Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is an exceptionally demanding title, and the measured results for the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with the Intel Arc B390 place this combination near the bottom of the database, ranking 2665 out of 2996 tested configurations. The data indicates a system that is fundamentally constrained by its graphics solution, where even the least demanding preset at 1080p only achieves an average of 56 FPS, and playable performance at higher resolutions is largely out of reach. This pairing is best suited for low-resolution, low-detail flight, as the benchmark results show a clear and consistent pattern of performance degradation as both resolution and graphical fidelity increase.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 2000 series, built on the Zen architecture and codenamed Zen+ (Pinnacle Ridge). It operates with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz, and its 16 MB of shared L3 cache is a notable resource for simulation workloads that often involve streaming large amounts of world data. In the context of the overall CPU market, this processor holds a 75th percentile ranking, indicating that while it is not a top-tier part, it is by no means a weak performer in general compute tasks. Its average benchmark score of 21484 places it in close competition with the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V, which scores 21440 and is just 0.2% behind, and the Intel Core i9-11900H, which is 0.5% behind with a score of 21367.

However, the performance data from Microsoft Flight Simulator suggests that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck in this specific configuration. The frame rates scale almost linearly with resolution, which is a classic symptom of a GPU-bound system. For instance, dropping from 1080p to 4K at Low settings reduces the average frame rate from 56 FPS to 33 FPS. If the Ryzen 5 2600 were the limiting factor, the frame rates would remain relatively flat across different resolutions, as the CPU workload would be consistent regardless of the number of pixels rendered. The fact that performance drops so significantly with resolution points to the Intel Arc B390 as the component that is holding the system back.

The CPU's multi-threaded capabilities are still relevant, as the game must manage flight physics, AI traffic, and world generation. The processor's PassMark multi-thread score of 13160 and Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 1248 provide a baseline for its ability to handle these complex, parallel tasks. Yet, the benchmark results indicate that this headroom is not being fully utilized because the graphics card cannot render frames fast enough to demand more from the processor. The data suggests that the Ryzen 5 2600 has the capacity to feed a more powerful GPU, but in this pairing, its potential is largely untapped, and the user experience is dictated by the graphics card's limitations.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Arc B390 is the clear performance limiter in this configuration. It is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process. Its specification sheet is unusual for a gaming GPU, as it features System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth, meaning it relies on the system's main memory rather than dedicated VRAM. With a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, it offers 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. Its raw compute capability is listed at 7.680 TFLOPS for FP32 operations, but its benchmark performance in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test is a low 1482 points.

This score places the Arc B390 in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, indicating that it is a very low-performing graphics solution. To put this into perspective, its nearest rivals are all significantly older entry-level dedicated graphics cards. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, which is 1.3% lower, the GeForce 800M scores 1460 (1.5% lower), and the GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446 (2.5% lower). Even the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 is only 2.7% behind with a score of 1443. The data is clear: the Arc B390 is competing with decade-old, entry-level hardware, and it is not designed for demanding modern titles like Microsoft Flight Simulator.

The lack of dedicated VRAM is a critical weakness for this game. Flight Simulator is known for loading vast amounts of terrain and aircraft textures, which can easily fill a dedicated memory buffer. With the Arc B390's system-shared memory architecture, the GPU and CPU are competing for the same memory bandwidth, which can lead to stuttering and low frame rates, especially at higher resolutions where the demand for texture data increases. The measured FPS data confirms this, as the average frame rate at 4K High settings is just 19 FPS, a level that is essentially unplayable. The GPU's 12 RT cores are present, but the 3DMark score suggests they offer little practical benefit in this context, and the overall performance profile is one of severe limitation.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The resolution scaling data provides undeniable evidence that the Intel Arc B390 is the bottleneck. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 56 FPS at 1920x1080 to 45 FPS at 2560x1440, and then to 33 FPS at 3840x2160. This is a 41% drop in performance from 1080p to 4K. Similarly, at Medium settings, the average frame rate drops from 43 FPS at 1080p to 35 FPS at 1440p and finally to 26 FPS at 4K. The pattern is consistent across all settings presets: as the pixel count increases, the frame rate plummets.

This behavior is the definitive signature of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU's workload in a flight simulator is largely independent of resolution; it must calculate the same physics, process the same AI, and load the same world data regardless of whether the output is 1080p or 4K. If the Ryzen 5 2600 were the limiting factor, the FPS would be roughly the same at all resolutions, since the CPU would be producing the same number of frames per second. However, the data shows that the frame rate is highly sensitive to resolution, which means the graphics card is unable to keep up with the increased pixel rendering demands.

The data also shows that the scaling is not perfectly linear, which is typical. The jump from 1440p to 4K at Low settings (45 to 33 FPS) is a 27% decrease, while the jump from 1080p to 1440p (56 to 45 FPS) is a 20% decrease. This non-linearity suggests that the GPU is running out of memory bandwidth or fill rate at higher resolutions. The system-shared memory architecture of the Arc B390 is likely a contributing factor, as the increased resolution requires more memory accesses for texture sampling and frame buffer operations, which the shared memory bus cannot efficiently deliver. In conclusion, the resolution scaling data confirms that the Intel Arc B390 is the primary factor limiting performance, and that the Ryzen 5 2600 is not the source of the low frame rates.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the only viable path to a playable experience with this hardware combination is to use the Low preset at 1920x1080. This is the only configuration that breaks the 60 FPS threshold, achieving an average of 56 FPS. While this is not a high refresh rate experience, it is the only setting that approaches smooth, playable performance. The Medium preset at 1080p yields an average of 43 FPS, which may be acceptable for some users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, but it is a significant step down from the smoothness of the Low preset. The data shows that the minimum FPS for Medium at 1080p is 37, which can lead to noticeable stutters during complex scenes.

At 1440p, the situation becomes more challenging. The Low preset produces an average of 45 FPS, which is playable but still requires compromises. The Medium preset at 1440p averages 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 FPS, which places it on the edge of playability. For users with a 2560x1440 monitor, the Low preset is the recommended choice, as it provides the best balance of frame rate and visual quality that this hardware can manage. The High and Ultra presets at 1440p, with averages of 26 and 25 FPS respectively, are not recommended for a smooth experience.

At 4K resolution, the data shows that no preset is truly playable. The Low preset at 3840x2160 averages 33 FPS, which is barely playable for a slow-paced game but will feel sluggish in faster scenarios. The Medium preset averages 26 FPS, and the High and Ultra presets both average 19 FPS. These frame rates are below the threshold for a comfortable experience. Therefore, the recommendation is unambiguous: for this CPU and GPU combination, users should set the resolution to 1920x1080 and the preset to Low. This is the only configuration that delivers a consistent, playable frame rate according to the measured data.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings preset for this system in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The measured data shows that the best experience is achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low preset, which averages 56 FPS. This is the only configuration that provides a frame rate near the 60 FPS target.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 CPU or the Intel Arc B390 GPU the performance bottleneck?

A: The resolution scaling data indicates the GPU is the bottleneck. Frame rates drop significantly as resolution increases, from 56 FPS at 1080p Low to 33 FPS at 4K Low, which is a classic sign of a GPU-limited system.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to other graphics cards?

A: The Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1482, placing it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, which is 1.3% slower, and the GeForce GT 710, which is 2.7% slower.

Q: Can this system run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K resolution?

A: The data shows that 4K performance is poor. The best 4K result is 33 FPS on the Low preset, and all other presets average between 19 and 26 FPS, which is not a playable experience.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 2600's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 5 2600 has an average benchmark score of 21484. It is 0.2% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V, and 0.5% faster than the Intel Core i9-11900H. It is 0.7% slower than the Intel Xeon D-1746TER.

Q: Is the Medium preset at 1080p a good choice for this system?

A: The Medium preset at 1080p averages 43 FPS with a minimum of 37 FPS. This is playable, but the Low preset provides a significantly smoother experience at 56 FPS, making it the preferred choice based on the data.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The following table details the exact average frame rates measured for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and Intel Arc B390, across all tested resolutions and settings presets.

1920x1080

• Ultra: The average frame rate is 31 FPS.
• High: The average frame rate is 33 FPS.
• Medium: The average frame rate is 43 FPS, with a minimum of 37 FPS and a maximum of 50 FPS.
• Low: The average frame rate is 56 FPS.

2560x1440

• Ultra: The average frame rate is 25 FPS.
• High: The average frame rate is 26 FPS.
• Medium: The average frame rate is 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS.
• Low: The average frame rate is 45 FPS.

3840x2160

• Ultra: The average frame rate is 19 FPS.
• High: The average frame rate is 19 FPS.
• Medium: The average frame rate is 26 FPS, with a minimum of 22 FPS and a maximum of 30 FPS.
• Low: The average frame rate is 33 FPS.

The data confirms a consistent performance hierarchy, with 1080p Low being the only configuration to achieve an average above 50 FPS. Performance degrades predictably as resolution and settings are increased, with the 4K Ultra and High presets both resulting in an unplayable 19 FPS average.