Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F paired with the Intel Arc B580 presents a mid-range combination for running Microsoft Flight Simulator, a title known for its demanding rendering of terrain and aircraft. The measured data shows that this system can handle the game at 1080p and 1440p with adjusted settings, but it falls short of the 60 FPS threshold at 4K across all presets. This analysis walks through the benchmark results, component roles, and practical settings recommendations based solely on the provided facts.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset this combo can run at 1920x1080 while staying at or above 60 FPS?

A: At 1920x1080, the Medium preset achieves an average of 76 FPS, with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 87 FPS. This is the most demanding preset that clears the 60 FPS threshold at this resolution.

Q: Is the system capable of maintaining 60 FPS at 2560x1440?

A: Yes, at 2560x1440, the Medium preset delivers an average of 61 FPS, with a minimum of 52 FPS and a maximum of 70 FPS. The Low preset runs at 78 FPS average, while High and Ultra fall below 60 FPS at 46 and 44 FPS respectively.

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

A: No, the data indicates no playable settings at 3840x2160. The Low preset reaches 58 FPS average, just under the 60 FPS threshold, while Medium averages 45 FPS, High 34 FPS, and Ultra 32 FPS. None of these meet the playable mark.

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F compare to its nearest rivals in overall CPU benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 7 9700F scores an average benchmark of 69,996, which is 0.2% above the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (69,875) and 0.7% above the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (69,515). It sits 0.2% below the Intel Core i7-14700KF (70,163) and 0.9% below the Intel Core i7-14700K (69,355).

Q: What is the GPU’s average benchmark score and how does it rank against similar cards?

A: The Intel Arc B580 has an average benchmark score of 23,021, placing it in the 68th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP, scores 23,061 (0.2% higher), while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 scores 22,895 (0.6% lower) and the RTX 3080 scores 23,172 (0.7% higher).

Q: What is the combo’s overall rank among tested combinations for this game?

A: This specific CPU-GPU pairing ranks 2,788 out of 3,714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the performance distribution, consistent with its inability to reach 4K playability.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data from measured FPS at different resolutions and presets reveals how the workload shifts between the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and the Intel Arc B580. At 1920x1080, the CPU has a more prominent role because the GPU is less likely to be the bottleneck at lower pixel counts. The jump from Low (97 FPS) to Medium (76 FPS) at 1080p shows a 21 FPS drop, indicating that the GPU is beginning to take on more work as settings increase. However, the difference between Medium and High (57 FPS) is 19 FPS, and High to Ultra (54 FPS) is only 3 FPS, which suggests that the CPU may be limiting performance at the highest presets, as the GPU’s additional load does not translate into a proportional FPS reduction.

At 2560x1440, the GPU assumes greater importance. The Low preset runs at 78 FPS, dropping to 61 FPS on Medium, a 17 FPS decline. High falls to 46 FPS (15 FPS below Medium), and Ultra to 44 FPS (2 FPS below High). The narrowing gap between High and Ultra at 1440p mirrors the 1080p pattern, but the overall lower FPS values indicate that the Arc B580 is now the primary constraint. For example, the 1440p Medium average of 61 FPS is exactly 15 FPS lower than the 1080p Medium average of 76 FPS, showing the GPU’s reduced headroom as resolution increases.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the dominant factor. The Low preset averages 58 FPS, which is 20 FPS lower than 1440p Low (78 FPS) and 39 FPS lower than 1080p Low (97 FPS). The scaling from 1440p to 4K at Medium is even steeper: from 61 FPS to 45 FPS, a 16 FPS drop. High and Ultra at 4K (34 and 32 FPS respectively) are nearly identical, with only a 2 FPS difference, suggesting that the CPU is not the limiting factor here; rather, the GPU simply cannot handle the pixel throughput. The minimum FPS values at Medium (38 FPS at 4K, 52 FPS at 1440p, 64 FPS at 1080p) further confirm that the Arc B580’s rendering capacity degrades sharply with resolution.

Across all resolutions, the Ryzen 7 9700F’s 8-core, 16-thread configuration with a 5.50 GHz boost clock provides sufficient compute for the simulation’s physics and scenery loading, as evidenced by the fact that FPS differences between High and Ultra are small (3-5 FPS) at every resolution. The GPU, with its 12 GB of GDDR6 memory and 456.0 GB/s bandwidth, becomes the deciding factor above 1080p. In summary, at 1080p the CPU and GPU share the load, but at 1440p and especially 4K, the Intel Arc B580 is the component that determines whether the game reaches 60 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across four presets and three resolutions. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers the highest average at 97 FPS. The Medium preset averages 76 FPS, with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 87 FPS, indicating consistent frame times. High drops to 57 FPS average, and Ultra to 54 FPS, with no min or max values recorded for these settings. The 1080p data shows a clear degradation from Low to Medium (21 FPS), then a smaller step to High (19 FPS), and a minimal drop to Ultra (3 FPS).

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 78 FPS, which is 19 FPS lower than 1080p Low. Medium averages 61 FPS, with a minimum of 52 FPS and a maximum of 70 FPS, making it the only preset at this resolution that stays at or above the 60 FPS playable threshold on average. High averages 46 FPS, and Ultra averages 44 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is 15 FPS, while High to Ultra is only 2 FPS, repeating the pattern seen at 1080p where the upper presets converge. The minimum FPS at 1440p Medium (52 FPS) is notably below the average, suggesting occasional dips that could be noticeable in dense scenery.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 58 FPS, just 2 FPS short of the 60 FPS target. Medium averages 45 FPS, with a minimum of 38 FPS and a maximum of 52 FPS, showing significant variance. High averages 34 FPS, and Ultra averages 32 FPS. The scaling from 1440p to 4K is severe: Low drops from 78 to 58 FPS (20 FPS), Medium from 61 to 45 FPS (16 FPS), High from 46 to 34 FPS (12 FPS), and Ultra from 44 to 32 FPS (12 FPS). These numbers indicate that the Intel Arc B580’s 13.67 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is insufficient for 4K in this title, even at Low settings.

Comparing presets across resolutions, the Medium preset is the most consistent for measuring resolution scaling, as it has full min/max data. At 1080p Medium, the average is 76 FPS with a 64-87 FPS range. At 1440p Medium, the average is 61 FPS with a 52-70 FPS range. At 4K Medium, the average is 45 FPS with a 38-52 FPS range. This shows a roughly 20% reduction in average FPS from 1080p to 1440p, and another 26% reduction from 1440p to 4K. The minimum FPS values follow a similar trend, dropping from 64 to 52 to 38.

The Verdict

Based on the verdictByResolution data, this PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, but only at certain resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the playable settings are Low and Medium, with the best preset being Medium at an average of 76 FPS. At 2560x1440, Low and Medium are playable, with Medium as the best option at 61 FPS average. At 3840x2160, there are no playable settings, as even Low averages 58 FPS, below the 60 FPS threshold.

The 60 FPS playable threshold is critical. At 1080p, the Medium preset not only averages 76 FPS but also maintains a minimum of 64 FPS, meaning it rarely dips below the target. At 1440p, Medium averages 61 FPS, but the minimum of 52 FPS indicates that the system will drop below 60 FPS during demanding moments, such as flying over dense urban areas or during weather effects. The Low preset at 1440p, with an average of 78 FPS, offers more headroom, though it sacrifices visual quality.

At 4K, the system is not playable by this benchmark’s definition. The Low preset’s 58 FPS average is tantalizingly close, but the lack of min/max data for that setting means we cannot assess stability. Medium at 4K, with a 38 FPS minimum, would exhibit noticeable stuttering. For users who prioritize 4K, this combination is not recommended, as even the lowest settings fail to reach the playable threshold. For 1440p and 1080p, the system is viable, provided users accept Medium settings as the ceiling for smooth gameplay.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F provide context for CPU-bound scenarios. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX scores 69,875, a 0.2% difference from the 9700F’s 69,996, meaning it would perform nearly identically in CPU-intensive tasks like flight simulation physics. The Intel Core i7-14700KF scores 70,163, 0.2% higher, and the Intel Core i7-14700K scores 69,355, 0.9% lower. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X scores 69,515, 0.7% lower. In practice, any of these CPUs would yield FPS numbers within 1% of the 9700F, so the measured results would be essentially unchanged.

For the Intel Arc B580, the nearest GPU rivals show similar benchmark scores. The AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP scores 23,061, just 0.2% above the Arc B580’s 23,021. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 scores 22,895, 0.6% lower, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 scores 23,172, 0.7% higher. The NVIDIA P106-100 scores 23,249, 1% higher. These deltas are small enough that the FPS results in Microsoft Flight Simulator would be within a few frames per second. For instance, the RTX 3080, despite being a more powerful card in other contexts, only scores 0.7% higher in the aggregate benchmark, so it would likely achieve similar playability at 1080p and 1440p, but still struggle at 4K.

The combination of a 9700F-class CPU with a B580-class GPU means that users seeking alternatives should look at any pairing where the CPU and GPU scores fall within a few percentage points of these values. The data does not support claims of large performance differences among these rivals, as the maximum delta is 1% for the GPU and 0.9% for the CPU. Therefore, swapping to any of these alternatives would not change the verdict: 1080p Medium (76 FPS) and 1440p Medium (61 FPS) are the playable targets, while 4K remains out of reach.

Best Settings per Resolution

For each resolution, the goal is to identify the most demanding preset that maintains an average FPS at or above 60. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset is the best choice, delivering an average of 76 FPS, with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 87 FPS. The High preset averages 57 FPS, which is below the threshold, so Medium is the highest playable setting. The Low preset runs at 97 FPS, but it offers no visual benefits that would justify sacrificing the Medium preset’s improvements.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset again provides the best playable experience, with an average of 61 FPS. However, the minimum of 52 FPS means that some scenes will drop below 60 FPS. The Low preset averages 78 FPS, offering a more stable experience if frame pacing is a concern. Since the verdict lists Medium as the best settings at this resolution, that is the recommended choice, but users sensitive to frame drops might prefer Low. The High and Ultra presets, at 46 and 44 FPS respectively, are not viable for smooth gameplay.

At 3840x2160, there is no best setting because no preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold. The Low preset’s 58 FPS is the closest, but it still fails the playable criterion. The Medium preset averages 45 FPS, High 34 FPS, and Ultra 32 FPS, all of which are significantly below 60 FPS. For 4K, the data suggests that this hardware combination is not suitable for this game, and users should either lower the resolution or accept sub-60 FPS performance. The recommendation is to use 1440p Medium for the best balance of visual quality and performance, or 1080p Medium for a more consistent experience.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank in Microsoft Flight Simulator is 2,788 out of 3,714 tested combinations. This places it in the 25th percentile of all tested combos (calculated as 1 - 2788/3714). This low ranking is consistent with the measured FPS data, which shows that the system cannot achieve 60 FPS at 4K and only barely clears it at 1440p Medium. The rank reflects the Arc B580’s 68th percentile standing among all GPUs and the Ryzen 7 9700F’s 94th percentile among all CPUs, but the game’s heavy GPU load at higher resolutions drags the overall combo down.

In comparison to other combos, this ranking means that most tested systems (about 75%) perform better in this game. The data does not provide specific scores for other combos, but the rank suggests that the Intel Arc B580 is the limiting factor, as its 68th percentile GPU score is far below the CPU’s 94th percentile. If the CPU were paired with a higher-performing GPU, the rank would likely improve significantly, but with the B580, the system is constrained to lower resolutions and presets.

The rank also aligns with the playable settings: the system is in the lower quarter of performers, yet it still manages to run the game at 1080p and 1440p with Medium settings. This indicates that Microsoft Flight Simulator is playable on mid-range hardware, but the 4K experience requires a substantially more powerful GPU. For users considering this combo, the rank serves as a warning that while the CPU is strong, the GPU’s performance in this specific title is below average, making 1440p the practical ceiling for smooth gameplay.