Microsoft Flight Simulator

Measured FPS Breakdown

Microsoft Flight Simulator is a demanding title, and the recorded data for the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F paired with the Intel Arc B390 confirms that this combination is heavily GPU-limited. The benchmark results show a clear pattern: as resolution increases, frame rates drop significantly, and even at the lowest settings, the system struggles to approach a smooth 60 FPS target.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the results are uniformly low. With Low settings, the average FPS is 33. Moving to Medium settings drops the average to 26 FPS, with a recorded minimum of 22 FPS and a maximum of 30 FPS. High settings yield an average of 19 FPS, and Ultra settings also average 19 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 7 FPS, while the difference between High and Ultra is negligible, suggesting the GPU is saturated before Ultra settings can make a meaningful impact.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), performance improves but remains below playable thresholds. Low settings produce an average of 45 FPS. Medium settings average 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS. High settings average 26 FPS, and Ultra settings average 25 FPS. The step from Low to Medium costs 10 FPS on average, while the step from High to Ultra is only 1 FPS, again pointing to a hard performance ceiling.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the best results are recorded. Low settings reach an average of 56 FPS, which is close to but still below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium settings average 43 FPS, with a minimum of 37 FPS and a maximum of 50 FPS. High settings average 33 FPS, and Ultra settings average 31 FPS. The delta between Low and Medium is 13 FPS, the largest single-setting jump in the entire dataset, which indicates that the Arc B390 has very little headroom once the render load increases.

Across all resolutions, the pattern is consistent: Low settings are the only option that approaches acceptable performance, and even then, only at 1080p. The min and max FPS values are only recorded for Medium settings, where the spread is roughly 8 to 10 FPS, indicating relatively stable frame pacing at that preset, though the averages themselves are far too low for a flight simulator that benefits from smooth camera movement.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database, this specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and the Intel Arc B390 ranks at 3302 out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places it in the bottom 11 percent of all tested systems, which is a strong indicator that this pairing is not suited for this game at any resolution.

The CPU itself is a strong performer in synthetic benchmarks. The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F sits in the 94th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 69996. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, which scores 69875 and is 0.2 percent behind, and the Intel Core i7-14700KF, which scores 70163 and is 0.2 percent ahead. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X scores 69515, 0.7 percent behind, and the Intel Core i7-14700K scores 69355, 0.9 percent behind. These deltas are tiny, meaning the 9700F is effectively on par with these high-end desktop and mobile processors.

The GPU, however, is the bottleneck. The Intel Arc B390 ranks in the 9th percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1482. Its nearest rivals are all older, low-end NVIDIA parts: the GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463 (1.3 percent behind), the GeForce 800M scores 1460 (1.5 percent behind), the GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446 (2.5 percent behind), and the GeForce GT 710 scores 1443 (2.7 percent behind). The Arc B390 is technically ahead of these, but only by a hair, and all of them are far below what Microsoft Flight Simulator requires for smooth gameplay.

The combination of a top-tier CPU and a bottom-tier GPU produces a lopsided result. The recorded data shows that the CPU is never the limiting factor; even at 1080p Low, the frame rate is capped by the GPU's compute and rasterization capabilities. The rank of 3302 out of 3714 confirms that, in practice, this system performs like an entry-level office PC with an integrated graphics adapter, not like a gaming rig.

FAQ

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

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS is 33 on Low settings. Medium settings drop to 26 FPS, and both High and Ultra average 19 FPS. None of these approach the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best settings preset at 1080p?

A: The best average FPS at 1920x1080 is 56 FPS on Low settings. Medium settings average 43 FPS, High averages 33 FPS, and Ultra averages 31 FPS. Even Low settings fall just short of 60 FPS.

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

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark. It is 1.3 percent ahead of the GeForce GT 520MX, 1.5 percent ahead of the GeForce 800M, 2.5 percent ahead of the GeForce GT 625 OEM, and 2.7 percent ahead of the GeForce GT 710. All of these are low-end parts.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F a weak processor for this game?

A: No. The CPU ranks in the 94th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 69996. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-14700KF, is only 0.2 percent faster. The processor is more than capable; the GPU is the limiting factor.

Q: What are the recorded minimum and maximum FPS values?

A: Min and max FPS are only recorded for Medium settings. At 3840x2160, the range is 22 to 30 FPS. At 2560x1440, the range is 30 to 40 FPS. At 1920x1080, the range is 37 to 50 FPS.

Q: Does the system meet the 60 FPS playable threshold at any resolution?

A: No. The verdict data shows no playable settings at 3840x2160, 2560x1440, or 1920x1080. The closest result is 1080p Low at 56 FPS, which is 4 FPS short of the threshold.

The Verdict

Based on the recorded measurements, this PC cannot run Microsoft Flight Simulator at a playable level at any resolution. The verdict data lists no playable settings for 3840x2160, 2560x1440, or 1920x1080, meaning no preset combination reaches the 60 FPS threshold.

At 4K, the best case is Low settings with an average of 33 FPS, which is far from smooth. At 1440p, Low settings reach 45 FPS, still well below 60. At 1080p, Low settings hit 56 FPS, which is tantalizingly close but still short. The data is clear: the Intel Arc B390, with its 9th percentile ranking and a benchmark score of 1482, is simply not capable of driving this flight simulator.

The CPU is not the issue. The Ryzen 7 9700F is a 94th percentile processor, and its performance is on par with the Ryzen 9 7940HX and the Core i7-14700KF. But the GPU holds the entire system back. If you are building a PC specifically for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this combination will disappoint. The only scenario where this makes sense is if the system is used for other, less demanding tasks, and Flight Simulator is an afterthought.

For users who already own this hardware, the practical advice is to lower expectations: use 1080p Low settings, accept an average of 56 FPS, and avoid busy airports or heavy weather. But for anyone planning a purchase, the data suggests looking at a different GPU entirely.

Similar Performance Alternatives

If you are considering the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F as your CPU, the data shows that nearby processors will behave almost identically. The Intel Core i7-14700KF is 0.2 percent faster, the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX is 0.2 percent slower, the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X is 0.7 percent slower, and the Intel Core i7-14700K is 0.9 percent slower. These deltas are within noise, so swapping between these CPUs would not change the frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator, since the GPU remains the bottleneck.

On the GPU side, the Intel Arc B390 is closely matched with several older NVIDIA parts. The GeForce GT 520MX is 1.3 percent slower, the GeForce 800M is 1.5 percent slower, the GeForce GT 625 OEM is 2.5 percent slower, and the GeForce GT 710 is 2.7 percent slower. These GPUs would all produce similar, sub-60 FPS results in this game. If you have any of these GPUs, the experience will be nearly identical to the Arc B390, which means none of them are viable for Flight Simulator.

It is important to note that the CPU alternatives are all strong processors, but they do not change the outcome. The GPU alternatives are all weak, and they reinforce the conclusion that the Arc B390 is not a gaming GPU for demanding titles. For a flight sim enthusiast, none of these combinations offer a path to 60 FPS.

Best Settings per Resolution

Given the measured data, there is no preset at any resolution that stays at or above 60 FPS. The verdict by resolution confirms this: no playable settings exist at 3840x2160, 2560x1440, or 1920x1080.

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset you can run is Low, which yields an average of 33 FPS. Medium settings average 26 FPS, High and Ultra both average 19 FPS. Since none of these reach 60 FPS, the best choice is Low, simply to minimize stutter and maintain the highest frame rate possible.

At 2560x1440, Low settings average 45 FPS, Medium averages 35 FPS, High averages 26 FPS, and Ultra averages 25 FPS. Again, Low is the only reasonable option, but 45 FPS is still below the playable threshold.

At 1920x1080, Low settings average 56 FPS, which is the highest recorded value in the entire dataset. Medium averages 43 FPS, High averages 33 FPS, and Ultra averages 31 FPS. Even at the lowest preset, the system falls 4 FPS short of 60 FPS.

The conclusion is straightforward: if you must run Microsoft Flight Simulator on this hardware, use 1080p Low settings. The frame rate will be borderline, but it is the best the data supports. For a smoother experience, you would need a different GPU, as the CPU is not the limiting factor in any of these configurations.