Microsoft Flight Simulator

Similar Performance Alternatives

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D sits in a tightly contested performance band according to the database. Its average benchmark score of 58386 places it within 0.7% of several competing processors. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M scores 58323, a delta of just 0.1% behind the Ryzen chip. The Intel Xeon w5-2545 comes in at 58504, 0.2% ahead. The Intel Core i9-14900 trails by 0.5% with a score of 58115, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 leads by 0.7% at 58826. These four processors form a cluster where real-world differences in this game would be difficult to attribute to the CPU alone. The 9850X3D ranks in the 92nd percentile against all CPUs in the database, so it is positioned well above the median part, but its nearest rivals demonstrate that the top end of the processor field is crowded.

On the graphics side, the Intel Arc B390 presents a very different picture. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 places it in the 9th percentile against all GPUs. The nearest rivals are all older NVIDIA parts: the GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463 (1.3% behind), the GeForce 800M scores 1460 (1.5% behind), the GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446 (2.5% behind), and the GeForce GT 710 scores 1443 (2.7% behind). The Arc B390 leads this group, but the margins are slim. Any of these GPUs would produce broadly similar frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator, meaning the B390 is not operating in a performance class that offers headroom for demanding flight simulation workloads. The gap between the CPU's high percentile ranking and the GPU's low percentile ranking is the central story of this combination.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no tested preset reaches the 60 FPS playable threshold. The highest average frame rate recorded is 33 FPS at Low settings. Medium produces 26 FPS average, High and Ultra both produce 19 FPS average. The database records no playable settings for 4K, meaning every preset falls short of the 60 FPS target.

At 2560x1440, the situation improves but still does not clear the threshold. The Low preset delivers 45 FPS average, the highest of any 1440p setting. Medium averages 35 FPS, High averages 26 FPS, and Ultra averages 25 FPS. No 1440p preset reaches 60 FPS, so the verdict for this resolution is also unplayable by the database's standard.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset comes closest to playability with a 56 FPS average. That is 4 FPS short of the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 43 FPS, High averages 33 FPS, and Ultra averages 31 FPS. The database lists no playable settings at 1080p either. The best recorded result across all resolutions and presets is 56 FPS at 1080p Low, which sits just below the playable cutoff.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured frame rates reveal a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-limited. Consider the scaling from 1080p to 4K at the Low preset: 56 FPS at 1920x1080 drops to 45 FPS at 2560x1440, then to 33 FPS at 3840x2160. That is a 41% reduction in average frame rate from 1080p to 4K. The resolution scaling pattern repeats across every preset. At Medium, the progression is 43 FPS at 1080p, 35 FPS at 1440p, and 26 FPS at 4K. At High, it is 33 FPS, 26 FPS, and 19 FPS. At Ultra, it is 31 FPS, 25 FPS, and 19 FPS.

The consistent drop as resolution increases points to the GPU as the binding constraint. The Ryzen 7 9850X3D, with its 92nd percentile CPU ranking, is not the limiting factor in these measurements. If the CPU were the bottleneck, frame rates would remain relatively flat across resolutions because the same number of draw calls and simulation updates would be required regardless of pixel count. Instead, the frame rate falls by roughly half from 1080p to 4K at every settings level, which is the signature of a GPU struggling with pixel throughput.

Settings scaling reinforces this interpretation. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra changes the average from 56 FPS to 31 FPS, a 45% drop. At 4K, Low produces 33 FPS and Ultra produces 19 FPS, a 42% drop. The settings sensitivity is nearly identical at both resolutions, indicating that the graphics workload scales with both resolution and quality settings in a predictable manner. The CPU's role is secondary here; the recorded data shows a part that could feed a much faster GPU without becoming the constraint in this title.

The Verdict

The database's verdict is unambiguous: this PC cannot run Microsoft Flight Simulator at a playable level at any resolution tested. The playable threshold is 60 FPS, and no resolution, from 1080p to 4K, records a single preset that reaches that mark. The closest result is 56 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which is 4 FPS short of playable. At 2560x1440, the best result is 45 FPS at Low. At 3840x2160, the best result is 33 FPS at Low. The verdictByResolution field lists empty playable settings arrays for all three resolutions, confirming that no configuration in the measured set clears the 60 FPS bar.

The gap between the CPU's capability and the GPU's output is stark. The Ryzen 7 9850X3D ranks in the 92nd percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel Arc B390 ranks in the 9th percentile among all GPUs. The combination produces frame rates that fall short of playability across the board. Users considering this pairing for flight simulation would need to lower expectations substantially or reconsider the GPU choice. The CPU is not the problem; the recorded data shows the GPU cannot deliver the necessary throughput for this title at any resolution tested.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset averages 19 FPS, with no minimum or maximum recorded. High also averages 19 FPS. Medium averages 26 FPS, with a minimum of 22 and a maximum of 30. Low averages 33 FPS, the best 4K result, with no min or max recorded. Every 4K preset falls far below the 60 FPS target.

At 2560x1440, Ultra averages 25 FPS. High averages 26 FPS. Medium averages 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 and a maximum of 40. Low averages 45 FPS. The 1440p results are uniformly better than 4K but still nowhere near playable.

At 1920x1080, Ultra averages 31 FPS. High averages 33 FPS. Medium averages 43 FPS, with a minimum of 37 and a maximum of 50. Low averages 56 FPS. This is the only preset in the entire dataset that approaches the 60 FPS threshold, but it still misses by 4 frames.

The min and max values are only recorded for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 4K Medium, the spread from 22 to 30 FPS shows consistent sub-30 performance. At 1440p Medium, the spread from 30 to 40 FPS keeps the experience in the mid-30s. At 1080p Medium, the spread from 37 to 50 FPS is the most stable band in the dataset, but it still lands below the playable threshold.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Ryzen 7 9850X3D and the Intel Arc B390 ranks 3302 out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places it in the bottom 11% of all tested configurations. The rank reflects the GPU's severe limitation; the 9th percentile GPU ranking drags the overall combo down despite the CPU's 92nd percentile standing.

The database shows that the combo rank is driven by the weakest link. The CPU is a top-tier part by percentile, but the GPU is near the bottom of the tested pool. In a frame-rate-bound title like Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU determines the outcome, and the B390's 1482 Steel Nomad score is simply not competitive for this workload. The 3302 rank out of 3714 combos means a large majority of tested systems deliver better performance in this game.

FAQ

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

A: No. The database records no preset at any resolution that reaches the 60 FPS playable threshold. The best result is 56 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

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

A: Low settings at 1920x1080 produces 56 FPS average, the highest recorded frame rate for this combo. Medium averages 43 FPS, High averages 33 FPS, and Ultra averages 31 FPS.

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

A: The Intel Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is 1.3% ahead of the GeForce GT 520MX, 1.5% ahead of the GeForce 800M, 2.5% ahead of the GeForce GT 625 OEM, and 2.7% ahead of the GeForce GT 710.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor. Frame rates drop by roughly 40% from 1080p to 4K at every preset, while the CPU ranks in the 92nd percentile overall.

Q: What is the best 4K result for this system?

A: Low settings at 3840x2160 averages 33 FPS. Medium averages 26 FPS, High and Ultra both average 19 FPS.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems?

A: It ranks 3302 out of 3714 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the bottom 11% of the database.