Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is an exceptionally demanding title, and the combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600G and Intel Arc B370 produces results that are strictly for low-resolution, low-detail play. The measured data shows a system that is heavily constrained by the graphics processor, with frame rates that fall below playable thresholds as resolution and settings increase. This analysis breaks down the measured performance, contextualizes it against other tested combinations, and explains the specific roles of the CPU and GPU in these results.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is severe, clearly identifying the graphics processor as the primary bottleneck in this configuration. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 50 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops the average to 41 FPS, a decline of 18%. At 4K Low, the average falls to 30 FPS, which is 40% lower than the 1080p result. This scaling pattern, where frame rate drops by roughly a fifth and then another fifth as resolution increases, indicates that the Intel Arc B370 is being saturated with pixel work.

The trend is consistent across all settings presets. At Medium settings, the average frame rate falls from 39 FPS at 1080p, to 32 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 23 FPS at 4K. The High preset shows a similar trajectory: 30 FPS at 1080p, 24 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, yielding 28 FPS at 1080p, 23 FPS at 1440p, and a nearly unplayable 17 FPS at 4K. The consistent percentage drops across these presets confirm that the limiting factor is the GPU's raw rendering throughput, not the CPU's ability to feed it data.

The data shows that the gap between 1080p and 1440p is nearly identical to the gap between 1440p and 4K for most settings. This linear scaling under increasing load is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU, while not a powerhouse, is clearly capable of providing enough draw calls and simulation data to keep the GPU busy, as the frame rate is dictated almost entirely by the resolution and quality settings. For a user hoping to play at 1440p or 4K, the performance degradation is prohibitive, making 1080p the only viable resolution for this hardware pairing.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator, this specific pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600G and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2770 out of 2996 combos. This places it in the bottom 8% of all tested systems. The percentile ranking for the GPU alone is just 5, meaning it performs better than only 5% of all GPUs in the database. This low GPU percentile is the dominant factor in the combo's overall rank.

The CPU, by contrast, is a much stronger performer. The AMD Ryzen 5 5600G sits in the 74th percentile for all CPUs, with a benchmark score of 21088. This score is nearly identical to its nearest rivals. It is only 0.1% behind the Intel Core i3-1220P, 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 256V, 0.2% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U, and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U. This shows that the 5600G is a solid, mid-range processor that is not the reason for this combo's low overall rank.

The combination of a high-percentile CPU with a low-percentile GPU results in a system that is fundamentally unbalanced for this game. The rank of 2770 out of 2996 reflects the GPU's severe performance limitations. The data suggests that the CPU has significant headroom, while the GPU is working at its absolute maximum. Users should interpret this rank as a warning that the graphics card is the limiting factor, and any performance upgrades to this system would need to start with the GPU.

FAQ

Q: Is this combination playable at 1080p?

A: Yes, but only at lower settings. The data shows an average of 50 FPS at Low, 39 FPS at Medium, and 30 FPS at High. For a smoother experience, Low or Medium settings are recommended.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 4K?

A: The results are not playable. The average frame rates are 30 FPS at Low, 23 FPS at Medium, 18 FPS at High, and 17 FPS at Ultra. These are well below the threshold for a smooth flight simulation experience.

Q: Which component is holding this system back?

A: The Intel Arc B370. Its performance percentile is 5, placing it in the bottom 5% of all GPUs. The CPU, in contrast, is in the 74th percentile, indicating a massive imbalance.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its direct competitors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5600G has an average benchmark score of 21088. It is virtually tied with the Intel Core i3-1220P, which is 0.1% faster, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 256V, which is 0.1% slower. It is also 0.2% faster than the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U and 0.4% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U.

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

A: The difference is significant. At Low settings, the average frame rate is 41 FPS. At Ultra, it drops to 23 FPS. This represents a 44% reduction in performance when switching to the highest quality preset.

Q: Does the game use more than a few CPU threads?

A: The data indicates the CPU has substantial multi-threaded capability. Its 3DMark 16-thread score is 5451, and its max-thread score is 5455, which is nearly identical. This suggests the game can effectively utilize the available threads, but the GPU is still the bottleneck.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following data represents the measured average FPS, with minimum and maximum values where they were recorded.

At 1920x1080, the results are:

• Low: Average 50 FPS.
• Medium: Average 39 FPS, with a minimum of 33 and a maximum of 45.
• High: Average 30 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 28 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the results are:

• Low: Average 41 FPS.
• Medium: Average 32 FPS, with a minimum of 27 and a maximum of 36.
• High: Average 24 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 23 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the results are:

• Low: Average 30 FPS.
• Medium: Average 23 FPS, with a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 27.
• High: Average 18 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 17 FPS.

The data shows a clear hierarchy. The jump from 1080p to 1440p costs approximately 9-10 FPS at Low and Medium settings, and 6-7 FPS at High and Ultra. The jump from 1440p to 4K is even more punishing, costing another 11 FPS at Low, 9 FPS at Medium, and 6 FPS at High and Ultra. The difference between Low and Ultra settings at any given resolution is substantial, ranging from a 22 FPS difference at 1080p to a 13 FPS difference at 4K.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the definitive bottleneck in this system. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad score is a mere 1184, which places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. It performs nearly identically to the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, which is 0.2% faster, and the ATI Radeon HD 5770, which is 0.5% faster. It is 0.7% faster than the AMD Radeon HD 7650M and 1.4% faster than the AMD FirePro M2000. These rival comparisons, all to hardware from a much older generation, underscore its lack of rendering power.

The GPU's specifications confirm its integrated-class nature. It has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. It features 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output pipelines. Its pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 6.144 TFLOPS. Critically, the memory is "System Shared," meaning it uses a portion of the system's main memory, and its bandwidth is "System Dependent." This reliance on shared memory for both texture storage and frame buffer operations is a major performance limiter in a game with vast, detailed scenery.

The data shows that this GPU is simply not designed for the demands of Microsoft Flight Simulator at high resolutions. The 17 FPS average at 4K Ultra is a direct result of the GPU's inability to process the sheer number of pixels and geometry. Even at 1080p Low, the 50 FPS result is likely limited by the shared memory bandwidth and the GPU's low fill rate. The GPU's 25 W TDP and "IGP" slot width clearly indicate it is an integrated graphics processor, albeit one with discrete-level architecture.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600G is a much more capable component than the GPU, and the data suggests it is not the primary constraint in this game. It is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its 74th percentile ranking for all CPUs is supported by strong benchmark scores, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10551 and a single-core score of 1409. Its Geekbench scores are 8428 for multi-core and 1801 for single-core.

The CPU's performance is closely matched with its nearest rivals, all of which are within a fraction of a percent of its average score of 21088. This indicates that it delivers a very standard level of performance for its class. The multi-threaded scores, such as the 3DMark 16-thread score of 5451 and the max-thread score of 5455, show excellent scaling, suggesting that Microsoft Flight Simulator can effectively utilize the processor's 12 threads to handle the complex simulation logic, AI traffic, and weather systems.

In this specific pairing, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with data. The fact that the frame rate does not improve significantly at lower resolutions, where the CPU's work is relatively constant, confirms that the CPU is not being maxed out. For instance, the difference in FPS between 1080p and 4K is entirely due to GPU load. The CPU is powerful enough to maintain the simulation at these frame rates, and those frame rates would likely be much higher if paired with a stronger GPU. The system's 16 MB of L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support provide adequate data throughput for the CPU to keep the Arc B370 as busy as it can be.