Microsoft Flight Simulator

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for this combination of an Intel Core i5-9400 and an Intel Arc B370 in Microsoft Flight Simulator shows a consistent pattern of performance that declines as resolution and graphical demand increase. Across all tested settings, the average frame rates never reach the 60 FPS threshold, and the highest recorded average is 50 FPS at 1080p with Low settings.

At 1920x1080, the benchmark results show a clear progression from Low to Ultra. The Low preset delivers an average of 50 FPS, while Medium drops to 39 FPS with a recorded minimum of 33 FPS and a maximum of 45 FPS. High settings produce an average of 30 FPS, and Ultra falls further to 28 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 22 FPS, which represents a substantial 44 percent reduction in average frame rate when moving to the most demanding preset.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance gap narrows in absolute terms but remains proportionally similar. Low settings yield an average of 41 FPS, Medium drops to 32 FPS with a minimum of 27 FPS and a maximum of 36 FPS, High produces 24 FPS, and Ultra settles at 23 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 9 FPS, while the drop from Medium to High is another 8 FPS. Interestingly, the difference between High and Ultra is only 1 FPS at this resolution, suggesting diminishing returns at the highest preset.

At 3840x2160, the results become more constrained. Low settings produce an average of 30 FPS, Medium drops to 23 FPS with a minimum of 20 FPS and a maximum of 27 FPS, High falls to 18 FPS, and Ultra reaches only 17 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 13 FPS, which is smaller than the 22 FPS gap seen at 1080p. This indicates that at higher resolutions, the GPU is operating closer to its limits across all presets, compressing the differences between settings.

The minimum and maximum frame rates are only recorded for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 1080p, the range spans from 33 to 45 FPS, a spread of 12 FPS. At 1440p, the range is 27 to 36 FPS, a spread of 9 FPS. At 4K, the range narrows to 20 to 27 FPS, a spread of just 7 FPS. This tightening of the frame rate variance at higher resolutions indicates that the system becomes more consistently bound by a single bottleneck as pixel count increases.

Best Settings per Resolution

Given the playable threshold of 60 FPS used in the database, no tested preset at any resolution achieves a playable average frame rate. The verdict data confirms that all three resolutions return empty playable settings lists, meaning there is no combination of resolution and preset that keeps the average at or above 60 FPS.

For 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that comes closest to the threshold is Low, which delivers an average of 50 FPS. This is 10 FPS short of the 60 FPS target. The next step up, Medium, drops to 39 FPS, which is 21 FPS below the threshold.

At 2560x1440, Low settings produce an average of 41 FPS, which is 19 FPS below the playable mark. Medium falls to 32 FPS, a 28 FPS shortfall. The gap between the best result at this resolution and the 60 FPS target is substantial.

At 3840x2160, Low settings deliver an average of 30 FPS, exactly half of the 60 FPS target. Medium produces 23 FPS, and the higher presets fall further. No resolution offers a preset that clears the threshold, so the database records no best settings for any resolution.

The data suggests that even the lowest graphical preset at 1080p cannot reach the playable threshold. Users seeking 60 FPS would need to reduce resolution below 1080p or accept frame rates in the 30 to 50 FPS range depending on settings.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions and presets in the measured data reveals which component limits performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator for this pairing. The Intel Core i5-9400 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor from the Coffee Lake architecture, while the Intel Arc B370 is an integrated GPU with a 25 W TDP and 1280 shading units. The GPU's percentile ranking among all graphics cards is 5, placing it in the lower performance tier, while the CPU's percentile is 47, near the middle of the field.

The frame rate behavior across resolutions indicates a strong GPU dependency. At 1080p Low, the average is 50 FPS. At 1440p Low, it drops to 41 FPS, and at 4K Low, it falls to 30 FPS. This represents a 40 percent reduction from 1080p to 4K at the same settings. The GPU is clearly the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, as the pixel count increases and the integrated Arc B370 struggles to maintain throughput.

However, the preset scaling at a fixed resolution also shows GPU sensitivity. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra reduces the average from 50 to 28 FPS, a 44 percent drop. This is similar in magnitude to the resolution scaling, indicating that both resolution and preset load the GPU heavily.

The CPU's role becomes more apparent when examining the frame rate stability. The minimum FPS at Medium settings across resolutions shows that the system maintains a relatively stable floor. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 33 FPS; at 1440p Medium, it is 27 FPS; at 4K Medium, it is 20 FPS. These minimums scale roughly in line with resolution, suggesting that the CPU is not causing erratic frame drops.

The narrowing range between minimum and maximum FPS at higher resolutions also points to GPU dominance. At 1080p, the spread is 12 FPS, while at 4K, it is only 7 FPS. When the GPU is fully saturated, frame delivery becomes more consistent, which is a typical sign of a GPU-bound scenario. The Core i5-9400, with its 6 cores and 6 threads, appears to have sufficient headroom to feed the GPU at these low frame rates.

The data suggests that the Intel Arc B370 is the limiting factor across all tested configurations. The CPU's mid-range benchmark scores, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 6629 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 5141, indicate it is not a weak processor, but the GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 places it in the bottom 5 percent of all GPUs. This asymmetry drives the system's overall performance ceiling.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core i5-9400 in the database provide context for its compute capability. The Intel Core i7-1068NG7 has an average benchmark score of 2259, which is 0.2 percent higher than the i5-9400's average of 2254. The Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264, 0.4 percent higher. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, 0.4 percent lower, and the Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248, 0.3 percent lower. These processors would likely exhibit very similar CPU-driven behavior in Microsoft Flight Simulator, meaning the frame rates would remain GPU-bound in most scenarios.

For the Intel Arc B370, the nearest rivals are all significantly older discrete or mobile graphics solutions. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 has an average score of 1186, 0.2 percent higher than the Arc B370's 1184. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, 0.5 percent higher. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, 0.7 percent higher, and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, 1.4 percent lower. These GPUs would produce comparable frame rates in this game, all falling well short of the 60 FPS threshold.

The delta percentages among these rivals are small, all within roughly 1.4 percent of each other. This indicates that swapping the Arc B370 for any of these alternatives would change the measured FPS by only a few frames at most. Similarly, substituting any of the rival CPUs would not meaningfully alter the results, as the GPU remains the binding constraint.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this pairing of the Intel Core i5-9400 and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3428 out of 3714 total combos. This places it in the bottom 8 percent of all tested systems. The rank reflects the overall inability to reach playable frame rates and the low GPU percentile.

The combination's position in the lower tail of the distribution is consistent with the measured FPS data. A rank of 3428 out of 3714 means that only 286 tested combos perform worse than this setup. The GPU's 5th percentile ranking among all GPUs is the dominant factor, as the CPU's 47th percentile ranking is comparatively much stronger.

Within the context of the database, this combo sits near the bottom, but it is not the absolute worst. The 286 combos ranked below it likely feature even weaker integrated graphics or older discrete solutions. For Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is a demanding flight simulation title, this combination falls into the category of systems that can render the game but only at reduced settings and resolutions with sub-60 FPS averages.

The Verdict

The recorded data and verdict fields are unambiguous: this system cannot run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 60 FPS at any resolution or preset tested. The verdictByResolution data shows that all three resolutions, 3840x2160, 2560x1440, and 1920x1080, have empty playable settings lists and no best settings.

At 1920x1080, the best achievable average is 50 FPS on Low settings. This is 10 FPS below the playable threshold and would feel noticeably less smooth than a locked 60 FPS experience. Medium settings at 1080p yield 39 FPS, which is playable in a broader sense but still below the database's strict threshold.

At 2560x1440, the best result is 41 FPS on Low, which is 19 FPS below the threshold. At 3840x2160, the best result is 30 FPS on Low, exactly half the target. None of these configurations meet the database's definition of playable.

The conclusion is that this combination is not suitable for 60 FPS gameplay in Microsoft Flight Simulator. Users would need to accept frame rates in the 30 to 50 FPS range, depending on resolution and settings, or consider hardware changes. The integrated nature of the Arc B370, with its 25 W TDP and shared system memory, fundamentally limits the performance ceiling for this demanding simulation.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combination achieves in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest recorded average is 50 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: Can this system reach 60 FPS at any resolution?

A: No, the verdict data shows that no tested resolution or preset achieves an average of 60 FPS or higher.

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

A: The Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184, which is 0.2 percent lower than the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, 0.5 percent lower than the ATI Radeon HD 5770, 0.7 percent lower than the AMD Radeon HD 7650M, and 1.4 percent higher than the AMD FirePro M2000.

Q: What is the frame rate range at Medium settings across resolutions?

A: At 1920x1080, Medium averages 39 FPS with a range of 33 to 45 FPS. At 2560x1440, it averages 32 FPS with a range of 27 to 36 FPS. At 3840x2160, it averages 23 FPS with a range of 20 to 27 FPS.

Q: How does this combination rank among all tested combos for this game?

A: It ranks 3428 out of 3714 total combinations, placing it in the bottom 8 percent of tested systems.

Q: Is the CPU or the GPU the limiting factor?

A: The GPU, the Intel Arc B370, is the limiting factor. Its percentile ranking is 5 among all GPUs, while the CPU's percentile is 47. The frame rate scaling across resolutions and presets confirms GPU-bound behavior.