Microsoft Flight Simulator

FAQ

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

A: The highest measured average FPS is 50, which occurs at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next best is 41 at 2560x1440 Low, followed by 39 at 1920x1080 Medium.

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic CPU benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 7 9850X3D has an average benchmark score of 58386. It is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M (58323), 0.5% ahead of the Intel Core i9-14900 (58115), 0.2% behind the Intel Xeon w5-2545 (58504), and 0.7% behind the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 (58826).

Q: What is the GPU's synthetic benchmark percentile ranking?

A: The Intel Arc B370 sits in the 5th percentile among all GPUs, with an average 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184. Its closest rival, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, scores 1186, which is 0.2% higher.

Q: Does the measured FPS data include minimum and maximum values for all settings?

A: No. Minimum and maximum FPS are only provided for Medium settings at each resolution. For example, at 1920x1080 Medium, the range is 33 to 45 FPS, while Low, High, and Ultra rows only list average FPS.

Q: How much does the frame rate improve when dropping from Ultra to Low at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the average FPS rises from 17 at Ultra to 30 at Low. This represents a substantial gain of 13 FPS, demonstrating that the graphics settings have a large impact on performance at this resolution.

Q: What is the combo's overall ranking in this game among all tested combinations?

A: The Microsoft Flight Simulator combo with this CPU and GPU ranks 2770 out of 2996 tested combinations. This places it in the lower portion of the tested pool, indicating that it is outperformed by the vast majority of other hardware pairings.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process. Its role in Microsoft Flight Simulator is defined by its modest compute resources: 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operation pipelines. The GPU operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, delivering a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput is 6.144 TFLOPS, and the FP16 throughput is 12.29 TFLOPS, with the 2:1 ratio indicating that the hardware is not fully optimized for double-rate FP16 workloads.

Memory is entirely system-shared, meaning the GPU has no dedicated VRAM. The memory type, bus width, and bandwidth are all classified as "System Shared" or "System Dependent," which directly impacts performance in a flight simulator that streams vast amounts of terrain and scenery data. The lack of dedicated video memory forces the GPU to rely on the CPU's DDR5 memory subsystem, which has a measured bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. In a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, where textures and geometry are constantly loaded as the aircraft moves, this shared memory arrangement can become a bottleneck. The GPU's low percentile ranking (5th) and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184, which is nearly identical to legacy cards like the ATI Radeon HD 5770, confirm that this is not a high-performance part.

The data shows that the GPU's clock speeds are not the limiting factor at lower resolutions; instead, the system-shared memory and limited ROP count are likely responsible for the frame rate caps seen across the measured settings. The 20 ROPs severely restrict fill-rate-bound scenarios, which are common in flight simulators due to dense horizon geometry and cockpit overlays. The 10 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support are present, but the raw throughput is so low that these features would only exacerbate the performance deficit if enabled. In summary, the Arc B370 provides just enough graphical capability to run Microsoft Flight Simulator at playable frame rates only at the lowest settings, and its shared memory architecture is the primary weakness.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average FPS is 50. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops the average to 41, a reduction of 9 FPS (18%). At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls further to 30, which is 20 FPS below the 1080p result. This scaling behavior indicates that the GPU is becoming increasingly saturated as pixel count rises, which is expected given its low fill-rate capabilities.

For Medium settings, the resolution scaling is similarly steep but with a narrower relative gap. At 1080p Medium, the average is 39 FPS (min 33, max 45). At 1440p Medium, it drops to 32 FPS (min 27, max 36), a 7 FPS decrease. At 4K Medium, the average is 23 FPS (min 20, max 27), which is 9 FPS lower than the 1440p result and 16 FPS below the 1080p figure. The minimum FPS at 4K Medium (20) is dangerously close to the threshold where simulation games become stuttery and unresponsive.

High settings show an even more pronounced drop. At 1080p High, the average is 30 FPS. At 1440p High, it falls to 24 FPS, and at 4K High, it bottoms out at 18 FPS. The difference between 1080p and 4K at High settings is 12 FPS, which is a 40% reduction. Ultra settings follow the same trajectory: 28 FPS at 1080p, 23 FPS at 1440p, and 17 FPS at 4K.

The scaling pattern from 1080p to 1440p is less severe than from 1440p to 4K, which suggests that the CPU is still contributing to performance at lower resolutions. At 1080p, the Ryzen 7 9850X3D's strong single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2228) can help feed the GPU, but as resolution increases, the GPU's pixel processing limits become the dominant factor. The data indicates that the limiting component shifts from the CPU at 1080p to the GPU at 4K, with the crossover occurring somewhere around 1440p. The fact that the FPS drops at 4K are nearly linear with pixel count (1080p has 2.07 million pixels, 1440p has 3.69 million, 4K has 8.29 million) confirms that the Arc B370 is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the best experience for this combo is achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which delivers an average of 50 FPS. This is the only configuration that approaches a smooth 60 FPS target, and even then, it falls short. The Low preset at 1080p is the only setting where the average frame rate is above 40, making it the most viable option for any semblance of fluid gameplay.

If the user prefers higher visual fidelity, 1080p Medium is the next best choice, with an average of 39 FPS and a minimum of 33 FPS. This ensures that the frame rate stays above 30, which is the minimum threshold for playable simulation. The 1080p High preset drops the average to 30 FPS, which is borderline, and Ultra at 1080p averages only 28 FPS. At 1440p, Low settings produce 41 FPS, which is acceptable, but Medium at 1440p drops to 32 FPS with a minimum of 27. The 1440p High and Ultra presets are not recommended, as they average below 25 FPS.

At 4K, none of the settings are playable by typical standards. The best 4K result is Low at 30 FPS, followed by Medium at 23 FPS, High at 18 FPS, and Ultra at 17 FPS. The minimum FPS for 4K Medium is 20, which indicates that even the "playable" Low setting at 4K is likely to suffer from stutter during complex scenes such as city flyovers or weather changes. The data strongly suggests that this combo should be used at 1080p only, with Low or Medium settings, to maintain a consistent frame rate above 30 FPS. Pushing beyond Medium at 1080p or attempting higher resolutions will result in a degraded experience with frequent frame drops.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D and the Intel Arc B370 ranks 2770 out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places it in the 92.5th percentile from the bottom, meaning only 226 combos perform worse. This ranking is remarkably low for a CPU that sits in the 92nd percentile of all processors, which highlights the severe imbalance between the CPU and GPU in this pairing.

The Ryzen 7 9850X3D is a top-tier processor with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22807 and a single-core score of 2228. It outperforms the Intel Core i9-14900 by 0.5% in average benchmark score, yet the overall combo rank is dragged down by the Arc B370's 5th percentile GPU ranking. The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 is on par with a decade-old ATI Radeon HD 5770, which is simply not enough for a demanding title like Microsoft Flight Simulator. The data shows that in games, the GPU is the dominant factor when it is this weak, regardless of how powerful the CPU is. The combo rank of 2770 suggests that users would be better served by pairing this CPU with a more capable discrete GPU, as the current configuration leaves the CPU's potential entirely untapped in this game.

The nearest CPU rivals (Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M, Intel Xeon w5-2545, Intel Core i9-14900, AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470) all have similar average scores within 0.7%, but none of them would rescue this combo from its low ranking because the GPU is the bottleneck. The ranking data underscores that this is a mismatched pairing for Microsoft Flight Simulator, and the measured FPS results confirm that the GPU is the limiting factor across all settings and resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: average 50 FPS
• Medium: average 39 FPS (min 33, max 45)
• High: average 30 FPS
• Ultra: average 28 FPS

At 1080p, the spread from Low to Ultra is 22 FPS, with the largest single drop occurring between Low and Medium (11 FPS). The drop from Medium to High is 9 FPS, while High to Ultra is only 2 FPS, indicating diminishing returns at the higher presets.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: average 41 FPS
• Medium: average 32 FPS (min 27, max 36)
• High: average 24 FPS
• Ultra: average 23 FPS

The 1440p results show a 9 FPS drop from Low to Medium, an 8 FPS drop from Medium to High, and only a 1 FPS drop from High to Ultra. The minimum FPS at 1440p Medium is 27, which is below the 30 FPS playability threshold.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: average 30 FPS
• Medium: average 23 FPS (min 20, max 27)
• High: average 18 FPS
• Ultra: average 17 FPS

At 4K, the frame rates are uniformly low. The difference between Low and Medium is 7 FPS, Medium to High is 5 FPS, and High to Ultra is 1 FPS. The maximum FPS at 4K Medium is 27, which is lower than the minimum FPS at 1080p Medium (33), illustrating the severe resolution penalty.

Across all resolutions, the Ultra preset offers only marginal improvements over High in terms of visual quality, but the FPS cost is minimal (1-2 FPS). However, the gap between Low and Medium is consistently the largest, suggesting that the Medium preset includes significant graphical upgrades that heavily tax the GPU's limited resources.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D is a desktop processor from the 9000 series, released on 2026-01-28 with a launch MSRP of $499. It features 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge), manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The base clock is 4.70 GHz, and the boost clock is 5.60 GHz, with a TDP of 120 W. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a substantial 96 MB of shared L3 cache, which is the defining feature of the X3D series for gaming performance. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s and includes 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes.

In synthetic benchmarks, the Ryzen 7 9850X3D excels. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22807 and single-core score of 2228 are strong, and its PassMark single-thread score of 4704 confirms excellent per-core performance. The CPU's percentile ranking of 92 among all processors indicates it is in the top 8% of CPUs, and its average benchmark score of 58386 places it within 0.7% of its nearest rivals, all of which are high-end server or desktop parts.

However, in Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is undercut by the GPU's limitations. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (50 FPS) is not high enough to exercise the CPU's full potential, as the Ryzen 7 9850X3D is capable of far higher frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios. The data shows that the FPS increases from 4K Low (30) to 1080p Low (50) by 20 FPS, which is a significant improvement but still far below what the CPU could deliver with a stronger GPU. The CPU's 16 threads and 96 MB of L3 cache are well-suited for flight simulation's complex physics and AI calculations, but the Arc B370's 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput simply cannot render frames fast enough to keep up. The bottleneck is evident in the fact that at 1080p, the FPS difference between Low and Ultra is only 22 FPS, indicating that the GPU is saturated even at the lowest settings. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see larger FPS gains from lowering resolution, which is not the case here. The Ryzen 7 9850X3D is left waiting for the GPU, making it a wasted resource in this specific configuration.