Microsoft Flight Simulator

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600 paired with the Intel Arc B370 produces a very specific performance profile in Microsoft Flight Simulator, one that is heavily constrained by the graphics solution. The measured data shows a combination that ranks near the bottom of the tested field, with playable frame rates only achievable at lower resolutions and settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall rank of this CPU and GPU combination in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: This combo ranks 2770 out of 2996 tested combinations. This places it in the bottom 8% of all tested systems, indicating a severe performance limitation for this flight simulator.

Q: What is the best average frame rate recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 50, which occurs at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only setting where the system approaches a generally acceptable frame rate for a flight simulator.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184. Its nearest rival, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, scores 1186, which is 0.2% higher. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, which is 0.7% higher, while the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, which is 1.4% lower.

Q: What is the difference in performance between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 50 FPS, while the Ultra preset delivers an average of 28 FPS. This represents a 44% drop in average frame rate when moving from Low to Ultra settings.

Q: What is the thermal design power (TDP) of the Intel Arc B370?

A: The Intel Arc B370 has a TDP of 25 W. This is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a slot width of "IGP" and no power connectors, meaning it is designed for low-power, portable devices.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU appear to be the main bottleneck in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary limiting factor. The Arc B370 ranks in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, while the Ryzen 5 7600 ranks in the 78th percentile of all CPUs. The frame rates scale dramatically with resolution and settings, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 7600 and Intel Arc B370 achieves a rank of 2770 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the system in the bottom 8% of all configurations tested. The ranking reflects a fundamental imbalance: a modern, capable desktop processor is paired with an integrated-class graphics processor.

The Ryzen 5 7600 is a strong performer in its own right. It holds a percentile rank of 78 among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 26324. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX with an average score of 26274 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen 7 7435HS with 26402 (0.3% lower), and the Intel Core i9-11900KF with 26212 (0.4% higher). These are all close scores, showing the 7600 is competitive with other mid-range and older high-end processors.

In contrast, the Intel Arc B370 is an extremely weak graphics solution. It has a percentile rank of only 5 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1184 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. Its nearest rivals are all legacy or low-end mobile parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186, the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168. The Arc B370 is essentially performing at the level of integrated graphics from over a decade ago.

This massive disparity between the CPU’s 78th percentile ranking and the GPU’s 5th percentile ranking explains the combo’s poor overall position. In a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which has significant graphical demands, the GPU’s limitations dominate the experience. The CPU is waiting on the GPU to render frames, resulting in the low scores seen across all resolutions and settings. The data suggests that even a significantly weaker CPU would produce nearly identical frame rates, as the bottleneck is firmly on the graphics side.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the only setting that provides a consistently playable experience is Low at 1920x1080, which yields an average of 50 FPS. This is the sole configuration where the average frame rate exceeds 30 FPS at any resolution.

Moving to Medium settings at 1080p drops the average to 39 FPS, with a minimum of 33 and a maximum of 45. This is still technically playable, but the margin for error is thin, and any complex scenery or weather effects could push frame rates lower. High settings at 1080p reduce the average to 30 FPS, which is borderline for a flight simulator. Ultra settings at 1080p achieve only 28 FPS on average.

At 1440p, the situation worsens. Low settings provide an average of 41 FPS, which is acceptable, but Medium settings drop to 32 FPS with a minimum of 27. High settings yield 24 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 23 FPS. These lower frame rates would likely be noticeable as stutter and reduced smoothness.

At 4K, the system is largely unplayable. Low settings achieve 30 FPS on average, but Medium settings drop to 23 FPS, High to 18 FPS, and Ultra to 17 FPS. None of these provide a smooth experience for a simulator that requires precise control.

For the best experience, the data strongly points to 1080p with Low settings. This provides a 50 FPS average, which is the highest measured for this combo. Users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate could attempt Medium settings at 1080p, accepting the 39 FPS average and the occasional dips to 33 FPS. However, any setting above Medium at 1080p, or any setting above Low at 1440p, will result in average frame rates below 30 FPS, which is generally considered the minimum threshold for a playable flight simulator experience.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of the system’s capabilities across three resolutions and four settings presets.

At 1920x1080, the system’s best performance is found. With Low settings, the average FPS is 50. Medium settings produce an average of 39 FPS, with a minimum of 33 and a maximum of 45. High settings reduce the average to 30 FPS. Ultra settings produce the lowest result at this resolution, with an average of 28 FPS.

At 2560x1440, performance drops noticeably. Low settings yield an average of 41 FPS. Medium settings produce an average of 32 FPS, with a minimum of 27 and a maximum of 36. High settings drop to an average of 24 FPS. Ultra settings produce an average of 23 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra at 1440p is from 41 FPS to 23 FPS, a reduction of 44%.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playable frame rates. Low settings achieve an average of 30 FPS. Medium settings produce an average of 23 FPS, with a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 27. High settings drop to an average of 18 FPS. Ultra settings produce the lowest measured result of any configuration, with an average of 17 FPS.

The data shows a consistent pattern: each step up in settings reduces the average FPS by a significant margin. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 22 FPS. At 1440p, the difference is 18 FPS. At 4K, the difference is 13 FPS. This suggests that the GPU is saturated even at the lowest settings, and increasing graphical fidelity has a direct and substantial impact on frame rate.

The minimum FPS values are only recorded for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 1080p, the minimum is 33 FPS. At 1440p, the minimum is 27 FPS. At 4K, the minimum is 20 FPS. These minimums indicate the frame rate can dip below the average, which can cause noticeable hitches during gameplay.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel’s 3 nm process. It has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The GPU features 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units. It also includes 10 ray tracing cores. Its theoretical peak performance is 6.144 TFLOPS for FP32 operations and 12.29 TFLOPS for FP16 operations with a 2:1 ratio.

The most critical aspect of this GPU is its memory configuration. It uses "System Shared" memory, meaning it relies on the system’s main RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. The memory type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent". This is a severe limitation for a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which loads vast amounts of terrain and scenery data.

The GPU’s benchmark performance is extremely low. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. This score is comparable to the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190) and ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186), both of which are over a decade old. The GPU’s low TDP of 25 W further confirms its integrated, low-power design.

In the measured FPS data, the GPU’s weakness is evident. Even at 1080p Low settings, the system only achieves 50 FPS. At 4K Ultra, it manages just 17 FPS. These results are consistent with a GPU that lacks both dedicated memory bandwidth and raw compute power. The system shared memory architecture means the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory access, further hampering performance in a memory-intensive simulation.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600 is a desktop processor from the 7000 series, built on the Zen 4 architecture with a 5 nm process. It has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The CPU has a TDP of 65 W and supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. It features 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache.

The CPU’s benchmark scores show it is a capable processor. It scores 12735 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 1852 in Cinebench R23 single-core. In Geekbench, it scores 13413 multicore and 2521 single-core. Its average benchmark score is 26324, placing it in the 78th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are all within 0.5% in average score, showing the 7600 is a solid mid-range performer.

In the context of this game, the CPU is not the bottleneck. The measured FPS data shows that performance is heavily dependent on resolution and settings. If the CPU were the limiting factor, frame rates would be more consistent across different resolutions. Instead, we see a clear drop in FPS as resolution increases, which is a classic sign of GPU limitation.

The CPU’s high single-thread performance, as indicated by its 1852 Cinebench R23 single-core score, should be sufficient for Microsoft Flight Simulator’s simulation logic. The 6 cores and 12 threads are also adequate for the game’s multithreaded tasks. The CPU is likely idle waiting for the GPU to complete its rendering work. The data shows that the Ryzen 5 7600’s performance is essentially wasted in this configuration, as the Arc B370 cannot keep up with the CPU’s output.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and consistent pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 50 at 1080p to 41 at 1440p, a reduction of 18%. From 1440p to 4K, the average FPS drops from 41 to 30, a further reduction of 27%. The total drop from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is 40%.

This pattern is repeated across all settings. At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 39 at 1080p to 32 at 1440p to 23 at 4K. This represents a 41% drop from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 30 at 1080p to 24 at 1440p to 18 at 4K, a 40% drop. At Ultra settings, the average FPS drops from 28 at 1080p to 23 at 1440p to 17 at 4K, a 39% drop.

The consistency of these percentage drops is significant. A GPU-bound system typically shows a predictable decrease in FPS as resolution increases, because the GPU must render more pixels. The fact that the FPS drops by roughly 40% from 1080p to 4K across all settings indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor at every resolution.

If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, with a drop only at 4K. Instead, we see a steady decline at each step. The data shows that the Arc B370 is simply overwhelmed by the pixel count at higher resolutions. Even at 1080p Low settings, the GPU is likely running near its maximum capacity, as evidenced by the fact that increasing settings reduces FPS significantly. The resolution scaling confirms that the Intel Arc B370 is the primary constraint in this system, and the Ryzen 5 7600’s performance headroom is not being utilized in Microsoft Flight Simulator.