Microsoft Flight Simulator

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT paired with the Intel Arc B570 lands at rank 2406 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the pairing in the bottom quintile of all configurations tested, which is a significant finding given the individual component profiles. The combo's position suggests that while neither part is a top-tier performer in this specific title, the combination produces a result that is heavily constrained by the graphics subsystem at higher resolutions. The rank of 2406 is not a reflection of a broken pairing, but rather a realistic outcome when a mid-range GPU is tasked with one of the most demanding simulation workloads available.

The percentile data for the individual components provides context. The Ryzen 7 5800XT sits at the 81st percentile among all CPUs, which is a strong showing for a desktop processor. In contrast, the Arc B570 sits at the 65th percentile among all GPUs. When these two are combined, the resulting rank of 2406 out of 2996 (roughly the 20th percentile) indicates that the GPU is the dominant bottleneck in this configuration for Microsoft Flight Simulator. The CPU's relative strength cannot compensate for the GPU's position in the hierarchy, especially when the game's rendering demands scale with resolution and settings.

The data shows a consistent pattern: the combo's rank is dragged down by the GPU's performance ceiling. This is not a case of a poorly matched pair in terms of compatibility, but rather a performance asymmetry. The CPU has ample headroom to feed the GPU, but the Arc B570's rendering capabilities cap the frame rates well before the processor can be fully utilized. For users considering this combination, the expectation should be that the GPU will determine the experience, with the CPU ensuring that the system does not introduce additional stutter or frame pacing issues.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, running on the AMD Socket AM4 platform. Its base clock is 3.80 GHz with a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The processor has a 32 MB shared L3 cache and supports DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 23794 and a single-core score of 3359, which are strong figures for a desktop part. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 7683 and single-thread score of 959 further illustrate its balanced performance across lightly and heavily threaded workloads.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is primarily to handle the simulation logic, physics calculations, and the complex scenery and weather systems that are constantly updated. The 8-core, 16-thread configuration is well-suited to this task, as the game can leverage multiple threads for different subsystems. The single-thread performance, as indicated by the Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3359, is equally important because the game's main thread often becomes the deciding factor in scenarios with dense scenery or complex aircraft systems. The Ryzen 7 5800XT's boost clock of 4.80 GHz ensures that this main thread can achieve high frequencies when needed.

The benchmark results show that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this combo. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 86 FPS, which is the highest result across all tested configurations. This indicates that the CPU can push the frame rate well above playable thresholds when the GPU is not heavily loaded. The CPU's performance is further validated by its nearest rivals: it is within 0.3% of the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS and Ryzen 7 7840HS, and 0.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X. This places the 5800XT in a competitive position among modern processors, though the margin over the Ryzen 5 9600X is marginal.

The data suggests that the CPU's contribution to the overall combo rank is positive. The processor's 81st percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates that it is capable of handling the game's CPU demands without becoming a bottleneck. The bottleneck in this system is clearly the GPU, as evidenced by the FPS scaling patterns. When the GPU is relieved of high-resolution rendering duties, the CPU is able to deliver frame rates that approach the higher end of what is possible with this combination.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B570 is a discrete graphics card built on the Xe2-HPG architecture, using the BMG-G21 chip on a 5 nm process. It features 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 380.0 GB/s. The GPU's base and boost clocks are both 2500 MHz, with memory running at 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective). The card has 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 80 raster operation units, along with 18 ray tracing cores. Its FP32 performance is rated at 11.52 TFLOPS, and it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU is responsible for rendering the vast and detailed environments, including terrain, water, clouds, and aircraft models. The game is known for its heavy GPU load, especially at higher resolutions and settings. The Arc B570's 10 GB VRAM is a relevant factor; the game's high-resolution textures and complex geometry can consume significant memory. However, the data does not indicate that VRAM capacity is the primary constraint, as the card's overall rendering throughput appears to be the limiting factor.

The GPU's synthetic benchmark scores provide context for its performance. In 3DMark Steel Nomad, it scores 2649, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 96844. Its Passmark G3D score is 14195, placing it at the 65th percentile among all GPUs. The nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, which is 0.1% faster, and the Intel Arc A750, which is 0.1% slower. This indicates that the Arc B570 is a mid-range GPU that performs similarly to a mobile RTX 3070, but it is not a high-end desktop part.

The measured FPS in Microsoft Flight Simulator confirms the GPU's role as the bottleneck. At 4K Ultra settings, the combo achieves only 28 FPS, which is below the threshold for a smooth experience. At 1080p Low, it achieves 86 FPS, showing that the GPU can handle lighter loads but struggles with the game's highest settings. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at High settings shows a drop from 50 FPS to 30 FPS, a 40% reduction that is almost entirely due to the GPU's rendering limits. The CPU's performance remains consistent, so the frame rate changes are directly attributable to the GPU's workload.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed picture of the combo's performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the combo achieves 86 FPS on Low settings, 67 FPS on Medium, 50 FPS on High, and 48 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset has a recorded minimum of 57 FPS and maximum of 77 FPS, which indicates a playable range with some variance. The Low and Ultra presets do not have recorded minimum or maximum values, but the averages suggest a wide performance spread.

At 2560x1440, the FPS drops to 69 FPS on Low, 54 FPS on Medium, 41 FPS on High, and 39 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset again has the only recorded min/max values, with a minimum of 46 FPS and a maximum of 62 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at each setting is consistent: Low falls by 17 FPS, Medium by 13 FPS, High by 9 FPS, and Ultra by 9 FPS. This pattern indicates that the GPU is becoming the limiting factor at this resolution, especially at lower settings where the CPU had more influence at 1080p.

At 3840x2160, the FPS drops further to 51 FPS on Low, 40 FPS on Medium, 30 FPS on High, and 28 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset has a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS, which is a narrow range. The 4K results show that the combo is not suitable for high-refresh-rate gaming at this resolution, as even Low settings only achieve 51 FPS. The Ultra preset at 28 FPS is below the threshold for a comfortable experience, and the High preset at 30 FPS is only marginally better.

The data reveals that the combo's best performance is at 1080p with Low settings, where it achieves 86 FPS. This is the only configuration that exceeds the 60 FPS threshold, and it does so by a significant margin. At 1440p, the Low preset at 69 FPS is still above 60 FPS, but the Medium preset at 54 FPS falls below. At 4K, no preset achieves 60 FPS, and only the Low preset at 51 FPS comes close. The overall picture is that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming, with acceptable performance at 1440p on lower settings.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K provides insight into which component is the limiting factor at each resolution. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 86 FPS. When the resolution is increased to 1440p Low, the FPS drops to 69, a reduction of 19.8%. At 4K Low, the FPS drops to 51, a further reduction of 26.1% from 1440p. The total drop from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is 40.7%. This is a substantial reduction, but it is not as severe as the drop at higher settings.

At High settings, the scaling is more pronounced. The FPS at 1080p is 50, which drops to 41 at 1440p (an 18% reduction) and then to 30 at 4K (a 26.8% reduction from 1440p). The total drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings is 40%. This is similar to the Low setting scaling, suggesting that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at both settings. The difference is that the absolute FPS values are lower at High settings, making the 4K result of 30 FPS less playable.

The scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor at all resolutions. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to remain relatively constant as resolution increases, because the CPU workload is largely resolution-independent. Instead, the FPS drops consistently with each resolution increase, which is a classic sign of GPU limitation. The CPU's role is to maintain the simulation's frame pacing, but it is not the component that determines the maximum FPS.

The data also shows that the scaling is roughly linear, with each resolution step (1080p to 1440p to 4K) resulting in a similar percentage drop. This is consistent with a GPU that is saturated at all resolutions, with the render workload scaling proportionally with the number of pixels. The Arc B570's 380.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 11.52 TFLOPS of FP32 performance are not sufficient to maintain high frame rates at 4K, but they are adequate for 1080p. The bottleneck is the GPU's raw rendering throughput, not its memory capacity or bandwidth.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the best resolution, with the combo achieving 86 FPS at Low settings and 48 FPS at Ultra. At 2560x1440, the maximum FPS is 69 at Low settings, and at 3840x2160, the maximum is 51 at Low settings. The 1080p resolution provides the only configuration that exceeds 60 FPS.

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

A: The GPU is the bottleneck. The FPS scales consistently with resolution, dropping from 86 FPS at 1080p Low to 51 FPS at 4K Low. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain relatively constant across resolutions. The CPU's performance, as indicated by its 81st percentile rank, is sufficient to feed the GPU.

Q: How does this combo compare to the CPU's nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 7 5800XT is within 0.3% of the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS and Ryzen 7 7840HS, and 0.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X in average benchmark score. This indicates that the CPU's performance is competitive with these modern processors, and the combo's rank is not due to a CPU deficiency.

Q: What FPS can I expect at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the combo achieves an average of 54 FPS, with a minimum of 46 FPS and a maximum of 62 FPS. This is a playable range, though it may not be consistently smooth in all scenes.

Q: Is the Arc B570's 10 GB VRAM sufficient for this game?

A: The data does not indicate that VRAM capacity is a limiting factor. The FPS drops are consistent with the GPU's rendering throughput, not memory capacity. The 10 GB VRAM is sufficient for the tested settings, as the game runs at all presets without indication of memory-related stutters.

Q: What is the highest FPS this combo achieves in any tested configuration?

A: The highest FPS is 86, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that exceeds the 60 FPS threshold, and it does so by a substantial margin. The next highest is 69 FPS at 2560x1440 Low.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the user's resolution and performance preferences. At 1920x1080, the Low preset provides the best experience with an average of 86 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The Medium preset at 67 FPS is also a strong choice, offering a more detailed visual experience while still maintaining a comfortable frame rate. The High preset at 50 FPS and Ultra at 48 FPS are playable but may not be ideal for users who prefer a consistent 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset at 69 FPS is the only configuration that exceeds 60 FPS. The Medium preset at 54 FPS is a reasonable compromise, providing better visuals while staying close to the playable threshold. The High preset at 41 FPS and Ultra at 39 FPS are less suitable, as they may result in noticeable frame drops in demanding scenes. Users at 1440p should prioritize Low or Medium settings for a balanced experience.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset at 51 FPS is the only configuration that approaches playable frame rates. The Medium preset at 40 FPS is marginal, and the High and Ultra presets at 30 FPS and 28 FPS are not recommended for a smooth experience. Users with a 4K display should consider lowering the resolution or accepting Low settings to maintain playability.

The data suggests that the Medium preset offers the best overall balance in terms of visual quality and performance, particularly at 1080p and 1440p. It provides a significant improvement over Low settings while maintaining frame rates that are within 15-20% of the Low preset. The Medium preset at 1080p (67 FPS) and 1440p (54 FPS) are both playable, and the minimum FPS values of 57 and 46, respectively, indicate that the frame pacing is consistent. For users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, the High preset at 1080p (50 FPS) is a viable option, but the Ultra preset provides minimal improvement over High while costing 4 FPS at 1080p.