Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator with AMD Ryzen 9 5900X + Intel Arc B370

The AMD Ryzen 9 5900X paired with the Intel Arc B370 delivers a deeply constrained experience in Microsoft Flight Simulator, ranking 2770th out of 2996 tested combinations. This places the combo in the bottom 8% of all tested systems, and the measured frame rates confirm a fundamental imbalance: the Intel Arc B370’s integrated-class graphics (5th percentile among all GPUs) become the dominant bottleneck at every resolution and settings level, while the Ryzen 9 5900X’s strong multi-threaded capabilities (87th percentile among all CPUs) go largely underutilized. The data shows that this pairing is only viable for low-settings, 1080p play, and even then the 50 FPS average is the ceiling across all tested configurations.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall ranking of this CPU-GPU combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The combo ranks 2770th out of 2996 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 8% of all tested systems. This is a very low ranking that reflects the GPU’s severe performance limitations in this title.

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

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is nearly identical to the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, -0.2% delta), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, -0.5% delta), and AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, -0.7% delta). It is only 1.4% ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168). These are all legacy or low-end parts, indicating the Arc B370 is not competitive with modern discrete GPUs.

Q: What is the best frame rate this combo can achieve in the game?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 50 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. At the same resolution, Medium settings yield 39 FPS, High settings yield 30 FPS, and Ultra settings yield 28 FPS. No configuration exceeds 50 FPS average.

Q: Is the Ryzen 9 5900X the limiting factor in this game?

A: No. The Ryzen 9 5900X ranks in the 87th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 41376. The GPU, by contrast, ranks in the 5th percentile. The measured FPS scaling across resolutions indicates the GPU is the bottleneck, as performance drops sharply when resolution increases even though the CPU has ample headroom.

Q: What is the CPU’s memory bandwidth and how might it affect the game?

A: The Ryzen 9 5900X supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with a maximum bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The Arc B370 uses System Shared memory, meaning its bandwidth is "System Dependent." This shared-memory architecture can limit GPU performance, especially in a simulation game like Microsoft Flight Simulator that streams large amounts of terrain and asset data.

Q: Does the Arc B370 have its own dedicated VRAM?

A: No. The GPU’s memory size, type, and bus width are all listed as "System Shared," and memory bandwidth is "System Dependent." This means the GPU relies on the system’s DDR4 memory, which is a significant disadvantage compared to discrete GPUs with dedicated high-bandwidth VRAM.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 2770th out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This is a bottom-decile placement, and the data strongly suggests that the GPU is almost entirely responsible for this poor showing. To contextualize this ranking, consider the CPU’s standing: the Ryzen 9 5900X sits in the 87th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 41376. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H (41263, +0.3% delta), Intel Core Ultra 7 356H (41215, +0.4% delta), and AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 (41208, +0.4% delta). The CPU’s performance is essentially on par with these modern mid-to-high-end parts, meaning it is not the source of the combo’s low rank.

On the GPU side, the Intel Arc B370 scores just 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it in the 5th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, -0.2%), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, -0.5%), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, -0.7%), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, +1.4%). These are all graphics processors from the late 2000s and early 2010s, which underscores how far behind modern standards the Arc B370 is. When a CPU in the 87th percentile is paired with a GPU in the 5th percentile, the resulting combo rank of 2770 out of 2996 is entirely predictable. The data indicates that this is a severely GPU-limited configuration, and the ranking reflects that imbalance rather than any deficiency in the Ryzen 9 5900X.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) built on Intel’s 3 nm process with the Xe3-LPG architecture and Panther Lake chip. It operates at a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, with a TDP of just 25 W. The GPU has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operations pipelines, along with 10 ray tracing cores. Its pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s, and it delivers 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 12.29 TFLOPS of FP16 compute (2:1 ratio). The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so it is feature-complete on the API front.

However, the critical limitation is memory. The Arc B370 has no dedicated VRAM; its memory size, type, and bus width are all "System Shared," and its bandwidth is "System Dependent." This means the GPU must compete with the CPU for access to the system’s DDR4 memory, which is a severe handicap in a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator that loads vast amounts of terrain, aircraft models, and scenery data. The measured FPS data reinforces this: at 1920x1080, the average frame rate drops from 50 FPS at Low settings to 39 FPS at Medium, 30 FPS at High, and 28 FPS at Ultra. This steep decline with increasing settings is typical of a GPU that is both compute-limited and bandwidth-starved.

The GPU’s 5th percentile ranking among all GPUs is consistent with its performance class. Its nearest rivals are all legacy parts from over a decade ago, and none of them were ever considered capable of running modern flight simulators at playable frame rates. The Arc B370’s integrated nature, shared memory, and low TDP (25 W) all point to a part designed for basic productivity or light gaming, not for demanding simulation titles. In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU role is thus the primary constraint, and no amount of CPU headroom can compensate for the graphics subsystem’s fundamental limitations.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160) and four settings levels (Low, Medium, High, and Ultra), yielding twelve data points. At 1920x1080, the combo achieves its best results: 50 FPS average at Low settings, 39 FPS average at Medium (with min 33 and max 45), 30 FPS average at High, and 28 FPS average at Ultra. These numbers indicate that even at the lowest resolution and settings, the system cannot maintain a solid 60 FPS, which is generally considered the baseline for smooth gameplay. At Medium settings, the 39 FPS average is borderline playable, but the min FPS of 33 shows that there are noticeable dips. At High and Ultra, the frame rates fall to 30 and 28 respectively, which is below the threshold for a comfortable experience in a game that requires precise control and situational awareness.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance drops further. Low settings yield 41 FPS average, Medium yields 32 FPS (min 27, max 36), High yields 24 FPS, and Ultra yields 23 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 9 FPS, and between Medium and High is 8 FPS, showing that each settings tier takes a meaningful toll. At this resolution, even Low settings cannot reach 45 FPS, and Ultra is below 25 FPS. This is a significant step down from 1080p, and the data shows that 1440p is not a viable resolution for this combo unless the user is willing to accept sub-30 FPS performance.

At 3840x2160, the results are largely unplayable. Low settings yield 30 FPS average, Medium yields 23 FPS (min 20, max 27), High yields 18 FPS, and Ultra yields 17 FPS. The Low setting at 4K barely hits 30 FPS, and every other setting is below 25 FPS. These numbers confirm that 4K is entirely out of reach for this combination, even at the lowest quality preset. The min FPS of 20 at Medium settings highlights the instability, with frame times likely causing noticeable stutter. In summary, the measured FPS breakdown shows a clear hierarchy: 1080p Low is the only configuration that approaches playability, while 1440p and 4K are progressively worse, with 4K being effectively unusable.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling across resolutions reveals a classic GPU-bound pattern. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 50 at 1080p to 41 at 1440p (an 18% drop) and 30 at 4K (a 40% drop from 1080p). At Medium settings, the averages are 39, 32, and 23 for 1080p, 1440p, and 4K respectively, representing drops of 18% and 41% from the 1080p baseline. At High settings, the numbers are 30, 24, and 18, which translates to 20% and 40% drops. At Ultra, the scores are 28, 23, and 17, with drops of 18% and 39%. The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings levels is striking: the FPS decreases by roughly 18-20% from 1080p to 1440p and by roughly 39-41% from 1080p to 4K, regardless of quality preset.

This uniform scaling is a hallmark of a GPU that is fully saturated at all resolutions. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see smaller FPS differences between resolutions, especially at lower settings where the CPU has more work to do relative to the GPU. Instead, the data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor even at 1080p Low, because the 50 FPS average is far below what the Ryzen 9 5900X is capable of driving. The CPU’s single-thread score of 941 in 3DMark and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1527 indicate strong per-core performance, but the GPU cannot translate that into higher frame rates. The resolution scaling also suggests that the Arc B370’s shared memory architecture becomes more problematic at higher resolutions, as the increased pixel count requires more memory bandwidth, which the system shared memory cannot provide. In short, the FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are consistent and predictable, and they point squarely at the GPU as the performance ceiling.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 5900X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer codename) built on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, with a TDP of 105 W. The CPU features 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 64 MB of L3 cache, along with dual-channel DDR4 memory support and a 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth. It supports PCIe Gen 4 and has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. The CPU’s benchmark results are strong: it scores 9075 in 3DMark 16-thread, 10075 in 3DMark max-thread, 16262 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, and 14118 in Geekbench multi-core. Its Passmark multi-thread score is 39002, and its average benchmark score is 41376, placing it in the 87th percentile among all CPUs.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU’s role is to handle game logic, physics, and asset streaming, all of which benefit from high single-thread performance. The Ryzen 9 5900X delivers a 3DMark single-thread score of 941 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1527, which are respectable numbers for a 2020-era processor. Its nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score are the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H (41263, +0.3%), Intel Core Ultra 7 356H (41215, +0.4%), and AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 (41208, +0.4%), as well as the Intel Core i7-14650HX (41576, -0.5%). These comparisons show that the 5900X is still competitive with modern mid-range and high-end mobile processors, despite being released in November 2020.

However, the measured FPS data in this game shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 50 FPS, but this is far below the CPU’s potential. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to remain relatively constant across resolutions, but instead it drops by 40% from 1080p to 4K. This indicates that the GPU is saturated at all settings, and the CPU is essentially waiting on the GPU to finish rendering each frame. The Ryzen 9 5900X’s 12 cores and 24 threads are more than sufficient for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which typically utilizes fewer than 8 threads effectively. The CPU’s high L3 cache (64 MB) and dual-channel memory bandwidth (51.2 GB/s) are also beneficial for loading terrain data, but the GPU’s shared memory architecture negates these advantages by forcing the system to use the same DDR4 memory for graphics. Ultimately, the Ryzen 9 5900X is a capable processor that is entirely wasted in this pairing, as the Intel Arc B370 cannot deliver frame rates that would allow the CPU to show its strengths. The data is clear: this is a GPU-limited configuration, and any attempt to improve performance would require a more powerful graphics card, not a faster processor.