Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is an exceptionally demanding title, and the data for the AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT paired with the Intel Arc B370 reflects a system positioned at the very low end of the performance spectrum. The measured results show a configuration that is heavily constrained by its graphics solution, struggling to maintain playable frame rates even at lower resolutions and settings. The benchmark data indicates a fundamental imbalance, where the CPU's capabilities are largely neutralized by the GPU's output limits.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling behavior in Microsoft Flight Simulator reveals a system that is almost entirely GPU-bound, with frame rates collapsing as pixel count increases. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo produces an average of 50 FPS, which drops to 41 FPS at 1440p and further to 30 FPS at 4K. This represents a 40% performance loss when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and a 40% loss again from 1440p to 4K. The scaling pattern is consistent with a GPU that has very limited fillrate and memory bandwidth resources, as the workload of rendering higher resolutions quickly overwhelms the Intel Arc B370's capabilities.

The data suggests that the limiting component is unequivocally the graphics processor. Moving from Low to High settings at any given resolution produces a substantial frame rate penalty, but the resolution scaling at a fixed quality preset tells a clearer story. At High settings, the system goes from 30 FPS at 1080p to 24 FPS at 1440p (a 20% drop) and then to 18 FPS at 4K (a 25% drop from 1440p). These are steep declines that point to the GPU's fixed-function units and memory system hitting their limits, rather than any CPU bottleneck. The CPU, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, is more than capable of feeding frames at these rates, but the GPU cannot render them fast enough.

At 4K, the frame rates become largely unplayable across all settings: 30 FPS on Low, 23 FPS on Medium, 18 FPS on High, and 17 FPS on Ultra. The narrow gap between High and Ultra at 4K (only 1 FPS difference) indicates that the GPU is saturated and additional graphical features have minimal impact on the already overwhelmed renderer. The resolution scaling data shows a classic case of a low-end integrated graphics solution being asked to handle a high-fidelity flight simulator, with the result being a steep and predictable performance cliff as resolution increases.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured frame rates, the settings recommendation for this combo is straightforward: prioritize Low settings for any semblance of playability, and accept that higher resolutions will require even more aggressive compromises. At 1080p, Low settings yield an average of 50 FPS, which is the only configuration in the entire dataset that approaches a smooth experience. Medium settings at 1080p drop to 39 FPS, which is playable but with noticeable stutter, while High and Ultra at 1080p provide 30 FPS and 28 FPS respectively—both marginal for a flight simulator that benefits from steady frame pacing.

The data shows that Medium settings at 1080p (39 FPS average, with a minimum of 33 FPS and maximum of 45 FPS) offers a better experience than High at 1080p (30 FPS). The measured minimum frame rate of 33 FPS for Medium is higher than the average for High, indicating that the Medium preset provides more consistent performance. For users who prioritize visual fidelity over smoothness, High at 1080p is the highest setting that maintains an average above 30 FPS, but the lack of a recorded minimum suggests potential dips below that threshold.

At higher resolutions, the recommendations become more restrictive. At 1440p, Low settings produce 41 FPS, which is the only playable option; Medium drops to 32 FPS (with a minimum of 27 FPS), and High and Ultra fall to 24 FPS and 23 FPS respectively. At 4K, even Low settings only manage 30 FPS, and every other preset sits below 23 FPS, making the game effectively unplayable at this resolution. The best experience per the measured rows is unequivocally 1080p with Low settings, which provides the highest average frame rate and the most headroom for the inevitable complex scenes in flight simulation.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank for this configuration in Microsoft Flight Simulator is 2770 out of 2996 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 7.5% of all systems. This ranking reflects the severe performance limitations imposed by the Intel Arc B370, which is the primary constraint in this pairing. The GPU's individual percentile ranking is 5th percentile against all GPUs, while the CPU sits at the 81st percentile against all CPUs, highlighting the stark mismatch between the two components.

The CPU's nearest rivals data shows that the Ryzen 7 5800XT is competitive with other mid-range processors, with an average benchmark score of 29879. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H, scores 29868 (a 0% delta), while the Ryzen 7 8845HS and Ryzen 7 7840HS both score 29955 (a -0.3% delta). The Ryzen 5 9600X scores 29713 (a 0.6% delta for the 5800XT). This indicates that the CPU is not the bottleneck in this combination; it is performing as expected for its class.

In contrast, the Intel Arc B370's nearest rivals are all legacy or low-end parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186 score, -0.2% delta), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190 score, -0.5% delta), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192 score, -0.7% delta), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168 score, +1.4% delta). The GPU's average benchmark score of 1184 places it firmly in the entry-level segment, and this is reflected in the game's combo ranking. The data shows that this combination ranks near the bottom of all tested systems, primarily due to the GPU's inability to keep up with the game's rendering demands.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system's performance across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: Low settings produce an average of 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 progression from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a 44% performance drop, from 50 FPS down to 28 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates decrease across the board: Low averages 41 FPS, Medium averages 32 FPS (minimum 27, maximum 36), High averages 24 FPS, and Ultra averages 23 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings is 9 FPS (50 to 41), while at High settings the drop is 6 FPS (30 to 24). The relative penalty for higher settings becomes more pronounced at 1440p, where High and Ultra are nearly identical (24 vs 23 FPS), suggesting the GPU is hitting a hard limit.

At 3840x2160, the performance is severely constrained: Low averages 30 FPS, Medium averages 23 FPS (minimum 20, maximum 27), High averages 18 FPS, and Ultra averages 17 FPS. The 4K results show that even the lowest quality preset struggles to maintain a playable frame rate, and the Ultra preset at 17 FPS is essentially a slideshow. The data indicates that this combo is only viable at 1080p with Low or Medium settings, with 1440p being marginal at Low, and 4K being entirely unsuitable for gameplay.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370's role in this configuration is defined by its severely limited specifications and the corresponding benchmark results. The GPU features 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 render output units, with a boost clock of 2400 MHz and a base clock of 300 MHz. Its pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 6.144 TFLOPS. These figures place it far below what is needed for a demanding title like Microsoft Flight Simulator.

The GPU uses "System Shared" memory, meaning it relies on the system's DDR4 RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. This is a critical limitation, as the memory bandwidth is "System Dependent" and the bus width is also "System Shared." In a flight simulator that streams vast amounts of terrain and aircraft data, the lack of dedicated high-bandwidth memory is a severe handicap. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark score of 1184 confirms the GPU's entry-level status, with its nearest rivals being decade-old integrated and discrete parts.

The GPU's power envelope is also notable, with a TDP of just 25 W and no power connectors, indicating it is an integrated graphics solution (IGP). This explains its low performance ceiling. The data shows that the GPU is the dominant bottleneck in this combo, as evidenced by the steep FPS drops when increasing resolution or quality settings. The GPU's 5th percentile ranking against all GPUs underscores that it is among the weakest graphics solutions currently measured, and it simply cannot handle the rendering load of Microsoft Flight Simulator at any reasonable quality level.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT plays a supporting role in this configuration, providing ample processing power that is largely underutilized due to the GPU bottleneck. The CPU features 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer), with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. It has 32 MB of shared L3 cache and 64 KB of L1 cache per core, along with 512 KB of L2 cache per core. The CPU supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and 51.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth.

Benchmark results show that the CPU is a capable performer: it scores 23794 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3359 in single-core, with a PassMark multithread score of 28053 and a single-thread score of 3535. Its average benchmark score of 29879 places it at the 81st percentile of all CPUs, with rival comparisons showing it is on par with modern mobile processors like the Ryzen 7 7840H and Ryzen 7 8845HS. The CPU's 3DMark scores (7683 for 16 threads, 6141 for 8 threads, and 959 for single-thread) confirm strong multi-threaded performance.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is to handle the complex simulation logic, including physics, weather, and AI traffic. The data suggests that the CPU is more than sufficient for this task, as the frame rates are consistently low across all settings and resolutions, indicating that the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU's 8 cores and 16 threads are well-suited for the game's multi-threaded workload, and the high boost clock of 4.80 GHz helps with single-threaded tasks. The CPU's performance is not the issue in this combo; rather, the GPU's output limits what the system can deliver.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combo for this hardware?

A: The measured data shows that 1920x1080 with Low settings provides the highest average frame rate at 50 FPS. Medium settings at 1080p offer 39 FPS with a minimum of 33 FPS, which is also playable. Higher resolutions result in significant frame rate drops, with 1440p at Low giving 41 FPS and 4K at Low giving only 30 FPS.

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

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 1184 is nearly identical to the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, -0.2% delta) and the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, -0.5% delta). It scores slightly higher than the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, +1.4% delta) but lower than the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, -0.7% delta).

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

A: The data clearly indicates the GPU is the bottleneck. The CPU has an 81st percentile ranking against all CPUs, while the GPU sits at the 5th percentile. The frame rates drop steeply with resolution increases and quality presets, which is characteristic of a GPU-limited system.

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested systems?

A: This combination of AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2770 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, placing it in the bottom 7.5% of all systems tested.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: No. At 4K, the highest average frame rate is 30 FPS on Low settings, dropping to 17 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset at 4K produces 23 FPS with a minimum of 20 FPS, which is below playable thresholds for a smooth experience.

Q: What is the CPU's memory bandwidth and how does it affect performance?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. Since the GPU uses System Shared memory, it relies on this same bandwidth, which is insufficient for the game's high-resolution texture streaming demands, contributing to the low frame rates.