Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator — AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D + Intel Arc B390

This combination pairs a 6-core/12-thread AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D with the Intel Arc B390 integrated graphics solution, producing a system that sits near the bottom of the tested field in Microsoft Flight Simulator. The CPU is a solid mid-range part with a 3.00 GHz base clock and 4.00 GHz boost clock, built on the Zen 3 Vermeer architecture with 96 MB of shared L3 cache, while the GPU is an integrated Xe3-LPG design with 1536 shading units and a 2500 MHz boost clock. The measured frame rates across all resolutions and settings presets tell a clear story: this is a configuration that struggles to maintain playable performance in a demanding flight simulator, with the GPU acting as the primary bottleneck.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D provides the computational foundation for this system, and its specifications suggest it is more than capable of handling the simulation logic that Microsoft Flight Simulator requires. With 6 cores and 12 threads, the processor can manage multiple background tasks alongside the main game thread, while the 96 MB shared L3 cache is a notable asset for flight simulation workloads that often involve streaming large terrain and scenery datasets. The base clock of 3.00 GHz and boost clock of 4.00 GHz are modest by modern standards, but the Zen 3 architecture's efficiency helps compensate in CPU-bound scenarios.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 5500X3D achieves a Passmark multithread score of 20363 and a single-thread score of 2941, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs tested. Its nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F with an average score of 36945 (a 0.2% delta), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 at 37093 (-0.2% delta), the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 at 36938 (0.2% delta), and the Intel Core i9-12900T at 37112 (-0.3% delta). These extremely tight margins—all within 0.3% of each other—indicate that the 5500X3D sits right at the center of a very competitive performance cluster, neither leading nor lagging its direct peers in general-purpose CPU workloads.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator specifically, the CPU's role is primarily to feed the GPU with draw calls and handle the complex flight model calculations, weather simulation, and AI traffic. The benchmark results show that at 1080p Low settings, the system achieves 56 FPS, which is the highest measured frame rate for this combo. This suggests that when the GPU load is reduced to its minimum, the CPU can still deliver respectable performance, though it does not reach the 60 FPS threshold that many users would consider ideal for smooth gameplay. The fact that the 1080p Low result is only 56 FPS—not higher—indicates that even at the lowest graphics settings, the CPU is not fully unlocking the system's potential, or alternatively, that the integrated GPU's memory bandwidth limitations are already coming into play.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics processor based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by Intel. Its specifications include 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 24 raster output units, and 12 ray tracing cores. The GPU operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, producing a pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance is rated at 7.680 TFLOPS for FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS for FP16 (2:1 ratio).

A critical limitation is that the Arc B390 uses system shared memory for its VRAM, with memory type, bus width, and bandwidth all classified as "System Shared" or "System Dependent." This means the GPU relies on the system's DDR4 memory (which the 5500X3D supports via dual-channel at 51.2 GB/s bandwidth) rather than dedicated high-speed VRAM. In a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is notorious for consuming large amounts of video memory for textures and terrain data, this shared memory architecture can become a severe bottleneck, particularly at higher resolutions.

The GPU's benchmark performance reflects its modest capabilities. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, it scores 1482, placing it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (score 1463, delta 1.3%), the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (score 1460, delta 1.5%), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (score 1446, delta 2.5%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (score 1443, delta 2.7%). These are all very old, entry-level discrete GPUs, and the Arc B390's scores are within a few percentage points of them, indicating that its raw graphics performance is comparable to decade-old budget hardware.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's role is to render the complex 3D environment, including detailed aircraft models, terrain mesh, weather effects, and lighting. The measured frame rates indicate that at 1080p Medium settings, the system produces 43 FPS average with a minimum of 37 FPS and maximum of 50 FPS. At 1080p High, the average drops to 33 FPS, and at 1080p Ultra, it falls to 31 FPS. These numbers demonstrate that the GPU is heavily taxed even at the lowest resolution, and the performance degrades predictably as settings increase, but the relatively small gap between High (33 FPS) and Ultra (31 FPS) suggests that beyond a certain point, the GPU's shading and memory resources are saturated.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data across all resolutions and settings presets provides clear guidance for what settings offer the best experience with this hardware combination. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 56 FPS average, which is the only setting level that approaches a smooth gameplay experience. The Medium preset yields 43 FPS average with a minimum of 37 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for a flight simulator where precise control is important. High settings drop to 33 FPS, and Ultra falls to 31 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the pattern continues but with lower absolute values. Low settings produce 45 FPS average, Medium delivers 35 FPS (minimum 30, maximum 40), High drops to 26 FPS, and Ultra falls to 25 FPS. At 3840x2160, the performance becomes marginal at best: Low gives 33 FPS, Medium gives 26 FPS (minimum 22, maximum 30), and both High and Ultra produce only 19 FPS average.

The data clearly indicates that the Low preset is the only viable option for consistent frame rates above 45 FPS, and even then, only at 1080p. At 1440p, Low settings produce 45 FPS, which is acceptable for a simulation game where frame pacing is less critical than in fast-paced action titles. The Medium preset at 1080p (43 FPS) is also reasonable, offering a balance between visual quality and playability, but the minimum frame rate of 37 FPS suggests occasional stutters. For users who prioritize visual fidelity over smoothness, the Medium preset at 1080p is the highest settings level that maintains an average above 40 FPS; anything above that results in sub-35 FPS averages that will likely feel sluggish.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this CPU+GPU pairing ranks 2665 out of 2996 total combos, placing it in the bottom 11% of all tested systems. This ranking reflects the significant GPU bottleneck created by the integrated Arc B390 graphics, which severely limits the system's ability to run a graphically demanding title like Microsoft Flight Simulator.

The CPU component of this combo is not the limiting factor in the ranking. The 5500X3D's 85th percentile CPU benchmark placement and its tight clustering with rivals like the Ryzen 5 5600F and Core Ultra 5 225 suggest that, if paired with a more capable discrete GPU, this processor could achieve much higher frame rates in this game. However, the integrated GPU's 9th percentile ranking and its similarity to GPUs like the GT 710 and GT 625 OEM drag the overall combo ranking down dramatically.

The gap between the CPU's relative strength and the GPU's relative weakness creates an imbalanced system where the graphics solution is clearly the limiting factor. This is evident from the FPS scaling: at 1080p Low, the system achieves 56 FPS, but even a modest increase to Medium settings drops the average to 43 FPS (a 23% reduction), and at 4K Ultra, the system manages only 19 FPS. The CPU has enough headroom to drive higher frame rates, but the GPU cannot keep up with the rendering demands.

Resolution Scaling

Examining the FPS progression from 1080p to 4K reveals important insights about which component is limiting performance. At Low settings, the average frame rates are 56 FPS at 1080p, 45 FPS at 1440p, and 33 FPS at 4K. This represents a 20% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 27% drop from 1440p to 4K, for a total of 41% reduction from 1080p to 4K.

At Medium settings, the progression is 43 FPS (1080p), 35 FPS (1440p), and 26 FPS (4K), representing a 19% drop and then a 26% drop. At High settings, the numbers are 33 FPS, 26 FPS, and 19 FPS, with drops of 21% and 27%. At Ultra, the progression is 31 FPS, 25 FPS, and 19 FPS, with drops of 19% and 24%.

The fact that the percentage drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistently around 20%, and from 1440p to 4K is around 25-27%, indicates a GPU-bound scenario. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see smaller frame rate differences between resolutions, as the CPU workload would remain constant while only the GPU rendering load changes. Instead, the frame rates decrease substantially with each resolution increase, confirming that the Arc B390's rendering capabilities and shared memory bandwidth are the primary constraints. The CPU is likely waiting for the GPU to complete its work at every resolution, which is why the system cannot exceed 56 FPS even at the lowest settings and resolution.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this system?

A: The measured data shows that 1920x1080 with Low settings produces the highest average frame rate at 56 FPS. The 2560x1440 Low setting achieves 45 FPS, which is also playable. At 3840x2160, even Low settings only reach 33 FPS average.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 5 5500X3D has an average benchmark score of 37018, which is within 0.3% of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (36945, +0.2% delta), AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 (37093, -0.2% delta), Intel Core Ultra 5 225 (36938, +0.2% delta), and Intel Core i9-12900T (37112, -0.3% delta). These differences are negligible.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals in 3DMark Steel Nomad?

A: The Intel Arc B390 scores 1482, which is 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463), 1.5% higher than the GeForce 800M (1460), 2.5% higher than the GT 625 OEM (1446), and 2.7% higher than the GT 710 (1443). All of these are entry-level or legacy GPUs.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Medium and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Medium settings produce an average of 43 FPS with a minimum of 37 FPS and maximum of 50 FPS, while Ultra settings produce an average of 31 FPS. This represents a 28% reduction in average frame rate when moving from Medium to Ultra.

Q: Is this combination better suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming?

A: The data shows that at 1080p Low, the system achieves 56 FPS, while at 1440p Low, it achieves 45 FPS. Given the 20% performance drop, 1080p is clearly the more suitable resolution for this combo, as even the lowest settings at 1440p do not reach 50 FPS.

Q: What does the combo's ranking of 2665 out of 2996 indicate?

A: This ranking places the combination in the bottom 11% of all tested CPU+GPU pairs for Microsoft Flight Simulator. The low ranking is primarily attributable to the integrated GPU's 9th percentile performance, not the CPU, which sits in the 85th percentile.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following measured frame rates were recorded for this CPU+GPU combination in Microsoft Flight Simulator:

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low settings: 56 FPS average
• Medium settings: 43 FPS average, 37 FPS minimum, 50 FPS maximum
• High settings: 33 FPS average
• Ultra settings: 31 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low settings: 45 FPS average
• Medium settings: 35 FPS average, 30 FPS minimum, 40 FPS maximum
• High settings: 26 FPS average
• Ultra settings: 25 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low settings: 33 FPS average
• Medium settings: 26 FPS average, 22 FPS minimum, 30 FPS maximum
• High settings: 19 FPS average
• Ultra settings: 19 FPS average

The minimum and maximum frame rates are only provided for Medium settings at each resolution, which shows that at 1080p Medium, the frame rate varies between 37 and 50 FPS; at 1440p Medium, between 30 and 40 FPS; and at 4K Medium, between 22 and 30 FPS. This variance of approximately 30% from minimum to maximum at each resolution indicates inconsistent frame pacing, likely caused by the shared memory architecture struggling with texture streaming during flight over complex terrain. Across all resolutions, the step from Low to Medium produces the largest drop in average FPS (23% at 1080p, 22% at 1440p, and 21% at 4K), while the step from High to Ultra produces the smallest drop (6% at 1080p, 4% at 1440p, and 0% at 4K), suggesting that the GPU's shading units become saturated at Medium settings and additional quality presets have diminishing returns on frame rate.