Microsoft Flight Simulator

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the Intel Core i5-12600KF paired with the Intel Arc B370 produces consistently low frame rates across all four tested presets. The Low preset averages 30 FPS, which is the strongest result at this resolution. Medium drops to 23 FPS average with a minimum of 20 FPS and a maximum of 27 FPS. High averages 18 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 17 FPS. None of these results approach the 60 FPS playability threshold, and even the best case, Low at 30 FPS, is only half of what would be considered fluid for this simulation.

Moving to 2560x1440, the same pattern holds, though each preset gains roughly 6 to 7 FPS over its 4K counterpart. Low averages 41 FPS, Medium averages 32 FPS with a recorded range of 27 to 36 FPS, High averages 24 FPS, and Ultra averages 23 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 9 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 1 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the top end of the settings scale. The data shows that even at 1440p, no preset clears the 60 FPS bar, and the best result, Low at 41 FPS, remains 19 FPS short.

At 1920x1080, the results improve further but still fall short of 60 FPS across the board. Low averages 50 FPS, Medium averages 39 FPS with a range of 33 to 45 FPS, High averages 30 FPS, and Ultra averages 28 FPS. The scaling from 1440p to 1080p is modest: Low gains 9 FPS, Medium gains 7 FPS, High gains 6 FPS, and Ultra gains 5 FPS. The data indicates that this combo is heavily constrained by the GPU, as lowering resolution yields only incremental gains rather than the dramatic jumps typically seen when a CPU is the limiting factor.

The recorded data shows a consistent hierarchy: Low is always the fastest preset, followed by Medium, then High, then Ultra. At every resolution, the spread between Low and Ultra is roughly 12 to 13 FPS. The Medium preset is the only one with complete min and max data, and those ranges show a narrow band of variance, 7 FPS at 1440p and 12 FPS at 1080p, which suggests relatively stable frame pacing within each run.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no settings preset reaches 60 FPS. The best available option is Low, which produces an average of 30 FPS. This is below the playability threshold, so the database records no playable settings for this resolution. Users targeting 4K would need to accept a frame rate that is effectively half of the target, which in a flight simulator context may be tolerable for static scenery but will feel sluggish during dynamic maneuvers.

At 2560x1440, the situation is similar. No preset achieves 60 FPS, and the best setting is again Low at 41 FPS. The data shows a 19 FPS deficit from the playability threshold. Medium at 32 FPS is the second-best option, but the visual upgrade it provides comes at a 9 FPS cost. Since no preset clears the bar, the verdict for 1440p is also no playable settings.

At 1920x1080, the best result remains below 60 FPS. Low averages 50 FPS, which is the highest recorded value for this combo across any resolution and settings combination. The deficit is 10 FPS. Medium trails at 39 FPS, High at 30 FPS, and Ultra at 28 FPS. The database lists no playable settings for 1080p either, meaning this combination cannot sustain a 60 FPS experience even at the lowest quality preset and the lowest common resolution.

The pattern across all three resolutions is consistent: the most demanding preset that stays closest to 60 FPS is always Low, but it never actually reaches the threshold. The data shows a maximum achievable average of 50 FPS at 1080p Low, with every other configuration falling further behind.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results indicate that the Intel Arc B370 is the dominant limiting factor in this pairing. Evidence comes from the resolution scaling pattern. When moving from 3840x2160 to 2560x1440, a 2.25x reduction in pixel count, the Low preset improves from 30 to 41 FPS, a 37% gain. When moving from 2560x1440 to 1920x1080, a 1.78x reduction in pixel count, the same preset improves from 41 to 50 FPS, a 22% gain. If the CPU were the primary constraint, these resolution changes would produce much smaller FPS differences, since the CPU workload for flight simulation logic would remain roughly constant regardless of output resolution.

The Intel Core i5-12600KF is a 10-core, 16-thread Alder Lake processor with a boost clock of 4.90 GHz and a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 23391. Its percentile ranking against all CPUs is 79, placing it near the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D, which scores 27896, a delta of -0.3%. The CPU is clearly capable of handling complex simulation workloads. The Arc B370, by contrast, ranks in the 5th percentile against all GPUs and has an average benchmark score of 1184, nearly identical to the ATI Radeon HD 5770 at 1190, a delta of -0.5%. This GPU is positioned at the very low end of the performance spectrum.

The settings scaling further confirms the GPU bottleneck. At 1080p, dropping from Ultra to Low raises the average from 28 to 50 FPS, a 79% improvement. At 1440p, the same settings change raises the average from 23 to 41 FPS, a 78% improvement. At 4K, it raises the average from 17 to 30 FPS, a 76% improvement. These large gains from reducing graphical load indicate that the GPU is saturated at every resolution, while the CPU has headroom to spare. The Intel Core i5-12600KF's single-thread performance, evidenced by a Geekbench single-core score of 2157 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3302, is more than sufficient for the per-frame simulation logic of Microsoft Flight Simulator.

The data also shows that the gap between presets remains relatively stable across resolutions. The difference between Low and Medium is 7 FPS at 1080p, 9 FPS at 1440p, and 7 FPS at 4K. The difference between High and Ultra is 2 FPS at both 1080p and 4K, and 1 FPS at 1440p. This consistency suggests that the GPU is uniformly stressed by each preset level, regardless of output resolution, which is a hallmark of a GPU-bound scenario.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 1080p with Low settings?

A: No. The recorded average at 1920x1080 with Low settings is 50 FPS, which is 10 FPS below the 60 FPS playability threshold. The database lists no playable settings for this resolution.

Q: What is the best frame rate this combo can achieve in any configuration?

A: The highest recorded average FPS across all tested resolutions and presets is 50 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184. Its closest rival, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, scores 1186, a delta of -0.2%. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, a delta of -0.5%, and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, a delta of -0.7%.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bigger bottleneck for this game?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. Resolution scaling produces large FPS gains (37% from 4K to 1440p on Low, 22% from 1440p to 1080p on Low), and preset scaling produces up to 79% improvement from Ultra to Low at 1080p. Both patterns indicate GPU saturation.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The only preset with min/max data is Medium. At 3840x2160, the minimum is 20 FPS. At 2560x1440, the minimum is 27 FPS. At 1920x1080, the minimum is 33 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-12600KF compare to the Ryzen 7 5800X3D?

A: The i5-12600KF has an average benchmark score of 27799, while the Ryzen 7 5800X3D scores 27896, a delta of -0.3%. The two processors are statistically equivalent in overall benchmark performance.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-12600KF and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3428 out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the bottom 8% of all configurations in the database. The ranking reflects the severe GPU constraint: the Arc B370 sits in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, while the CPU sits in the 79th percentile of all CPUs. This is an extreme mismatch, where a strong processor is paired with one of the weakest graphics solutions in the measured set.

The CPU's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-10900K at 27872 (delta -0.3%), the AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE at 27712 (delta 0.3%), the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U at 27887 (delta -0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D at 27896 (delta -0.3%). All of these processors are within 0.3% of the i5-12600KF's average score, indicating that the CPU is competitive with a wide range of high-end parts. The GPU's nearest rivals, by contrast, are all legacy or low-end parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, ATI Radeon HD 5770, AMD Radeon HD 7650M, and AMD FirePro M2000. The Arc B370 is in the company of graphics hardware from a much older era.

The rank of 3428 out of 3714 means that 286 combos perform worse, while 3427 perform better. Given that the CPU is a top-quartile part and the GPU is a bottom-quartile part, the overall ranking is dragged down almost entirely by the graphics card. In a flight simulator that relies heavily on terrain rendering, volumetric clouds, and detailed cockpit instrumentation, the GPU workload dominates the frame time budget. The recorded data supports this interpretation: no resolution or preset combination reaches 60 FPS, and the best case is 50 FPS at 1080p Low.

The Verdict

This PC cannot run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 60 FPS in any tested configuration. The verdict by resolution is clear: 3840x2160 has no playable settings, 2560x1440 has no playable settings, and 1920x1080 has no playable settings. The highest average FPS recorded is 50 at 1080p Low, which is 10 FPS short of the playability threshold.

At 4K, the best option is Low at 30 FPS, which is exactly half the target frame rate. At 1440p, the best option is Low at 41 FPS. At 1080p, the best option is Low at 50 FPS. The data shows a consistent shortfall at every resolution and preset. Users who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity could run the game at 1080p Low and experience a playable, if not perfectly smooth, simulation, but the 60 FPS standard is not met.

The Intel Core i5-12600KF is not the issue. Its benchmark scores place it among capable desktop processors, and its nearest rivals include the Ryzen 7 5800X3D and Core i9-10900K, both within a fraction of a percent in average score. The Intel Arc B370, however, is a 5th percentile GPU with performance comparable to legacy parts like the Radeon HD 5770. The pairing produces a system that is CPU-rich and GPU-poor, and Microsoft Flight Simulator's demanding rendering pipeline exposes that imbalance immediately. For 60 FPS gameplay, a different GPU would be required, but based on the measured data alone, this combination falls short at every resolution and preset.