPU's benchmark results, including a Passmark multi-thread score of 28309 and a single-thread score of 3234, place it well above the GPU's relative standing. However, the measured FPS data does not show any situation where the CPU holds back the GPU. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 56 FPS, which is close to the 60 FPS target. If the CPU were a major constraint, we would expect the FPS to be lower at 1080p Low, since the GPU has less work to do at that resolution and preset. The fact that the system comes within 4 FPS of the target at 1080p Low, but falls to 33 FPS at 4K Low, points to the GPU as the primary limitation.

The GPU's memory configuration also plays a role. The Arc B390 uses system shared memory, with system dependent bandwidth. This means the GPU relies on the same memory pool as the CPU, which can lead to contention and reduced performance in memory-heavy scenarios. The CPU, by contrast, has a dedicated memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s with dual-channel DDR4 support. This asymmetry reinforces the conclusion that the GPU is the weak link.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 60 FPS on any setting?

A: No. The measured data shows that no preset at any resolution reaches the 60 FPS playability threshold. The highest average recorded is 56 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which is 4 FPS short of the target.

Q: What is the best average FPS this combination achieves?

A: The best average FPS is 56, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next best is 45 FPS at 2560x1440 with Low settings, followed by 43 FPS at 1920x1080 with Medium settings.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc B390 has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, which scores 1463, putting the Arc B390 1.3 percent ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460, 1.5 percent behind, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5 percent behind, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7 percent behind. These are all very low-end GPUs, and the performance differences are minor.

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 7 5800X3D has an average benchmark score of 27896. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 scores 27932, which is 0.1 percent higher. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800U scores 27887, essentially tied at 0 percent difference. The Intel Core i9-10900K scores 27872, 0.1 percent lower. The Intel Core i5-12600KF scores 27799, 0.3 percent lower. All four rivals are within a fraction of a percent of the 5800X3D in average benchmark score.

Q: What are the FPS ranges for Medium settings at each resolution?

A: At 1920x1080, Medium averages 43 FPS with a minimum of 37 and a maximum of 50. At 2560x1440, Medium averages 35 FPS with a minimum of 30 and a maximum of 40. At 3840x2160, Medium averages 26 FPS with a minimum of 22 and a maximum of 30.

Q: Is there any resolution where the combination is close to playable?

A: The closest result is 1920x1080 with Low settings, at 56 FPS average. This is 4 FPS below the 60 FPS threshold. All other tested settings are further from the target, with the next best being 45 FPS at 1440p Low.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D has an average benchmark score of 27896, and its nearest rivals are all within a very tight band. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 scores 27932, which is 0.1 percent higher. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800U scores 27887, a 0 percent difference. The Intel Core i9-10900K scores 27872, 0.1 percent lower. The Intel Core i5-12600KF scores 27799, 0.3 percent lower. In practical terms, any of these processors would behave almost identically to the 5800X3D in CPU-bound scenarios. The differences are so small that they fall within normal run-to-run variance. For Microsoft Flight Simulator, where the CPU handles simulation logic, swapping the 5800X3D for any of these rivals would not meaningfully change the measured FPS, because the GPU is the limiting component.

For the GPU, the Arc B390 has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. Its nearest rivals are all older, low-end NVIDIA parts. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, 1.3 percent lower. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460, 1.5 percent lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5 percent lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7 percent lower. These GPUs would produce nearly the same frame rates as the Arc B390 in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The performance delta between the Arc B390 and the GT 710 is only 2.7 percent, which means a user with a GT 710 would see essentially the same FPS numbers at the same settings and resolutions. The Arc B390 is an integrated GPU, and its performance class is clearly at the bottom of the database.

The combination of a top-tier CPU with a bottom-tier GPU creates an unusual pairing. The CPU's nearest rivals are all strong processors, while the GPU's nearest rivals are all weak. This means the overall system performance in this game is determined almost entirely by the GPU. Any of the listed CPU rivals would yield the same FPS, and any of the listed GPU rivals would also yield nearly the same FPS. The bottleneck is unambiguous.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D and the Intel Arc B390 ranks 3302 out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the combo in the 11th percentile of tested systems, meaning roughly 89 percent of tested combinations perform better. The rank reflects the GPU's severe limitation. The CPU alone ranks in the 80th percentile against all CPUs, which indicates strong processor performance. The GPU ranks in the 9th percentile against all GPUs, which indicates very weak graphics performance. The overall combo rank is dragged down by the GPU.

The rank of 3302 out of 3714 means there are 412 tested combos that perform worse. This puts the system in the lower tail of the distribution. For a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is demanding on both CPU and GPU, the combo rank makes sense given the measured FPS data. The system cannot reach 60 FPS at any settings, and its best result is 56 FPS at 1080p Low. The recorded data shows a large gap between this combo and the playable threshold.

The CPU's high percentile ranking (80) relative to the GPU's low percentile ranking (9) highlights the imbalance. In this game, the combo rank is a direct reflection of the GPU's performance class. The database shows that the GPU's nearest rivals are all parts from the bottom of the performance spectrum, which aligns with the low overall rank.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Microsoft Flight Simulator? Based on the measured data, the answer is no for the 60 FPS playability threshold. The verdict by resolution lists no playable settings at 3840x2160, 2560x1440, or 1920x1080. The best settings field is null at every resolution, and the average FPS at best is null as well. This means the database does not record any preset that meets or exceeds 60 FPS for this combination.

The closest result is 1920x1080 with Low settings, which averages 56 FPS. This is 4 FPS short of the threshold. At 2560x1440, the best result is 45 FPS with Low settings. At 3840x2160, the best result is 33 FPS with Low settings. None of these are playable under the 60 FPS standard.

The data indicates that the system is GPU-bound. The Intel Arc B390, with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 and a 9th percentile GPU ranking, cannot handle the rendering demands of Microsoft Flight Simulator. The CPU, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D, is more than capable, ranking in the 80th percentile against all CPUs. However, the CPU's strength does not compensate for the GPU's weakness in this title.

For users with this combination, the recorded data suggests that the only path to playable performance would be to lower the resolution or settings below what was tested, or to upgrade the GPU. Lowering the resolution below 1920x1080 was not tested, so the database does not provide evidence for whether sub-1080p would reach 60 FPS. The verdict stands: at the tested resolutions and presets, this PC cannot run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 60 FPS. The system ranks 3302 out of 3714 combos, confirming its position in the lower portion of the database for this game.