Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator: AMD Ryzen 5 7400F + Intel Arc B370 — Database Analysis

FAQ

Q: How does this CPU-GPU combination rank among all tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: This combo ranks 2770th out of 2996 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 8% of all systems measured. The rank reflects a pairing of a strong modern CPU with an integrated GPU that sits at the 5th percentile among all GPUs.

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in the game?

A: The best result is 50 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. At the same resolution, Medium yields 39 FPS, High drops to 30 FPS, and Ultra falls to 28 FPS. This shows the GPU ceiling is reached quickly even at 1080p.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in raw benchmark scores?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Its closest rival, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, scores 1186 (0.2% higher). The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% higher), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% higher). The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (1.4% lower).

Q: What CPU benchmark scores does the Ryzen 5 7400F produce, and how do they compare to rivals?

A: The CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21765 and single-core score of 3072. Its average benchmark score is 32750, placing it at the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rival, Intel Core i5-14600T, scores 32707 (0.1% lower), while AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H scores 32812 (0.2% higher).

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration, and does it affect performance in this game?

A: The Intel Arc B370 uses System Shared memory with System Shared type, bus width, and bandwidth. The memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent." This means the GPU relies on the system's DDR5 memory, which can become a bottleneck in a simulation game that streams large terrain and aircraft data.

Q: Is there a significant FPS difference between 1080p and 4K at Medium settings?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080 Medium, the average is 39 FPS. At 2560x1440 Medium, it drops to 32 FPS. At 3840x2160 Medium, it falls to 23 FPS. The progression from 1080p to 4K represents a 41% reduction in average FPS, highlighting the GPU's limitations at higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The data places this AMD Ryzen 5 7400F + Intel Arc B370 combination at rank 2770 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This is a deeply unfavorable position, sitting near the bottom 8% of all systems. The rank reflects a massive imbalance: the CPU is a modern 6-core Zen 4 part with a 21765 Cinebench R23 multi-core score and an 83rd percentile standing among all CPUs, while the GPU is an integrated solution that ranks at the 5th percentile among all GPUs with a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of just 1184.

This disparity creates a system where the processor is effectively waiting for the graphics hardware at every turn. The GPU's nearest rivals are all legacy parts from over a decade ago — the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, ATI Radeon HD 5770, and AMD Radeon HD 7650M — which means the Arc B370's performance class is more aligned with ancient integrated solutions than with any modern discrete GPU. The combo rank of 2770 suggests that in a game as demanding as Microsoft Flight Simulator, this pairing produces results that are playable only at the lowest settings and resolutions.

The CPU's avgBenchmarkScore of 32750 versus the GPU's 1184 paints a stark picture. The Ryzen 5 7400F is a capable processor by any measure, but it cannot compensate for a GPU that delivers frame rates in the teens at 4K Ultra. The measured FPS data confirms this: the system never exceeds 50 FPS in any configuration tested, and at 4K Ultra it drops to 17 FPS. The combination's rank is a direct consequence of the GPU's inability to keep pace with the CPU's potential.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated GPU based on the Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, which gives it a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s. The GPU has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, 20 ROPs, and 10 ray tracing cores, but its FP32 performance is just 6.144 TFLOPS.

The most critical limitation is memory: the Arc B370 uses System Shared memory with a bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." In Microsoft Flight Simulator, which streams vast amounts of terrain, weather, and aircraft data, this shared memory arrangement creates a severe bottleneck. The GPU cannot access dedicated VRAM, so it competes with the CPU for system memory bandwidth, which is rated at 83.2 GB/s for the dual-channel DDR5 setup. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 — ranking at the 5th percentile of all GPUs — confirms that this is not a gaming-oriented part.

The measured FPS results reflect this. At 1920x1080 Low, the system achieves 50 FPS, but moving to Medium drops it to 39 FPS, and High falls to 30 FPS. At 4K, the situation worsens dramatically: Low yields 30 FPS, Medium 23 FPS, High 18 FPS, and Ultra just 17 FPS. The GPU's TDP of 25 W, combined with its integrated nature, means it is designed for efficiency rather than performance. The boost clock of 2400 MHz is respectable, but the memory constraint and low shading unit count limit its ability to handle the complex shaders and high-resolution textures that Flight Simulator demands.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured data provides a complete picture across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system delivers 50 FPS on Low, 39 FPS on Medium (with min/max of 33/45), 30 FPS on High, and 28 FPS on Ultra. This is the only resolution where the system approaches playable frame rates, and only at the lowest preset.

At 2560x1440, the results drop noticeably: 41 FPS on Low, 32 FPS on Medium (min/max 27/36), 24 FPS on High, and 23 FPS on Ultra. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows from 22 FPS at 1080p to 18 FPS at 1440p, suggesting that the GPU is becoming the limiting factor regardless of settings. The Medium preset at 1440p shows a minimum of 27 FPS, which falls below the threshold for smooth gameplay in a flight simulator where precise control is essential.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playability: 30 FPS on Low, 23 FPS on Medium (min/max 20/27), 18 FPS on High, and 17 FPS on Ultra. The 4K Low result of 30 FPS is identical to the 1080p High result, which highlights how resolution scaling impacts this GPU. The min FPS at 4K Medium is 20, which would result in visible stuttering during complex scenes. The Ultra preset at 4K produces 17 FPS, which is effectively a slideshow for a game that requires smooth visual feedback for landing and navigation.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals the GPU as the dominant bottleneck. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 50 at 1080p to 41 at 1440p (18% drop) and 30 at 4K (40% drop from 1080p). At Medium settings, the progression is 39 to 32 to 23, representing a 41% total drop. At High settings, the drop is from 30 to 24 to 18, a 40% reduction. At Ultra, the drop is from 28 to 23 to 17, a 39% reduction.

These consistent drops of roughly 40% from 1080p to 4K across all settings indicate that the GPU's pixel throughput is the limiting factor. The Intel Arc B370's pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s is insufficient for 4K rendering, and the system shared memory bandwidth compounds the problem. The fact that the scaling is uniform across settings — rather than showing a larger drop at Ultra — suggests that the GPU is saturated even at Low settings when the resolution increases.

The CPU's role in this scaling is minimal. With a boost clock of 4.70 GHz and 6 cores capable of handling the simulation's physics and AI, the Ryzen 5 7400F is not the constraint. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see smaller FPS drops at higher resolutions, as the GPU would have more time to render each frame. Instead, the consistent 40% drop from 1080p to 4K points to the GPU's fixed rendering capacity being exhausted.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on Zen 4 architecture with a 5 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, with 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU scores 21765 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3072 in single-core, placing it at the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 32750 is within 0.2% of its nearest rivals, including the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU handles the complex flight dynamics, weather simulation, and AI traffic. The Ryzen 5 7400F's PassMark multi-thread score of 25645 and physics score of 1660 indicate strong computational capabilities. The CPU's memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, while shared with the GPU, is sufficient for the simulation's data streaming needs.

However, the CPU's performance is largely wasted in this combination. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 50 FPS, but this is the GPU's limit, not the CPU's. The CPU could likely push higher frame rates with a more capable GPU, as evidenced by its strong single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3072) which is crucial for the game's main thread. The data shows that the CPU is never the bottleneck: even at 4K Ultra with 17 FPS, the CPU is likely idle waiting for the GPU to complete its rendering.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data suggests that the playable range for this combination is extremely limited. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 50 FPS, which is the only configuration that approaches smooth gameplay. The Medium preset at 1080p yields 39 FPS with a minimum of 33, which is borderline acceptable for a flight simulator where precise control is needed. The High and Ultra presets at 1080p drop to 30 and 28 FPS respectively, which are marginal.

At 1440p and 4K, the system falls below playable thresholds in most configurations. The 1440p Low preset delivers 41 FPS, which is playable but visually sparse. The 4K Low preset delivers 30 FPS, which is at the edge of playability. For the best experience, the data indicates that 1080p with Low settings is the only configuration that provides both visual clarity and smooth performance. The Medium preset at 1080p offers a 30% improvement in visual fidelity over Low with a 22% FPS penalty, making it a viable middle ground for users who prioritize graphics.

The Ultra preset at any resolution is not recommended, as it never exceeds 28 FPS and drops to 17 FPS at 4K. The gap between Medium and High at 1080p is 9 FPS (39 vs 30), while the gap between High and Ultra is only 2 FPS (30 vs 28), suggesting diminishing returns at the highest settings. For users who must play at higher resolutions, the Low preset at 1440p (41 FPS) is the only viable option, as all other settings at 1440p fall below 32 FPS.