Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT paired with the Intel Arc B570 presents a mid-range combination capable of running Microsoft Flight Simulator, but the experience is heavily dependent on resolution and quality settings. The data shows a system that can comfortably clear the 60 FPS threshold at 1080p with medium settings, yet struggles at 4K where even low settings fall short of playable frame rates. This analysis breaks down the measured performance across resolutions and presets, examines the CPU and GPU roles, and contextualizes the combo against similar hardware.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160 (4K), the Arc B570 and Ryzen 7 5800XT combination produces the following average frame rates: Low settings yield 51 FPS, Medium settings drop to 40 FPS with a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS, High settings reach 30 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 28 FPS. The 4K results show a steep performance cliff between Low and Medium, with a 11 FPS drop that represents a 22% reduction in average frame rate. The gap between High and Ultra is narrower, only 2 FPS, suggesting that at this resolution the rendering pipeline is saturated and additional quality presets have diminishing returns.

Moving to 2560x1440 (1440p), the measured averages improve substantially: Low settings hit 69 FPS, Medium averages 54 FPS with a range of 46 to 62 FPS, High reaches 41 FPS, and Ultra produces 39 FPS. The 1440p data reveals a non-linear scaling pattern — the jump from Low to Medium costs 15 FPS, while the jump from Medium to High costs 13 FPS, but High to Ultra only costs 2 FPS. This suggests that the Ultra preset at 1440p is not meaningfully more demanding than High, at least in the scenes captured by the benchmark.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the combination performs best: Low settings average 86 FPS, Medium averages 67 FPS with a minimum of 57 FPS and maximum of 77 FPS, High averages 50 FPS, and Ultra averages 48 FPS. The 1080p results show the most complete dataset, with min/max values available only for Medium. The 19 FPS difference between Low and Medium at 1080p is the largest single-preset gap across all resolutions, indicating that Medium introduces significant additional geometry, shadows, or texture work that stresses the GPU.

The pattern across all three resolutions is consistent: Low to Medium is the largest performance step, while High to Ultra is minimal. This implies that the Ultra preset in Microsoft Flight Simulator may add features that are not heavily scene-dependent, or that the Arc B570's 10 GB memory buffer is sufficient for the texture loads at these settings, but the shading and compute demands scale unevenly.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 3840x2160, the verdict data lists no playable settings — meaning no preset achieves at least 60 FPS average. The closest is Low at 51 FPS, which falls 9 FPS short of the playable threshold. Even the most forgiving preset cannot deliver a smooth experience at 4K, so the best recommendation is to lower resolution entirely.

For 2560x1440, the only playable setting is Low, which averages 69 FPS. This clears the 60 FPS bar by 9 FPS, but with no min/max data recorded, the frame time consistency is uncertain. Medium at 54 FPS is 6 FPS below the threshold, so while it is close, it does not qualify as playable under the defined criteria. The best settings at 1440p is therefore Low, and users seeking higher quality would need to accept sub-60 averages.

For 1920x1080, two presets qualify as playable: Low at 86 FPS and Medium at 67 FPS. The best settings designation goes to Medium, since it is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS. The Medium preset also has the only recorded min/max range at this resolution — 57 to 77 FPS — meaning the minimum dips slightly below 60, but the average remains playable. High at 50 FPS and Ultra at 48 FPS fall short of the threshold.

The takeaway is that this combo is a 1080p-medium or 1440p-low system for Microsoft Flight Simulator. The 4K resolution is effectively out of reach for smooth gameplay, and even at 1440p, only the lowest quality settings provide headroom above 60 FPS.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions reveals how the workload shifts between the Ryzen 7 5800XT and the Arc B570. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 86 FPS; at 1440p Low, it drops to 69 FPS; at 4K Low, it falls to 51 FPS. This progression shows a 20% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a further 26% drop from 1440p to 4K. Since resolution scaling primarily affects the GPU's pixel and texture throughput, the consistent decline indicates that the Arc B570 is the dominant bottleneck at higher resolutions.

The CPU's role becomes more apparent when examining preset scaling at a fixed resolution. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium costs 19 FPS, while at 1440p the same preset transition costs 15 FPS, and at 4K it costs 11 FPS. The diminishing cost of quality presets as resolution increases suggests that at 4K, the GPU is already saturated with base rendering work, so additional quality settings have less incremental impact. Conversely, at 1080p, the GPU has more headroom, and preset changes translate into larger FPS swings — but this does not necessarily mean the CPU is the limiter.

The Ryzen 7 5800XT's 8-core, 16-thread configuration with a boost clock of 4.80 GHz is well-suited for the simulation's physics and AI workloads. However, the benchmark data shows that the GPU's 11.52 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 380.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are the limiting factors at higher resolutions. The 10 GB GDDR6 memory buffer may also constrain texture streaming in dense scenery areas, though the measured data does not isolate this variable.

The min/max data points provide a clue: at 1440p Medium, the range is 46 to 62 FPS, and at 1080p Medium, it is 57 to 77 FPS. The wider spread at 1080p suggests that CPU-driven frame time spikes (e.g., terrain streaming or AI traffic calculations) are more visible when the GPU is not the bottleneck. At 1440p, the GPU's slower throughput masks some of these spikes, compressing the range. This implies that at 1080p, the Ryzen 7 5800XT's single-thread performance (3dmark_single_thread score of 959) is sufficient to keep up, but at 1440p and above, the Arc B570's rendering capacity becomes the primary constraint.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT sits at the 81st percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29879. Its nearest rivals are remarkably close: the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H scores 29868 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS and 7840HS both score 29955 (-0.3% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X scores 29713 (0.6% delta). In gaming scenarios, these CPUs would deliver nearly identical frame rates when paired with the same GPU, meaning users with a Ryzen 7 7840H or 8845HS would see essentially the same Microsoft Flight Simulator performance. The Ryzen 5 9600X, despite having fewer cores, is within 0.6% in average score, so it would not represent a meaningful difference in this game's CPU-bound sections.

For the Intel Arc B570, the GPU sits at the 65th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20556. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (score 20534, 0.1% delta), the Intel Arc A750 (score 20582, -0.1% delta), the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (score 20480, 0.4% delta), and the AMD Radeon R9 M390X (score 20662, -0.5% delta). The RTX 3070 Mobile and Arc A750 are the most relevant comparisons for gamers. The Arc A750, being a desktop card from the same Intel Alchemist generation, would produce nearly identical FPS numbers — likely within 1-2 FPS of the B570 in this game. The RTX 3070 Mobile, despite being a mobile part, matches the B570's average score, so laptop users with that GPU would see comparable performance, though thermal constraints could alter real-world results.

The Quadro M4000M and R9 M390X are older or specialized parts that happen to land in the same score band, but they are not direct competitors for modern gaming. Still, the data confirms that the B570's performance envelope is well-established: it trades blows with mid-range GPUs from the previous generation, and the Ryzen 7 5800XT is not the limiting factor in this pairing.

How This Combo Ranks

Among all tested CPU-GPU combinations in the database, this pairing ranks 2988 out of 3714 combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the lower half of tested systems — roughly the 20th percentile of all combinations. The rank is driven almost entirely by the GPU's position, since the CPU is in the 81st percentile while the GPU is in the 65th percentile. In a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for heavy GPU load at high resolutions, the B570's mid-range standing pulls the combo down.

The rank implies that a significant portion of tested systems outperform this combo, but it also means the pairing is not a low-end outlier. The 4K results (28-51 FPS) and 1440p results (39-69 FPS) are consistent with what a mid-range GPU would deliver in a flight simulator with complex photogrammetry and weather effects. The combo would rank substantially higher if paired with a faster GPU, but as configured, it is a competent 1080p machine with limited headroom for higher resolutions.

FAQ

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

A: Yes, but only at certain settings. At 1920x1080, Low (86 FPS) and Medium (67 FPS) clear the 60 FPS threshold. At 2560x1440, only Low (69 FPS) qualifies. At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS — the best is Low at 51 FPS.

Q: What is the best quality setting at 1080p?

A: Medium is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS, averaging 67 FPS. High (50 FPS) and Ultra (48 FPS) both fall below the playable threshold.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B570 compare to the RTX 3070 Mobile?

A: The Arc B570 has an average benchmark score of 20556, while the RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20534, a 0.1% difference. In practical terms, they perform nearly identically in this game.

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 5800XT a bottleneck for the Arc B570?

A: The CPU is not the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. The GPU's performance drops significantly from 1080p to 4K (86 to 51 FPS on Low settings), indicating the Arc B570 is the limiting factor. The CPU's nearest rivals all score within 0.6% of it, so CPU performance is consistent.

Q: What 4K performance can be expected?

A: The 4K results are below playable thresholds. Low averages 51 FPS, Medium averages 40 FPS (min 34, max 46), High averages 30 FPS, and Ultra averages 28 FPS. Users should avoid 4K for smooth gameplay.

Q: Does the combo have enough VRAM for high settings?

A: The Arc B570 has 10 GB of GDDR6 memory. The measured data shows that High and Ultra presets produce lower FPS at all resolutions, but the benchmark does not isolate VRAM capacity as the cause. The performance drops could stem from compute limits or memory bandwidth constraints.

The Verdict

This PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, but the experience is tiered by resolution. At 1920x1080, the system is fully playable with Medium settings at 67 FPS average, and Low settings provide a comfortable 86 FPS headroom. At 2560x1440, only Low settings achieve playable frame rates at 69 FPS — Medium falls just short at 54 FPS. At 3840x2160, no settings reach the 60 FPS threshold, with Low as the best option at 51 FPS.

The verdict data confirms this exactly: 1080p has two playable settings (Low and Medium), 1440p has one (Low), and 4K has none. For users prioritizing visual fidelity, the 1080p Medium preset is the sweet spot, offering a balance of quality and smoothness. For those with 1440p monitors, dropping to Low settings is necessary to maintain playability. The Ryzen 7 5800XT provides ample CPU power, but the Intel Arc B570's mid-range GPU performance defines the system's ceiling — this is a solid 1080p gaming rig for flight simulation, not a high-resolution powerhouse.