Microsoft Flight Simulator

Intel Core i5-13400F paired with Intel Arc B370 presents a highly unusual configuration for Microsoft Flight Simulator. The CPU is a modern 10-core, 16-thread Raptor Lake part with strong multi-threaded performance, but the GPU is an integrated-class solution that the database ranks in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Benchmark results confirm a severe bottleneck on the graphics side. Across every resolution and preset tested, the measured average frame rates fall far below the 60 FPS playability threshold, often by a wide margin. The recorded data indicates this combo cannot deliver a smooth experience in this title at any tested setting.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the CPU alone, the Intel Core i5-13400F sits in the 77th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 25292. Its nearest rivals in the database are extremely close in overall score. The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS scores 25284, a 0% difference. The Intel Core 5 120 scores 25362, a -0.3% delta. The AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D scores 25365, also a -0.3% delta. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800H scores 25201, a 0.4% delta. For CPU-bound tasks, these four alternatives would deliver nearly identical performance to the i5-13400F.

The GPU situation is entirely different and far more restrictive. The Intel Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. The only benchmark recorded for it is 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 with a score of 1184. Its nearest rivals are all legacy or low-power parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186, a -0.2% delta. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, a -0.5% delta. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, a -0.7% delta. The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, a 1.4% delta. These deltas are all within 1.4% of the Arc B370, meaning any of these GPUs would behave almost identically in graphics-bound scenarios. This is a critical point: the Arc B370 is not comparable to any modern discrete GPU, even those from several generations ago. It is an integrated graphics processor, sharing system memory, with a 25 W TDP.

For this specific game, the combination's performance is dictated almost entirely by the GPU. The CPU has ample headroom for this title, as indicated by its high multi-thread scores like 22604 in Cinebench R23. The bottleneck is the graphics pipeline. Any of the GPU rivals listed above would produce similar frame rates, while the CPU rivals would not meaningfully change the outcome because the GPU is already the limiting factor.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 1080p with playable frame rates?

A: No. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average FPS is 50. Medium settings drop to 39 average FPS. High settings drop to 30 average FPS. Ultra settings drop to 28 average FPS. All of these fall below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best-case scenario for this hardware in this game?

A: The highest recorded average FPS for this combo is 50, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that gets close to the 60 FPS target, but it still misses it by 10 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to other GPUs in the database?

A: The Arc B370 ranks in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, ATI Radeon HD 5770, AMD Radeon HD 7650M, and AMD FirePro M2000, all within 1.4% of its benchmark score. These are all legacy or low-power parts.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-13400F a strong processor for this game?

A: Yes, the CPU is not the limiting factor. It ranks in the 77th percentile of all CPUs. Its multi-threaded Cinebench R23 score is 22604, and its 3dmark 16-thread score is 7314. The bottleneck is entirely on the GPU side.

Q: What resolution and settings combination yields the highest minimum FPS?

A: The only configurations with recorded minimum FPS are the Medium presets. At 1920x1080 Medium, the minimum is 33 FPS. At 2560x1440 Medium, the minimum is 27 FPS. At 3840x2160 Medium, the minimum is 20 FPS.

Q: Does the database show any configuration that reaches 60 FPS for this combo?

A: No. The verdict by resolution lists no playable settings for 3840x2160, 2560x1440, or 1920x1080. Every tested preset at every resolution falls short of the 60 FPS threshold.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data covers four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) across three resolutions. The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/avg/max data. For all other presets, only the average FPS is recorded.

At 3840x2160, the results are as follows. Low settings produce an average of 30 FPS. Medium settings produce an average of 23 FPS, with a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 27. High settings produce an average of 18 FPS. Ultra settings produce an average of 17 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 13 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the results improve slightly but remain low. Low settings produce an average of 41 FPS. Medium settings produce an average of 32 FPS, with a minimum of 27 and a maximum of 36. High settings produce an average of 24 FPS. Ultra settings produce an average of 23 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 18 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the results are the best of the three resolutions but still do not reach playability. Low settings produce an average of 50 FPS. Medium settings produce an average of 39 FPS, with a minimum of 33 and a maximum of 45. High settings produce an average of 30 FPS. Ultra settings produce an average of 28 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 22 FPS.

The pattern across resolutions is consistent. Lowering the resolution from 4K to 1440p to 1080p yields meaningful gains at each preset. Lowering the preset from Ultra to Low also yields meaningful gains. However, even the best combination (1080p Low at 50 FPS average) does not clear the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset at 1080p, which is often a reasonable target for demanding games, only reaches 39 FPS average with a 33 FPS minimum.

The Verdict

The verdict from the database is unambiguous. For 3840x2160, there are no playable settings. For 2560x1440, there are no playable settings. For 1920x1080, there are no playable settings. The playable threshold is defined as 60 FPS. Every single tested configuration falls below that number.

The best average FPS recorded for this combo is 50 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is 10 FPS short of the target. The second-best is 41 FPS at 2560x1440 with Low settings. The third-best is 39 FPS at 1920x1080 with Medium settings. Even at the lowest resolution and lowest preset, the hardware cannot maintain a steady 60 FPS.

The bottleneck is clearly the Intel Arc B370. This GPU has a 25 W TDP, uses system shared memory, and ranks in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. It is an integrated graphics solution, not a discrete card. The CPU, by contrast, is a capable desktop processor that ranks in the 77th percentile. For Microsoft Flight Simulator, this combination is not viable for playable frame rates at any resolution or preset tested. A different GPU would be required to reach the 60 FPS threshold.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database's measured results for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this specific CPU and GPU combination ranks 3428 out of 3714 tested combos. This places it in the bottom 8% of all tested configurations. The rank reflects the overall performance of the pair in this specific game, and the data confirms that it is a very low-performing setup.

The CPU's individual ranking, at the 77th percentile, suggests that many other CPUs in the database perform worse. However, the GPU's ranking at the 5th percentile drags the entire combo down. The combination's rank of 3428 out of 3714 indicates that nearly all other tested combos deliver better frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The GPU is the primary reason for this low ranking.

Best Settings per Resolution

Given the 60 FPS playability threshold, the database records no best settings for any resolution. The verdict by resolution explicitly lists no playable settings for 3840x2160, 2560x1440, and 1920x1080. The best settings field is null for all three resolutions, and the average FPS at best settings is null as well.

For context, the highest average FPS achieved at each resolution is as follows. At 3840x2160, the highest average is 30 FPS on Low settings. At 2560x1440, the highest average is 41 FPS on Low settings. At 1920x1080, the highest average is 50 FPS on Low settings. In every case, Low settings provide the best average FPS, but none of them reach the 60 FPS target.

If the playable threshold were lower, say 30 FPS, then 1080p Low and 1440p Low would qualify. At 1080p Low, the average is 50 FPS. At 1440p Low, the average is 41 FPS. At 4K Low, the average is exactly 30 FPS. However, the database defines playability at 60 FPS, and this hardware cannot meet that standard. The recommendation for any user is to accept that this combo is not suitable for Microsoft Flight Simulator at playable frame rates, regardless of settings.