Microsoft Flight Simulator

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Microsoft Flight Simulator with the AMD Ryzen 7 5700G and Intel Arc B580 reveals a clear and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces 97.9 FPS; dropping to 2560x1440 Low yields 75.3 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Low the average falls to 58.2 FPS. That is a 40.5% reduction from 1080p to 4K at Low settings, which is a substantial hit but still leaves the frame rate comfortably above 60 FPS at the highest resolution tested.

The scaling curve steepens dramatically as settings rise. At Ultra settings, the frame rate goes from 55.5 FPS at 1080p to 40.3 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 28.9 FPS at 4K. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 29.3 FPS, while at 1080p that same gap is 42.4 FPS. This compression of the settings range at higher resolutions indicates that the Intel Arc B580 becomes the limiting factor as pixel count increases. The GPU is clearly struggling to maintain its advantage at 4K, where even the jump from Low to Medium costs 11.4 FPS.

At 1080p, the data suggests a more balanced workload. The difference between Low and Medium is 25.6 FPS, and between Medium and High is 14.7 FPS. This relatively even distribution of performance across settings implies that the Ryzen 7 5700G is keeping pace with the GPU at lower resolutions. The 8-core, 16-thread processor has enough headroom to feed the Arc B580, and the bottleneck shifts to the graphics card only when resolution climbs to 1440p and beyond.

The 1440p results sit neatly between the two extremes. Low settings deliver 75.3 FPS, which is a playable experience for a flight simulator, while Ultra drops to 40.3 FPS. The Medium preset at 62.3 FPS represents a sweet spot for this resolution, as it maintains a smooth frame rate while offering better visual fidelity than Low. The data points to a system where 1080p is the resolution for maximum performance, 1440p is viable with settings compromises, and 4K is only playable at Low settings.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this pairing of the AMD Ryzen 7 5700G with the Intel Arc B580 ranks 1405 out of 1795 combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places it in the lower half of tested systems, specifically in the 21st percentile of all combinations. The rank is a reflection of both components' positions in their respective hierarchies: the CPU sits in the 83rd percentile of all processors, while the GPU is in the 66th percentile of all graphics cards.

The CPU's benchmark data shows a strong multi-threaded performer. It scores 20,755 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,930 in single-core, with a PassMark multi-thread score of 24,419. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U, which scores 25,706 with a delta of -0.3%, and the Intel Xeon D-2752TER at 25,532 with a delta of 0.4%. The Ryzen 7 5700G's average benchmark score of 25,626 is competitive with these chips, and the small deltas suggest the processor is not the primary reason for the low combination rank.

The GPU side tells a different story. The Intel Arc B580 has an average benchmark score of 23,021, which places it near the AMD Radeon 760M at 22,999 and the NVIDIA P106-100 at 22,950. However, its nearest rival by performance is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060, which scores 23,181 with a delta of -0.7% against the Arc B580. The RTX 4060 Mobile scores 22,729 with a delta of 1.3%. This clustering indicates that the Arc B580 is a mid-range GPU, and in a demanding title like Microsoft Flight Simulator, it falls short of what is needed to push the combination higher in the rankings.

The combination rank of 1405 out of 1795 suggests that while each component is individually capable, the pairing does not excel in this particular simulation. The game is known for being CPU-intensive, and the Ryzen 7 5700G's Zen 3 architecture with 16 MB of L3 cache handles the load adequately, but the GPU becomes the constraint at higher resolutions. The data shows that the system is better suited for 1080p gaming, where it can achieve frame rates above 90 FPS at Low settings, rather than attempting to drive 4K displays.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the most capable resolution, with Low settings hitting 97.9 FPS and Ultra still managing 55.5 FPS. At 2560x1440, the frame rates range from 75.3 FPS at Low to 40.3 FPS at Ultra, while 3840x2160 only reaches 58.2 FPS at Low and drops to 28.9 FPS at Ultra.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B580 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B580 scores 23,021 on average benchmarks, which is just 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon 760M and 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA P106-100. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 is 0.7% faster, and the RTX 4060 Mobile is 1.3% slower.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 7 5700G a bottleneck for the Arc B580?

A: Benchmark data indicates the CPU is not the limiting factor. The Ryzen 7 5700G scores 20,755 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,930 in single-core, ranking in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K shows the GPU becoming the constraint at higher resolutions.

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

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings deliver 97.9 FPS while Ultra produces 55.5 FPS, a difference of 42.4 FPS. The Medium preset sits between at 72.3 FPS, and High achieves 57.6 FPS.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in this title?

A: At 3840x2160, the combo can only manage 58.2 FPS at Low settings. Medium drops to 46.8 FPS, High falls to 33.6 FPS, and Ultra is effectively unplayable at 28.9 FPS. The data suggests 4K is only viable with Low settings.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems?

A: The combination ranks 1405 out of 1795 total combos tested for Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the lower 22% of all systems. The CPU ranks in the 83rd percentile of all processors, while the GPU ranks in the 66th percentile of all graphics cards.

Settings Recommendations

For the best balance of visual quality and playable frame rates, the Medium preset at 2560x1440 is the most compelling option, delivering 62.3 FPS. This is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for a smooth experience in a flight simulator, and the visual improvement over Low settings is substantial given the 13.0 FPS cost. At 1080p, the Medium preset at 72.3 FPS is also excellent, and the High preset at 57.6 FPS remains playable for those who prioritize visual fidelity.

For 4K displays, the data strongly indicates that only Low settings are viable. The 58.2 FPS at Low is just shy of 60 FPS, and the Medium preset's 46.8 FPS introduces noticeable stutter in a simulation where smooth camera panning is critical. The Ultra preset at 28.9 FPS is not recommended under any circumstances, as the frame rate drops below 30 FPS, which is generally considered the minimum for interactive flight simulation.

The High preset presents a mixed picture. At 1440p, it delivers 43.5 FPS, which is borderline playable but not ideal for a game that relies on precise control inputs. At 1080p, High achieves 57.6 FPS, which is close to the 60 FPS target but still below the Medium preset's performance. The data suggests that High settings are best reserved for screenshots or less demanding scenarios, while Medium offers the best overall experience across resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured frame rates across settings are as follows: Low delivers 97.9 FPS, Medium achieves 72.3 FPS, High produces 57.6 FPS, and Ultra manages 55.5 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is the largest single-step difference at 25.6 FPS, while the jump from High to Ultra is the smallest at just 2.1 FPS. This suggests that the Ultra preset adds very little visual benefit relative to its performance cost at this resolution.

The 2560x1440 results show a similar pattern but with lower absolute numbers. Low settings hit 75.3 FPS, Medium achieves 62.3 FPS, High delivers 43.5 FPS, and Ultra drops to 40.3 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium here is 13.0 FPS, which is half the 1080p gap. The High to Ultra delta is 3.2 FPS, again the smallest step. The Medium preset at 62.3 FPS is the only settings level that clears 60 FPS at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates are significantly lower across the board. Low settings produce 58.2 FPS, Medium falls to 46.8 FPS, High manages only 33.6 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 28.9 FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium costs 11.4 FPS, while the jump from Medium to High costs 13.2 FPS. The High to Ultra penalty is 4.7 FPS, which is proportionally larger than at lower resolutions, indicating that the GPU is running out of headroom entirely at 4K. The measured data shows a system that is clearly optimized for 1080p play, with 1440p requiring settings compromises and 4K limited to Low settings for acceptable performance.