Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator with AMD Ryzen 5 7400F + Intel Arc B570

This combo ranks 2406th out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the lower third of all systems evaluated. The data shows a configuration that can run the simulator at playable frame rates, but only with careful attention to resolution and quality settings. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F, a 6-core/12-thread Zen 4 processor with a 3.70 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost clock, sits in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Arc B570 GPU, with its 10 GB of GDDR6 memory and 2500 MHz clock, ranks in the 65th percentile of all GPUs. The pairing produces a system that is clearly GPU-limited at higher resolutions but shows surprising CPU headroom at 1080p.

How This Combo Ranks

The 2406th position out of 2996 combos places this pairing in the bottom 20% of all tested systems for this specific title. This ranking is notable because the individual components do not appear weak on paper. The Ryzen 5 7400F holds an 83rd percentile rank among all CPUs, and its average benchmark score of 32750 places it just 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i5-14600T and 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H. The Intel Arc B570, meanwhile, scores 20556 on average, sitting within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile and 0.1% behind the Intel Arc A750.

The discrepancy between component-level rankings and the in-game combo ranking suggests that Microsoft Flight Simulator's demands do not align well with this hardware pairing's strengths. The game is known for pushing graphics hardware heavily, and the Arc B570's 65th percentile GPU standing appears to be the limiting factor. The CPU's strong multi-threaded performance — shown by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21765 and a Passmark multi-thread score of 25645 — cannot compensate for the GPU's mid-range position when the simulator's rendering load scales with resolution and quality settings.

Looking at the measured FPS data, the combo produces 86 FPS at 1080p Low settings, which would rank reasonably well, but this drops dramatically as settings increase. The gap between component potential and in-game results points to the GPU as the bottleneck, particularly at 4K where the system barely maintains 30 FPS at High settings. The data indicates this combo is best suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming with moderate settings, rather than high-refresh or high-resolution flight simulation.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The data shows 1080p is the only resolution where the combo consistently exceeds 60 FPS, hitting 86 FPS at Low settings and 67 FPS at Medium. At 1440p, only Low settings break 60 FPS with 69 FPS, while 4K never exceeds 51 FPS at any setting.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B570 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc B570's average benchmark score of 20556 is 0.1% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (20534) and 0.1% lower than the Intel Arc A750 (20582). It also sits 0.4% above the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M and 0.5% below the AMD Radeon R9 M390X.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 7400F a strong CPU for this game?

A: The CPU ranks in the 83rd percentile of all processors, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21765 and a single-core score of 3072. Its Passmark single-thread score of 3689 suggests adequate per-core performance, though the game's frame rates at higher resolutions indicate the GPU becomes the limiting factor.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: The measured data shows 54 FPS average at 2560x1440 with Medium settings, with a minimum of 46 FPS and maximum of 62 FPS. This is playable but not consistently smooth, and users seeking higher frame rates would need to drop to Low settings.

Q: Does the combo perform better at 4K with any settings?

A: At 3840x2160, the best result is 51 FPS at Low settings. High settings produce 30 FPS, Medium produces 40 FPS, and Ultra drops to 28 FPS. None of these 4K results approach the smoothness achievable at 1080p.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in benchmark scores?

A: The Ryzen 5 7400F scores 32750 on average, which is 0.1% above the Intel Core i5-14600T (32707), 0.2% above the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H (32697), 0.3% above the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (32662), and 0.2% below the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (32812).

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data reveals a steep performance drop as resolution increases, which strongly indicates GPU-bound behavior. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at High settings, the frame rate falls from 50 FPS to 41 FPS, an 18% decrease. The drop from 1440p to 4K at High settings is even more severe, falling from 41 FPS to 30 FPS, a 27% reduction. At Low settings, the scaling is similar: 86 FPS at 1080p, 69 FPS at 1440p (a 20% drop), and 51 FPS at 4K (a 26% drop from 1440p).

This pattern is classic GPU-limited scaling. The Intel Arc B570's 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus with 380.0 GB/s bandwidth appears to handle the increased pixel count at 1440p reasonably, but 4K pushes the GPU's 11.52 TFLOPS of FP32 performance to its limits. The CPU's role diminishes at higher resolutions; the Ryzen 5 7400F's 6 cores and 12 threads at up to 4.70 GHz boost are sufficient to feed the GPU at 1080p, but at 4K the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck.

The Medium settings data provides the most complete picture, with minimum and maximum FPS recorded. At 1080p Medium, the range is 57-77 FPS with a 67 FPS average. At 1440p Medium, this drops to 46-62 FPS with a 54 FPS average. At 4K Medium, the range narrows to 34-46 FPS with a 40 FPS average. The narrowing range at higher resolutions suggests the GPU is hitting consistent performance limits rather than being constrained by CPU frame pacing or asset streaming.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce 86 FPS average, Medium drops to 67 FPS with a 57-77 FPS range, High produces 50 FPS, and Ultra falls to 48 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 19 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 2 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the highest quality presets.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates step down noticeably. Low settings yield 69 FPS, Medium produces 54 FPS with a 46-62 FPS range, High drops to 41 FPS, and Ultra manages 39 FPS. The delta between Low and Medium at 1440p is 15 FPS, while High to Ultra is again only 2 FPS apart. This consistency suggests the Ultra preset adds little visual benefit for the performance cost at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the combo struggles to maintain playable frame rates. Low settings produce 51 FPS, Medium yields 40 FPS with a 34-46 FPS range, High drops to 30 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 28 FPS. The 4K Low result is the only 4K setting that approaches what most users would consider smooth gameplay, and even that is below the 60 FPS threshold that 1080p Low easily clears.

The pattern across all resolutions shows that the Ultra preset consistently costs 2-3 FPS more than High, while Low to Medium represents the largest performance jump. For users prioritizing frame rate, the data suggests Medium is the sweet spot — at 1080p it delivers 67 FPS, at 1440p it holds 54 FPS, and even at 4K it maintains 40 FPS, which is only 2 FPS below the 4K High result but 11 FPS above 4K Ultra.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B570's specifications tell a story of a mid-range GPU that is stretched thin by Microsoft Flight Simulator's rendering demands. With 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 80 ROPs, the GPU has solid compute resources, but its 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus delivers 380.0 GB/s of bandwidth — a figure that may struggle with the high-resolution textures and streaming geometry the simulator loads.

The GPU's 2500 MHz base and boost clocks are identical, meaning no dynamic clock headroom exists to compensate for heavy loads. The 18 ray tracing cores are present, but the game's performance at 4K suggests traditional rasterization is the primary bottleneck. The 11.52 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 200.0 GPixel/s pixel rate are respectable for the GPU's 65th percentile ranking, but the measured FPS data shows this translates to just 30 FPS at 4K High — a clear sign that the GPU is overmatched at that resolution.

The GPU's nearest rivals provide context for its performance ceiling. The Arc B570 scores 20556 on average, essentially tied with the RTX 3070 Mobile (20534) and Arc A750 (20582). Yet in Microsoft Flight Simulator, this performance level only achieves 86 FPS at 1080p Low. The 10 GB memory capacity is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but 4K Ultra may exceed comfortable memory usage, contributing to the 28 FPS result. The GPU's 272 mm² die size and 19,600 million transistors represent significant hardware, but the simulator's demands outpace what this mid-range card can deliver at high resolutions.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F brings substantial processing power to this combo. Its 6 cores and 12 threads based on Zen 4 architecture run at 3.70 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost, with 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU's Cinebench R23 scores — 21765 multi-core and 3072 single-core — place it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, and its Passmark single-thread score of 3689 indicates strong per-core performance.

The CPU's role in Microsoft Flight Simulator becomes clear when examining the FPS scaling across resolutions. At 1080p, the combo achieves 86 FPS at Low settings, which suggests the CPU can feed the GPU adequately at moderate loads. However, the fact that 1080p Ultra only reaches 48 FPS while 4K Ultra hits 28 FPS indicates the GPU becomes the limiting factor as resolution increases. The CPU has headroom that goes unused at higher resolutions.

The Ryzen 5 7400F's nearest rivals in benchmark scores — the Intel Core i5-14600T (32707), Intel Core Ultra 7 155H (32697), AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (32812), and AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (32662) — all sit within 0.3% of its 32750 average score. This tight grouping suggests the CPU is not the differentiator in this combo's in-game ranking. Instead, the data implies the CPU's 6 cores are sufficient for the simulator's physics and simulation calculations, but the GPU's mid-range standing holds the system back from higher frame rates.

The CPU's 65W TDP and dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth provide a solid foundation, but the measured FPS data shows the CPU is rarely the bottleneck. The exception might be at 1080p Low, where 86 FPS approaches the CPU's ability to feed the GPU, but even there, the performance is respectable. The data suggests that pairing this CPU with a stronger GPU would yield significantly better results in this game.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance across all resolutions. At 1080p, Medium delivers 67 FPS average with a 57-77 FPS range, which is smooth enough for most users. At 1440p, Medium holds 54 FPS with a 46-62 FPS range, which is playable though not consistently at 60 FPS. Even at 4K, Medium manages 40 FPS, which, while not ideal, is 10 FPS better than High and 12 FPS better than Ultra at that resolution.

For users who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity, Low settings are the clear choice. The 1080p Low result of 86 FPS is the highest measured output for this combo, and 1440p Low at 69 FPS is also above 60 FPS. The 4K Low result of 51 FPS is the only 4K setting that approaches smooth gameplay. The data shows that Low settings are the only preset that consistently delivers playable frame rates at 4K.

High settings present a compromise that few users will find worthwhile. At 1080p High, the combo produces 50 FPS — just 2 FPS more than Ultra at 48 FPS, but 17 FPS less than Medium at 67 FPS. At 1440p High, the 41 FPS result is only 2 FPS better than Ultra's 39 FPS, and 13 FPS worse than Medium's 54 FPS. The Ultra preset consistently delivers the worst performance with minimal visual gain, making it the least recommended option across all resolutions.

The data suggests that users should select their resolution first, then choose settings accordingly. At 1080p, Medium provides the best experience with 67 FPS. At 1440p, Low at 69 FPS offers the smoothest gameplay, while Medium at 54 FPS is acceptable for users who prefer better visuals. At 4K, Low at 51 FPS is the only viable option, and users seeking higher quality at 4K would need to accept frame rates in the 28-40 FPS range, which the data shows is the practical ceiling for this combo.