Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is one of the most demanding titles in the PC gaming landscape, and the combination of an AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D with an Intel Arc B370 produces results that are heavily skewed by the GPU’s limitations. The data indicates that this pairing, while featuring a top-tier processor, struggles to deliver playable frame rates at higher resolutions and settings. The measured FPS across all tested configurations shows a clear pattern: the Intel Arc B370 becomes the primary bottleneck, capping performance well below what the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is capable of supporting. This analysis breaks down the measured results, contextualizes the CPU and GPU roles, and offers practical settings guidance based strictly on the provided data.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo achieves in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 50, which occurs at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that reaches the 50 FPS mark, while all other tested settings and resolutions produce averages of 41 FPS or lower.

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

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

Q: What is the CPU’s percentile ranking among all CPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D is placed in the 83rd percentile when compared to all CPUs. This indicates it outperforms the majority of processors in the database, with an average benchmark score of 33079.

Q: At which resolution and settings does the combo achieve 30 FPS or higher?

A: Achieving 30 FPS or higher is possible in several configurations. At 1920x1080, Low (50 FPS), Medium (39 FPS), and High (30 FPS) all meet or exceed this threshold. At 2560x1440, Low (41 FPS) and Medium (32 FPS) qualify. At 3840x2160, only Low (30 FPS) reaches exactly 30 FPS.

Q: What are the minimum FPS figures for the Medium settings at each resolution?

A: For Medium settings, the minimum FPS values are as follows: 33 at 1920x1080, 27 at 2560x1440, and 20 at 3840x2160. The corresponding maximum FPS for these settings are 45, 36, and 27, respectively.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested combos in this game?

A: The combo ranks 2770 out of 2996 total tested combinations for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the bottom portion of the ranking, near the 8th percentile, reflecting its overall performance limitations in this specific title.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear hierarchy for settings adjustments. The primary goal for any user should be to maintain a playable frame rate, and the data shows that this combo’s headroom is extremely limited. At 1920x1080, the difference between Low and Ultra is a 22 FPS drop, from 50 down to 28. The step from Low to Medium costs 11 FPS, while Medium to High costs another 9 FPS. High to Ultra costs only 2 FPS more but brings the average down to 28, which is below the 30 FPS threshold that many consider the minimum for acceptable playability. Therefore, at 1080p, the Medium preset offers the best balance, delivering a 39 FPS average with a minimum of 33 and a maximum of 45. This ensures the frame rate stays consistently above 30. While Low provides a higher average, the visual quality loss is substantial, and Medium’s minimum of 33 FPS shows it can hold a playable level even in demanding scenes.

Moving to 2560x1440, the situation becomes more constrained. The Low preset yields a 41 FPS average, which is the only setting at this resolution to exceed 40 FPS. Medium drops to 32 FPS, with a minimum of 27, which will result in noticeable hitches during heavy load. High and Ultra fall to 24 and 23 FPS, respectively, making them difficult to recommend for any sustained play. For a smoother experience at 1440p, Low is the only setting that provides a comfortable margin above 30 FPS. However, if visual fidelity is prioritized over frame rate consistency, Medium’s 32 FPS average is the highest quality option that stays near the playable threshold, though users should expect occasional dips below 30.

At 3840x2160, the data shows that this combo is not suited for 4K gaming. The Low preset produces a 30 FPS average, which is exactly on the line of playability but offers no headroom. Medium averages 23 FPS with a minimum of 20, while High and Ultra average 18 and 17 FPS, respectively. These results are too low for a smooth experience and would result in a slideshow-like presentation during flight. For 4K, the only viable option is Low, and even then, the 30 FPS average suggests that users should expect occasional frame drops. The best experience across all resolutions, based on the data, is achieved at 1920x1080 with the Medium preset, as it provides the highest average FPS that still maintains a minimum above 30.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D is a high-end processor, and its specifications reflect a strong foundation for gaming. It features 8 cores and 16 threads, running on the Zen 4 architecture with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The CPU has a substantial 96 MB of shared L3 cache, which is a key feature for gaming performance. Its benchmark scores are robust, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 16817 and a single-core score of 1713. In Geekbench, it scores 15610 multicore and 2426 single-core. The 3DMark scores show scaling from 1887 with 2 threads to 7967 with max threads, indicating good multi-threading capability. The CPU is in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 33079.

Its nearest rivals, by average benchmark score, include the AMD Ryzen 7 8700G and Intel Core i7-13650HX, both with an average score of 33089, which is a 0% delta. The AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX also scores 33091, again a 0% delta, while the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H scores 33201, which is a -0.4% difference. This means the 7800X3D is effectively performance-equivalent to these CPUs in general benchmarks. For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU’s role is to handle the complex flight model, AI traffic, and world physics calculations. The 8-core, 16-thread configuration is more than sufficient for this task, and the high single-thread performance, evidenced by the 959 3DMark single-thread score, helps with the game’s primary simulation thread.

However, the measured FPS data reveals that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this combo. The frame rates are consistently low across all settings, and the pattern of declining FPS with higher resolutions and settings points directly to the GPU. For instance, at 1920x1080, the Ultra preset still only achieves 28 FPS, which is far below what a CPU like the 7800X3D should be able to feed to a capable GPU. The CPU’s high L3 cache and fast clocks are underutilized because the GPU cannot render frames quickly enough. In this pairing, the CPU is effectively waiting on the GPU for most of the time. The data suggests that the Ryzen 7 7800X3D provides ample headroom, and its performance is not the reason for the low FPS. The processor’s capabilities are largely wasted with the Intel Arc B370, as the GPU becomes the sole bottleneck at every resolution and settings level tested.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s ranking in Microsoft Flight Simulator is a direct reflection of its overall performance. It is ranked 2770 out of 2996 total tested combinations, which places it in the bottom 8% of all systems tested. This is a low ranking, indicating that the majority of other CPU-GPU pairings deliver better frame rates in this specific game. The rank is more indicative of the GPU’s weakness than the CPU’s strength. A system with a weaker CPU but a stronger GPU would likely rank much higher, as the game’s performance is more dependent on the graphics card. The combo’s position suggests that it is not well-suited for Microsoft Flight Simulator, particularly if the user expects high or ultra settings at common resolutions.

The fact that this combo ranks this low is significant because the CPU is in the top 17% of all processors. The disparity between the CPU’s high percentile (83rd) and the combo’s low rank (8th percentile) highlights the severe bottleneck created by the Intel Arc B370. The GPU’s percentile is 5th, meaning it is in the bottom 5% of all GPUs, which aligns with its low benchmark scores. The combination of a top-tier CPU with a bottom-tier GPU results in a system that performs poorly overall in this game. This ranking serves as a warning that the choice of GPU is far more critical for this title. The data shows that the 7800X3D’s potential is not realized in this configuration. Users would need to upgrade the GPU to see any meaningful improvement in frame rates, as the CPU is more than capable of supporting a much faster graphics card.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution, and its performance characteristics are clearly reflected in the measured data. It has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, with a TDP of just 25 W. It features 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, along with 10 ray tracing cores. Its memory is system shared, meaning it relies on the main system RAM, with bandwidth being system dependent. The GPU’s benchmark data is limited, but its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1184. This places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, with its nearest rivals being older cards like the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, -0.2%) and the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, -0.5%). The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, which is 1.4% lower, showing the B370 is in the same performance class as these legacy parts.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU’s role is to render the vast, detailed scenery, including terrain, clouds, and aircraft models. The data shows that the Arc B370 is not capable of handling this workload at acceptable frame rates. The most telling result is the 3840x2160 Ultra setting, which produces an average of 17 FPS. Even at 1920x1080, the highest average is 50 FPS, but only on Low settings. The GPU’s lack of dedicated VRAM and low compute power (6.144 TFLOPS FP32) are the primary reasons for these results. The texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s are too low to keep up with the demands of a flight simulator that renders large, continuous environments.

The scaling of FPS with settings and resolution is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck. When going from Low to Ultra at 1080p, the FPS drops from 50 to 28, a 44% reduction. At 1440p, the drop is from 41 to 23, and at 4K, from 30 to 17. This consistent degradation shows that the GPU is unable to handle the increased shader complexity and pixel count. The minimum FPS values, where available, also confirm this. At Medium settings, the minimum FPS drops from 33 at 1080p to 20 at 4K, indicating that the GPU struggles even in less demanding scenes. The Intel Arc B370 is fundamentally mismatched for this game. It lacks the raw power and memory bandwidth to provide a smooth experience at any resolution above 1080p with low-to-medium settings. Users would need a discrete GPU with significantly more performance to play this title properly.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive picture of this combo’s performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the results show a clear progression. With Low settings, the average FPS is 50. Moving to Medium, the average drops to 39, with a minimum of 33 and a maximum of 45. High settings yield an average of 30 FPS. The Ultra preset produces an average of 28 FPS. This shows that at 1080p, the combo can achieve playable frame rates only on Low or Medium settings, with Medium being the highest quality option that maintains a minimum FPS above 30.

At 2560x1440, the performance declines further. Low settings produce an average of 41 FPS. Medium settings drop to an average of 32 FPS, with a minimum of 27 and a maximum of 36. High settings average 24 FPS, and Ultra averages 23 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 9 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is 8 FPS. This indicates that the GPU’s performance degrades significantly as the resolution increases, and only the Low preset provides a comfortable margin above 30 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the combo is largely unplayable. Low settings average 30 FPS. Medium settings average 23 FPS, with a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 27. High settings average 18 FPS, and Ultra averages 17 FPS. The data shows a near-linear drop in performance from Low to Ultra, with the difference between Low and Ultra being 13 FPS. The minimum FPS of 20 at Medium settings highlights the instability, suggesting frequent drops below the average. Across all resolutions, the trend is consistent: the Intel Arc B370 cannot sustain high frame rates. The best-case scenario is 50 FPS at 1080p Low, which is playable but visually basic. For a more balanced experience, 1080p Medium provides 39 FPS average with a solid minimum, making it the recommended configuration based on the measured data. Any attempt to use higher resolutions or settings results in frame rates that are too low for a smooth simulation experience.