Microsoft Flight Simulator

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data for Microsoft Flight Simulator with this AMD Ryzen 7 5800X + Intel Arc B370 combination reveals a steep performance cliff as resolution climbs. At 1080p Low, the combo delivers 50 FPS, which drops to 41 FPS at 1440p Low, and further to 30 FPS at 4K Low. That represents a 40% reduction from 1080p to 4K at the lowest settings. Under High settings, the slide is even more dramatic: 30 FPS at 1080p, 24 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K — a 40% loss from 1080p to 4K as well, but from an already low baseline.

The scaling pattern tells a clear story about which component is the bottleneck. When moving from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings, the drop is 9 FPS (50 to 41), and from 1440p to 4K another 11 FPS (41 to 30). The roughly linear degradation with pixel count suggests the GPU is the dominant constraint. If the CPU were the limiter, you would expect 1080p and 1440p scores to cluster closer together, since higher resolutions offload more work to the graphics card while the CPU workload stays relatively flat. Instead, every resolution step costs significant frame rate, indicating the Intel Arc B370 is saturated at each step.

At Ultra settings, the picture is grim but consistent. The combo manages 28 FPS at 1080p, 23 FPS at 1440p, and 17 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1080p and 4K Ultra is 11 FPS, which is proportionally similar to the Low setting gap. This consistency across presets reinforces the GPU-bound conclusion — the Arc B370's compute and memory resources are the limiting factor, not the Ryzen 7 5800X's eight cores.

What is particularly telling is the 1080p High result of 30 FPS versus the 1080p Low result of 50 FPS. That 20 FPS gap (40%) for a single preset step down shows how sensitive this GPU is to the increased shading and texture work in Flight Simulator's High preset. The data implies that no amount of CPU headroom — and the 5800X has plenty, given its 3DMark max threads score of 7578 — can rescue frame rates when the GPU is working at its ceiling.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Arc B370 is striking in its specifications: a 3 nm Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture, featuring 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs. Its boost clock runs at 2400 MHz, with a base of 300 MHz. The memory configuration is unusual — "System Shared" for both size and type, meaning there is no dedicated VRAM. Bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," which in a flight simulator streaming vast terrain and city data could be a serious handicap.

The GPU's benchmark presence is minimal: a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184. That places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, which is remarkably low. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, 0.2% higher), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, 0.5% higher), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, 0.7% higher), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, 1.4% lower). These are all legacy or low-end parts from over a decade ago, which frames the Arc B370's expected performance tier.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator specifically, the GPU's shared memory architecture likely contributes to the low FPS figures. The game is notorious for loading high-resolution textures and photogrammetry data, and with system-shared memory, the GPU must compete with the CPU for bandwidth. The measured 4K Medium result of 23 FPS with a minimum of 20 FPS and maximum of 27 FPS shows tight frame pacing but at an unplayable level. The 1080p Medium range of 33 to 45 FPS (39 average) is the only preset where the combo approaches playability, and even that is marginal.

The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are modest figures that align with the GPU's low percentile ranking. At 4K, the fill rate requirements of 8.3 million pixels per frame (3840×2160) outstrip what the 20 ROPs can deliver, explaining why 4K Ultra bottoms out at 17 FPS. The FP32 throughput of 6.144 TFLOPS is not enough for the heavy shading and lighting calculations Flight Simulator performs at higher presets.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X is a Zen 3 Vermeer chip on the AM4 socket, built on TSMC's 7 nm process. It packs 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and boost of 4.70 GHz. The 32 MB L3 cache and 4,150 million transistors indicate a solid desktop processor. Its 105 W TDP and DDR4 dual-channel memory support (51.2 GB/s bandwidth) are standard for its generation.

Benchmark results show the CPU is far from the limiting factor in this combo. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 15476 and single-core score of 1574.5 demonstrate strong sustained performance. The Geekbench multicore score of 11036 with a single-core score of 2032 confirms balanced throughput. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 7586 and max-thread score of 7578 show that scaling across cores is efficient. The 5800X sits in the 81st percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29123.

Its nearest rivals in the CPU benchmark database are the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H (29093, 0.1% lower), Intel Xeon Phi 7210 (29245, 0.4% higher), Intel Core i5-13500HX (29270, 0.5% higher), and AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT (28940, 0.6% lower). These deltas are all within a percentage point, meaning the 5800X is firmly in the middle of a tightly packed performance cluster.

In Flight Simulator, which is known to be heavily CPU-dependent for its simulation and physics calculations, the 5800X should theoretically provide adequate headroom. The data, however, shows that this headroom is wasted because the GPU cannot keep up. At 1080p Low, the 50 FPS ceiling is likely GPU-limited rather than CPU-limited; a stronger GPU would likely push that number higher with the same CPU. The 3DMark 2-thread score of 1846 suggests the CPU can handle the two-thread workloads that flight simulators often present, but the system FPS never approaches what the CPU could theoretically support.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Given the measured FPS data, the only preset that delivers a consistently playable experience is 1080p Low, with an average of 50 FPS. This is the sole configuration above 45 FPS in the entire dataset. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 39 FPS with a minimum of 33 FPS and maximum of 45 FPS — playable for a flight simulator where smoothness matters less than in fast-paced shooters, but still under the 40 FPS threshold many would consider comfortable.

At 1440p, the best option is Low at 41 FPS, which is technically playable but offers no visual upgrade over 1080p Low given the GPU's limitations. The 1440p Medium result of 32 FPS (minimum 27, maximum 36) is borderline, while High and Ultra at 24 and 23 FPS respectively are not viable. At 4K, every preset fails: Low at 30 FPS, Medium at 23 FPS, High at 18 FPS, and Ultra at 17 FPS. None of these meet the 30 FPS threshold except Low, and even that is marginal.

The data suggests the following hierarchy for best experience: first, 1080p Low for maximum frame rate; second, 1080p Medium for a balance of visual fidelity and playability (39 FPS average); third, 1440p Low for sharper resolution at a cost of 9 FPS versus 1080p Low; and fourth, 1080p High at 30 FPS for those who prioritize visuals over smoothness. Ultra settings at any resolution are not recommended, as the 17-28 FPS range will produce noticeable stutter in a sim where smooth camera pans are essential.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and preset combination for this system in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The measured data shows 1080p Low provides the highest average FPS at 50. 1080p Medium offers 39 FPS average with a range of 33-45 FPS, which may be acceptable for slower-paced flight sim play.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its closest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 is 0.2% lower than the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186), 0.5% lower than the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190), and 0.7% lower than the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192). It is 1.4% higher than the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this system?

A: The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K shows consistent drops at every resolution step, which indicates the GPU is the limiting component. The Ryzen 7 5800X scores in the 81st percentile of CPUs, while the Arc B370 sits in the 5th percentile of GPUs.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 4K with this combo?

A: At 4K, the measured averages are 30 FPS on Low, 23 FPS on Medium (minimum 20, maximum 27), 18 FPS on High, and 17 FPS on Ultra. None of these are ideal for smooth flight simulation.

Q: Does the Ryzen 7 5800X hold up against similar CPUs?

A: The 5800X's average benchmark score of 29123 is within 0.6% of its nearest rivals. It is 0.1% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H, 0.4% slower than the Intel Xeon Phi 7210, 0.5% slower than the Intel Core i5-13500HX, and 0.6% faster than the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT.

Q: What is the frame time consistency like at 1080p Medium?

A: The 1080p Medium preset shows a minimum of 33 FPS and maximum of 45 FPS with an average of 39 FPS, suggesting moderate frame pacing variation. The 1440p Medium preset shows a tighter but lower range of 27-36 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low settings produce 50 FPS, Medium produces 39 FPS (with a minimum of 33 and maximum of 45), High produces 30 FPS, and Ultra produces 28 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 22 FPS, and even the highest preset fails to reach 30 FPS average.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops noticeably. Low settings yield 41 FPS, Medium yields 32 FPS (minimum 27, maximum 36), High yields 24 FPS, and Ultra yields 23 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 18 FPS, but the absolute values are all lower than their 1080p counterparts by 7-9 FPS across presets.

At 3840x2160, the results become marginal. Low settings produce 30 FPS, Medium produces 23 FPS (minimum 20, maximum 27), High produces 18 FPS, and Ultra produces 17 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 4K is just 1 FPS, indicating the GPU is completely saturated at that resolution, with no headroom for additional visual features.

Across all resolutions, the Medium preset shows the only recorded minimum and maximum values, which allows for frame time analysis. At 1080p Medium, the range is 12 FPS (33 to 45); at 1440p Medium, the range narrows to 9 FPS (27 to 36); at 4K Medium, the range is 7 FPS (20 to 27). This tightening range at higher resolutions suggests the GPU becomes more consistently bottlenecked, reducing variance but also reducing average performance.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of AMD Ryzen 7 5800X and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2770 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places it in the bottom 7.5% of all tested systems, which aligns with the GPU's 5th percentile ranking. The CPU's 81st percentile ranking does little to boost the combo's standing because the GPU is so decisively the weak link.

The ranking of 2770 out of 2996 means that 92.5% of tested combos deliver better performance in this game. This is a poor result for a system with a capable eight-core CPU, and the data suggests that pairing the 5800X with a stronger GPU would yield dramatically better results. The CPU's benchmark scores — particularly the Cinebench R23 multicore of 15476 and 3DMark max threads of 7578 — indicate it could support far higher frame rates than the Arc B370 allows.

The wide gap between the CPU's percentile (81) and the GPU's percentile (5) creates an imbalanced system. In a flight simulator that stresses both simulation logic and graphics rendering, the CPU has headroom to spare while the GPU is overwhelmed. This is evident in the 4K Ultra result of 17 FPS, which is only 1 FPS above the 4K High result of 18 FPS — the GPU has no resources left to differentiate between presets at that resolution.

For comparison, the combo's rank of 2770 sits just 226 spots from the bottom of the 2996 tested configurations. The nearest GPU rivals in the benchmark database all score within 1.4% of the Arc B370, indicating that this performance tier is consistent with legacy integrated and low-end discrete graphics from previous generations. The Ryzen 7 5800X, meanwhile, competes with modern mid-range laptop and desktop processors, all within 0.6% of each other in average score. This combination of a high-performing CPU with a low-performing GPU results in a system that underperforms in GPU-bound games like Microsoft Flight Simulator, despite the CPU's capabilities.