Microsoft Flight Simulator

The Intel Core i7-13700K combined with the Intel Arc B370 produces a severely limited experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator, with the integrated-class GPU acting as a hard bottleneck across all tested resolutions. The recorded data shows that no resolution or preset combination reaches the 60 FPS playable threshold, and even the lowest graphical settings at 1080p only manage an average of 50 FPS. The database indicates a fundamental mismatch: the CPU is a high-end desktop part, while the GPU is an integrated processor with a 25 W TDP and a 5th percentile ranking among all tested GPUs.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly poor. The Low preset delivers the highest average at 30 FPS, followed by Medium at 23 FPS with a recorded range of 20 to 27 FPS. High drops to 18 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 17 FPS. No 4K setting comes close to the 60 FPS target, and even the most favorable reading, the Low preset, is half of the playable threshold.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance improves but remains far from fluid. The Low preset reaches an average of 41 FPS, which is the best result at this resolution. Medium averages 32 FPS with a range of 27 to 36 FPS. High sits at 24 FPS, while Ultra manages only 23 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 9 FPS, suggesting that the additional rendering work at Medium has a measurable cost on this GPU.

At 1920x1080, the best overall results appear. Low averages 50 FPS, the single highest average in the entire dataset. Medium averages 39 FPS with a range of 33 to 45 FPS. High reaches 30 FPS, and Ultra falls to 28 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 22 FPS, which is substantial but still leaves even the fastest setting short of 60 FPS.

A few patterns emerge from the full set of measurements. The difference between Low and High at each resolution is consistent: roughly 12 FPS at 4K, 17 FPS at 1440p, and 20 FPS at 1080p. The Ultra preset is never more than 2 FPS faster than High, and in some cases it is slower, indicating that the GPU is saturated long before the most demanding settings are enabled. The Medium preset is the only one with min and max values recorded, and those ranges show a narrow band of performance, roughly 7 to 12 FPS wide, which points to a stable but very low frame delivery.

CPU and GPU Roles

The component roles here are stark. The Intel Core i7-13700K is a 16-core, 24-thread Raptor Lake processor with a boost clock of 5.40 GHz and a 30 MB L3 cache. It ranks in the 89th percentile among all CPUs, and its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Ryzen 9 5900, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, the AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX, and the Intel Xeon w3-2535, all within a 0.5% delta of its average benchmark score. This is a CPU with ample headroom for a flight simulator that benefits from strong single-thread and multi-thread performance.

The Intel Arc B370, by contrast, is an integrated GPU built on the Xe3-LPG architecture with 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs. Its boost clock is 2400 MHz, and it uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. The database ranks it in the 5th percentile among all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are legacy parts like the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M. The GPU has a single recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184, which places it in a performance class far below what modern flight simulation requires.

The scaling data makes the GPU bottleneck obvious. At 4K Low, the average is 30 FPS; at 1080p Low, it is 50 FPS. That is a 67% improvement from dropping resolution, which indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor. If the CPU were the constraint, the frame rate would stay roughly flat across resolutions. The CPU, with its 89th percentile ranking, is unlikely to be the limiting component at any of these settings. The GPU, with its 5th percentile ranking, is the clear ceiling. The fact that the Ultra preset at 1080p (28 FPS) is barely faster than the High preset at 1440p (24 FPS) reinforces this: the GPU is running out of compute and memory bandwidth long before the CPU is stressed.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves the 60 FPS threshold. The best available option is the Low preset, which averages 30 FPS, but that is still only half of the playable target. The verdict field for 4K lists no playable settings, and the best settings entry is null.

At 2560x1440, the situation is identical. No preset reaches 60 FPS. The Low preset averages 41 FPS, which is the highest at this resolution, but it falls 19 FPS short of the threshold. The verdict field for 1440p also lists no playable settings.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 50 FPS, the best recorded result in the entire dataset. Even so, the verdict field for 1080p lists no playable settings, and the best settings entry is null. The closest any setting comes to the threshold is Low at 1080p, which is 10 FPS below 60. The Medium preset at 1080p averages 39 FPS, and High drops to 30 FPS, so there is no setting that can be recommended as playable by the database standard.

The Verdict

This PC cannot run Microsoft Flight Simulator at the 60 FPS playable threshold at any resolution or preset. The verdict by resolution is unambiguous: 3840x2160 has no playable settings, 2560x1440 has no playable settings, and 1920x1080 has no playable settings. The best case scenario is 1080p Low at 50 FPS, which is smooth enough for a slideshow but not for flight simulation, where rapid changes in scenery and cockpit instrumentation demand consistent frame delivery.

The root cause is the GPU. The Intel Core i7-13700K has the compute headroom to handle the simulation logic, but the Intel Arc B370 is an integrated part with a 25 W TDP and a 5th percentile GPU ranking. The data shows that even at the lowest settings, the GPU cannot push past 50 FPS at 1080p, and at higher resolutions it falls below 30 FPS. The CPU's performance is essentially irrelevant here; the GPU is the constraint in every single measurement. For a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for heavy GPU load at high settings, this combination is not viable for playable frame rates.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo can achieve in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest recorded average is 50 FPS, which occurs at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. No other resolution or preset combination exceeds this value.

Q: Can this combo reach 60 FPS at 1080p?

A: No. The closest result is the Low preset at 1080p, which averages 50 FPS. The Medium, High, and Ultra presets at 1080p average 39, 30, and 28 FPS respectively.

Q: How does the GPU compare to other tested GPUs in the database?

A: The Intel Arc B370 ranks in the 5th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1184. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, ATI Radeon HD 5770, AMD Radeon HD 7650M, and AMD FirePro M2000, all within a 1.4% delta.

Q: How does the CPU compare to other tested CPUs in the database?

A: The Intel Core i7-13700K ranks in the 89th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 46881. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 9 5900, AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX, and Intel Xeon w3-2535, all within a 0.5% delta.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 41 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 23 FPS. That is an 18 FPS difference between the lowest and highest settings.

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

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU ranks in the 89th percentile while the GPU ranks in the 5th percentile. The frame rate scales significantly with resolution (30 FPS at 4K Low versus 50 FPS at 1080p Low), which is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this pairing ranks 3428 out of 3714 tested combos. That places it in the bottom percentile of all tested systems, which is consistent with the measured FPS data. For context, the CPU alone is a top-tier part, but the GPU is near the bottom of the GPU ranking. The combination of a high-end CPU with an integrated-class GPU produces a system that is severely underpowered for this title. The rank of 3428 out of 3714 means that 286 tested combinations perform worse, but the vast majority of tested systems deliver better results. The data shows that this combo is only suitable for the lowest settings at the lowest resolution, and even then it misses the 60 FPS target.