Microsoft Flight Simulator

The data for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the AMD Ryzen 5 5500 and Intel Arc B390 presents a clear picture of a system struggling to maintain playable frame rates at higher resolutions. The benchmark results show a combination that ranks in the lower percentile of tested configurations, with performance heavily dictated by the GPU's limitations and the demanding nature of the flight simulator. The following analysis breaks down the measured FPS, the roles of each component, and the optimal settings based strictly on the provided data.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall performance ranking of this CPU and GPU combination in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5500 and Intel Arc B390 combo ranks 2665 out of 2996 tested combinations. This places it in the bottom 11% of all tested systems, indicating that it is on the lower end of the performance spectrum for this title.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 GPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Intel Arc B390 has an average 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. It is 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (score 1463), 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (score 1460), 2.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (score 1446), and 2.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (score 1443). Its percentile ranking versus all GPUs is 9, signifying it outperforms only a small fraction of the database.

Q: What is the best frame rate the system achieves at 1920x1080, and at what settings?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded at 1920x1080 is 56 FPS, achieved with the Low settings preset. This is the only setting at this resolution that approaches a smooth 60 FPS experience. The Medium preset yields 43 FPS, High yields 33 FPS, and Ultra yields 31 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU a bottleneck for this GPU in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The data shows the CPU is a mid-range performer, with a 73rd percentile ranking among all CPUs. Its average benchmark score is 19593, which is nearly identical to its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen AI 5 430 (19617, -0.1%) and Intel Core i5-12500 (19668, -0.4%). Given the extremely low GPU percentile ranking (9), the GPU is the primary bottleneck, not the CPU.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 5500's CPU performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 5 5500's average benchmark score of 19593 is, at most, 0.7% different from its listed rivals. It is 0.5% ahead of the Intel Core i7-10700F (score 19499), and 0.7% behind the Intel Core i5-11600KF (score 19723). This shows the CPU is competitive with those peers in general compute tasks.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS figures recorded for the system?

A: The data includes min and max FPS figures only for the Medium settings preset across all resolutions. At 3840x2160, the system averages 26 FPS with a min of 22 and max of 30. At 2560x1440, it averages 35 FPS with a min of 30 and max of 40. At 1920x1080, it averages 43 FPS with a min of 37 and max of 50.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the AMD Ryzen 5 5500?

A: The launch MSRP for the AMD Ryzen 5 5500 is $159. The Intel Arc B390 has no listed launch MSRP in the data.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the decisive factor in this system's performance within Microsoft Flight Simulator. Its benchmark data reveals a GPU that is fundamentally limited. The Arc B390, built on Intel's 3 nm process and featuring the Xe3-LPG architecture (Panther Lake chip), has a percentile ranking of just 9 versus all GPUs. This means it performs better than only 9% of the GPUs in the database, a clear indication of its entry-level capabilities. Its only recorded benchmark, 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, yields a score of 1482, placing it in direct competition with legacy mobile and OEM parts like the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463), GeForce 800M (1460), GT 625 OEM (1446), and GT 710 (1443), as shown by the deltaPct values of 1.3%, 1.5%, 2.5%, and 2.7% respectively.

The GPU's specifications support this characterization. It operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. The memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning there is no dedicated VRAM; instead, it relies on shared system memory. This results in a memory bus width and bandwidth that are also "System Shared" and "System Dependent," respectively. This architecture can severely limit performance in a memory-intensive simulation like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which benefits from dedicated, high-bandwidth video memory. The GPU's compute capabilities, while present, are modest. With 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, it delivers a pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s, with an FP32 performance of 7.680 TFLOPS.

In the measured FPS data, the GPU's limitations are immediately apparent. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS achieved is 33 on Low settings. This drops to 26 on Medium and 19 on both High and Ultra. The situation improves at 2560x1440, but the pattern holds: Low settings yield 45 FPS, Medium 35 FPS, and both High and Ultra fall to 26 and 25 FPS, respectively. Even at 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the GPU can only muster a 56 FPS average on Low settings. This data consistently shows that the Arc B390 is the performance ceiling for this combination, unable to provide fluid frame rates at higher graphical presets or resolutions. The GPU's role is one of a hard limiter, preventing the rest of the system from expressing its full potential in this game.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5500 plays a supporting role in this configuration, and its data suggests it is more than capable of feeding the Intel Arc B390. As a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture (Codenamed Cezanne), it has a 73rd percentile ranking among all CPUs. This places it well above the GPU's 9th percentile, indicating a significant performance imbalance in favor of the CPU. The Ryzen 5 5500's average benchmark score is 19593, which is a robust figure. Its nearest rivals, including the AMD Ryzen AI 5 430 (19617, -0.1%), Intel Core i5-12500 (19668, -0.4%), Intel Core i7-10700F (19499, 0.5%), and Intel Core i5-11600KF (19723, -0.7%), all have average scores within 0.7% of the Ryzen 5 5500, showing it is a competitive mid-range part.

The CPU's specifications are solid for a simulation title. It operates with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, along with a 16 MB L3 cache. This configuration is beneficial for handling the complex flight models, scenery loading, and AI traffic that Microsoft Flight Simulator processes. The CPU's memory support is DDR4 with a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The CPU also has an unlocked multiplier, allowing for overclocking, though the data does not indicate if this was done during testing.

Its synthetic benchmark results are strong. In Cinebench R23, it scores 16429 in multi-core and 2319 in single-core. Geekbench results show 7976 in multi-core and 1730 in single-core. These scores demonstrate that the Ryzen 5 5500 has sufficient processing power to handle the game's simulation logic. However, in the context of the measured FPS, the CPU's role is less visible. The frame rates are consistently low, which would be expected if the GPU were the sole bottleneck. The data does not suggest that the CPU is causing frame drops or stutters beyond what the GPU's low performance would dictate. The CPU is a capable partner, but its performance is effectively masked by the Arc B390's inability to render the game at higher speeds. The CPU ensures the simulation logic runs, but the GPU is the component that determines the visual output and frame rate.

How This Combo Ranks

The combined performance of the AMD Ryzen 5 5500 and Intel Arc B390 in Microsoft Flight Simulator is ranked 2665 out of 2996 tested combinations. This rank places the system in the bottom 11% of all tested configurations, a position that is primarily a consequence of the GPU's low standing. The GPU's percentile rank of 9 is the dominant factor in this poor overall showing. The CPU's much stronger 73rd percentile ranking does little to boost the combo because the GPU cannot translate that processing power into higher frame rates.

This disparity creates a unique system profile. It is a configuration where a relatively capable processor is paired with a GPU that is at the very bottom of the performance scale. The combo's rank of 2665 suggests that the vast majority of other tested systems, whether they use more balanced components or have stronger GPUs, will outperform it in this specific game. The data indicates that users with this combo will experience a significant performance ceiling. The system is not ranked for its balance but rather for its overall output, which is heavily constrained by the Arc B390. The ranking reflects the final, combined result, and that result is a low-performance experience in a demanding flight simulator. The 2996 total combos tested provides context, showing that this system sits just 331 places from the very bottom of the database.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system's performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. The data is measured and includes average FPS for all rows, with minimum and maximum FPS only recorded for the Medium preset.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the system is largely unable to provide a playable experience. The average frame rates are as follows:

• Low: 33 FPS
• Medium: 26 FPS (min 22, max 30)
• High: 19 FPS
• Ultra: 19 FPS

The data shows a steep drop from Low to Medium, and then a further drop to the High and Ultra presets, which are identical at 19 FPS. This resolution is clearly too demanding for the Intel Arc B390, with even the lowest settings failing to hit a stable 30 FPS.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), performance improves, but remains limited. The average frame rates are:

• Low: 45 FPS
• Medium: 35 FPS (min 30, max 40)
• High: 26 FPS
• Ultra: 25 FPS

This resolution offers a more usable experience on Low settings, with 45 FPS being a playable average. The Medium preset provides a playable 35 FPS, but the High and Ultra presets fall below 30 FPS, making them less desirable for a smooth experience. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a consistent reduction in performance.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the system achieves its best results. The average frame rates are:

• Low: 56 FPS
• Medium: 43 FPS (min 37, max 50)
• High: 33 FPS
• Ultra: 31 FPS

This is the only resolution where the system can approach a smooth 60 FPS, but only on the Low preset. The Medium preset's 43 FPS average is playable, while the High and Ultra presets hover around the low 30s, which is on the edge of playability for a flight simulator. The data shows a clear trend: as resolution and settings increase, the frame rate drops significantly due to the GPU's limitations.

Settings Recommendations

Based strictly on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings for the AMD Ryzen 5 5500 and Intel Arc B390 in Microsoft Flight Simulator depend heavily on the user's resolution and preference for visual quality versus smoothness.

For a 1920x1080 display, the Low preset is the clear recommendation for the best experience. It is the only setting that achieves an average frame rate above 50 FPS (56 FPS). This provides the smoothest and most responsive experience, which is crucial for a flight simulator where precise control is needed. The Medium preset, with its 43 FPS average, is a viable alternative for those who want better visuals and can tolerate a lower frame rate. It offers a balance, but the data shows that the Low preset is the only one that truly allows the system to stretch its legs at this resolution.

For 2560x1440, the Low preset is again the best choice, delivering an average of 45 FPS. This is a playable frame rate for a simulation. The Medium preset, at 35 FPS, is also playable, but the data suggests it is a compromise. The High (26 FPS) and Ultra (25 FPS) presets are not recommended, as their average frame rates fall below the 30 FPS threshold that is generally considered the minimum for a tolerable simulation experience.

For 3840x2160, none of the settings provide a consistently smooth experience. The Low preset achieves the highest average at 33 FPS, which is technically playable but may feel stuttery. The Medium preset's 26 FPS average is borderline, and the High and Ultra presets, both at 19 FPS, are not recommended for any serious use. The data indicates that 4K is simply beyond the capabilities of this GPU for this game.

In summary, the data points to the Low settings preset as the best overall choice for this combo, as it provides the highest average FPS at every resolution. Users who prioritize visual fidelity can consider the Medium preset at 1920x1080 or 2560x1440, but they will sacrifice a significant amount of frame rate. The High and Ultra presets should be avoided, as the measured data shows they push the system below the threshold of playability. The system's best experience is clearly at 1920x1080 on Low settings, where it comes closest to a standard 60 FPS target.