Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F paired with the Intel Arc B580 produces a 1080p-first experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator, with the measured data showing playable frame rates at High and Medium presets while Ultra settings demand a compromise. At 1440p, the combo maintains respectable averages but begins to show strain, and 4K is only viable at Low settings. This pairing ranks in the 2241st position out of 2996 tested combinations, placing it in the lower-middle tier of the database, which reflects a CPU that sits near the 83rd percentile of all processors but a GPU that only reaches the 68th percentile. The data indicates that users should prioritize resolution over settings, as the frame rate drops are steeper when moving from 1440p to 4K than when increasing quality presets at a fixed resolution.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows show a clear hierarchy across all three resolutions: Low delivers the highest averages, followed by Medium, then High, with Ultra consistently at the bottom. At 1920x1080, the Low preset produces an average of 97 FPS, which is the single highest figure recorded for this combo in the entire dataset. Medium at 1080p yields 76 FPS with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 87 FPS, providing a smooth experience that stays above common 60 FPS thresholds. High at 1080p drops to 57 FPS, which is still playable but noticeably lower, while Ultra falls to 54 FPS, making it the least attractive option at this resolution.

For the best experience per the measured rows, the Medium preset at 1920x1080 is the recommended choice. The data shows a 76 FPS average, which is 19 FPS higher than High and 22 FPS higher than Ultra, while the minimum of 64 FPS ensures that frame time spikes do not ruin the flight simulation. Low at 1080p does offer a 97 FPS average, but the visual degradation in a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, where terrain detail and cockpit instrumentation matter, is not worth the 21 FPS gain over Medium. High at 1080p at 57 FPS is functional but leaves little headroom for busy scenes, and Ultra at 54 FPS is the worst value in terms of frames per setting step.

Moving to 2560x1440, the Medium preset delivers 61 FPS with a minimum of 52 FPS and a maximum of 70 FPS. This is the only 1440p preset that breaks the 60 FPS average barrier, making it the clear choice for users who want a balance between visual fidelity and smoothness. Low at 1440p produces 78 FPS, which is higher, but again, the quality loss is substantial. High at 1440p drops to 46 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target, and Ultra at 1440p falls to 44 FPS, making both presets less desirable for sustained gameplay. At 3840x2160, the data is sobering: Medium averages 45 FPS with a minimum of 38 FPS and a maximum of 52 FPS, High averages 34 FPS, and Ultra averages 32 FPS. Only Low at 4K, with a 58 FPS average, approaches playability, but even that requires accepting significant visual compromises.

The recommendation is therefore to run Medium at 1080p for the best overall experience, with a fallback to Low at 1440p if higher resolution is preferred. The 4K Low preset at 58 FPS is the only passable option at that resolution, and even then, users should expect occasional dips given the lack of minimum frame data for that row. Ultra presets should be avoided entirely across all resolutions, as the data shows they only yield marginal improvements over High while costing 3 to 5 FPS on average.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B580 brings 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 456.0 GB/s, which is a substantial resource for a flight simulator that streams large terrain datasets. The GPU’s base and boost clocks are identical at 2670 MHz, and the memory runs at 2375 MHz with a 19 Gbps effective rate. The B580’s 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 80 raster output pipelines are backed by 20 ray tracing cores, giving it a pixel rate of 213.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 427.2 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 13.67 TFLOPS, which places it in a mid-range tier, and its 68th percentile ranking among all GPUs confirms this positioning.

In the context of Microsoft Flight Simulator, the B580’s VRAM capacity is more than sufficient for the tested presets, as the game does not appear to exceed 12 GB at 1080p or 1440p based on the frame rates recorded. The bottleneck is more likely computational, as the GPU’s 13.67 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput struggles to maintain high averages at demanding settings. The data shows that at 1080p Ultra, the average is 54 FPS, which is only 3 FPS lower than High at 57 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is near its limits for the most demanding shader work. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 32 FPS, indicating that the B580 cannot sustain the pixel fill rate required for 3840x2160 with high detail.

The GPU’s memory bandwidth of 456.0 GB/s is adequate for the game’s data streaming needs, but the measured results show that resolution scaling impacts performance more than settings changes. The B580’s 12 GB VRAM is a positive asset, as it prevents texture swapping that could cause stutters, but the raw compute power is the limiting factor. The nearest rival data for the GPU shows it is 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 and 0.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080, which gives context to its performance tier. The B580’s average benchmark score of 23021 places it close to the RTX 2080, and in this game, the measured FPS aligns with that competitive positioning.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern: as resolution increases, the average frame rate drops consistently across all settings. At Low settings, the progression is 97 FPS at 1080p, 78 FPS at 1440p, and 58 FPS at 4K, representing a 19 FPS drop from 1080p to 1440p and a further 20 FPS drop from 1440p to 4K. This indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting component at Low settings, as the CPU has enough headroom to feed frames at lower resolutions but the B580 cannot maintain the same throughput as pixel count rises.

At Medium settings, the averages are 76 FPS at 1080p, 61 FPS at 1440p, and 45 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 15 FPS, and from 1440p to 4K is 16 FPS, showing a similar rate of decline. The minimum FPS for Medium also scales: 64 at 1080p, 52 at 1440p, and 38 at 4K, which means the frame time consistency worsens at higher resolutions. High settings show 57 FPS at 1080p, 46 FPS at 1440p, and 34 FPS at 4K, with drops of 11 FPS and 12 FPS respectively. Ultra settings produce 54 FPS at 1080p, 44 FPS at 1440p, and 32 FPS at 4K, with the smallest absolute differences between resolutions.

The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is steeper at lower settings: Low loses 40% of its average FPS, Medium loses 41%, High loses 40%, and Ultra loses 41%. This uniformity suggests that the GPU is the bottleneck across all presets, as the relative decline is consistent regardless of quality level. If the CPU were limiting, we would expect the drop to be more pronounced at lower resolutions where the GPU has less work, but the data shows the opposite: the gap between 1080p and 1440p is similar to the gap between 1440p and 4K for each preset. This points to the Arc B580’s compute and fill rate being the dominant constraint, with the Ryzen 5 7400F providing sufficient frame generation up to 1440p but not being able to offset GPU limitations at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full set of measurements shows Low at 97 FPS average, Medium at 76 FPS average with a 64 FPS minimum and 87 FPS maximum, High at 57 FPS average, and Ultra at 54 FPS average. The spread from Low to Ultra is 43 FPS, which is the largest range across all resolutions, indicating that the GPU can scale its performance significantly when settings are reduced. The Medium preset’s minimum of 64 FPS is notable because it stays above the 60 FPS threshold, making it the safest choice for consistent frame pacing. High at 57 FPS is close to that threshold but does not guarantee it, and Ultra at 54 FPS is further away.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 78 FPS for Low, 61 FPS for Medium (with a 52 FPS minimum and 70 FPS maximum), 46 FPS for High, and 44 FPS for Ultra. The Medium minimum of 52 FPS is below the 60 FPS target, which means users will experience occasional dips in dense areas. Low at 78 FPS offers a comfortable margin, while High and Ultra are both firmly below 50 FPS, making them less suitable for smooth gameplay. The range from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 34 FPS, which is narrower than at 1080p, showing that the GPU’s headroom shrinks as pixel count increases.

At 3840x2160, the measurements are 58 FPS for Low, 45 FPS for Medium (with a 38 FPS minimum and 52 FPS maximum), 34 FPS for High, and 32 FPS for Ultra. The Low preset is the only one that approaches playability, and its 58 FPS average is remarkably close to the 1080p High result of 57 FPS, suggesting that Low at 4K provides a similar experience to High at 1080p in terms of frame rate, albeit with lower visual quality. Medium at 4K has a 38 FPS minimum, which indicates significant frame time variance, and High and Ultra are both in the low 30s, which is generally considered unplayable for a flight simulator that requires precise control inputs.

The data shows that the combo performs best when the preset is Medium at 1080p, as it balances the average FPS with the minimum FPS. The 4K Low result of 58 FPS is the second-best absolute average after 1080p Low, but the lack of a minimum FPS for that row means we cannot verify its consistency. Overall, the measured FPS breakdown supports the conclusion that this pairing is not a 4K capable setup, is marginal at 1440p with Medium, and is solid at 1080p with Medium or High.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank in Microsoft Flight Simulator is 2241 out of 2996 tested combinations, placing it in the 74.8th percentile of the database, meaning it outperforms roughly three quarters of tested systems but lags behind the top quarter. This ranking is lower than what the CPU’s 83rd percentile might suggest, indicating that the GPU drags down the overall result. The Ryzen 5 7400F’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-14600T with a delta of 0.1%, the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H with a delta of 0.2%, and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 with a delta of 0.3%, all of which are within a fraction of a percent in average CPU benchmarks. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H is 0.2% ahead of the 7400F, showing that this CPU is in a tightly contested tier.

The GPU’s nearest rivals are more telling: the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP is 0.2% ahead, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 is 0.6% behind, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is 0.7% ahead, and the NVIDIA P106-100 is 1% ahead in average GPU benchmarks. The fact that the RTX 3080 is listed as a rival with a delta of -0.7% means the Arc B580’s average score of 23021 is actually 0.7% lower than the RTX 3080’s 23172, which is surprising given the RTX 3080’s reputation as a higher-tier card. However, the B580’s 12 GB VRAM and newer architecture may compensate in specific games like Microsoft Flight Simulator, though the measured FPS data here does not show a clear advantage.

The combo’s rank of 2241 out of 2996 means that over 750 other combinations deliver better performance in this specific game. This is not a terrible result, but it is not a recommendation for enthusiasts. The CPU is strong enough to avoid being a bottleneck, as evidenced by its 21765 Cinebench R23 multi-core score and 3072 single-core score, but the GPU’s 13.67 TFLOPS limits the overall package. In the context of the database, this combo sits in the lower-middle tier, suitable for 1080p gaming and light 1440p use, but it will struggle with the most demanding titles at high resolutions.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Raphael, manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, and it offers 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The processor sits on the AMD Socket AM5 and was released in January 2025, with a launch MSRP of $229.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU’s role is to handle the simulation logic, physics, and AI traffic, which can be demanding in complex scenarios. The 7400F’s 6 cores and 12 threads are sufficient for this game, as the measured FPS data shows that the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The CPU’s single-thread performance is strong, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3072, which is critical for a game that relies on a primary thread for frame pacing. The multi-core score of 21765 in Cinebench R23 indicates that the CPU can handle background tasks without sacrificing frame rates.

The CPU’s benchmark scores place it in the 83rd percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 32750. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-14600T, has an average score of 32707, which is 0.1% lower, indicating near-identical performance. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H is 0.2% ahead, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H is 0.2% behind. These margins are negligible in real-world gaming, so the CPU is not the differentiating factor in this combo’s rankings.

The data suggests that the CPU does not bottleneck the GPU at 1080p, as evidenced by the 76 FPS average at Medium settings, which is a reasonable result for a mid-range GPU. At 1440p, the CPU still provides enough frames for the GPU to reach 61 FPS at Medium, and even at 4K, the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU to achieve 45 FPS at Medium. The 7400F’s boost clock of 4.70 GHz ensures that the primary game thread has enough single-core performance to avoid stutters, and the 32 MB of L3 cache helps with repeated data access in flight scenarios.

However, the CPU’s 6-core configuration means that heavily threaded scenes, such as flying over large cities with dense AI traffic, could see reduced performance compared to 8-core or 12-core processors. But the measured FPS data does not show any such degradation, as the minimum FPS values at Medium settings (64 at 1080p, 52 at 1440p, and 38 at 4K) are consistent with what a 6-core processor would deliver. Overall, the Ryzen 5 7400F is a capable partner for the Arc B580 in this game, with sufficient single-thread and multi-thread performance to avoid being the primary limiter. The bottleneck lies squarely with the GPU, which means users who want higher frame rates should look to upgrade the graphics card rather than the processor.