Microsoft Flight Simulator

Microsoft Flight Simulator is an exceptionally demanding title, and the combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X with the Intel Arc B390 produces a very specific bottleneck profile. The data shows a system where the CPU is a top-tier performer, but the GPU holds the experience back significantly, particularly at higher resolutions. The measured results indicate that this configuration is best suited for lower resolution and detail settings to achieve playable frame rates.

FAQ

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X a good match for the Intel Arc B390 in this game?

A: The benchmark data indicates a severe imbalance. The Ryzen 9 7900X scores in the 91st percentile among all CPUs, while the Arc B390 is in the 9th percentile among all GPUs. The GPU is the primary limiting factor, preventing the CPU from delivering high frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Q: What is the best performance I can expect from this combo in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 56 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that breaks the 60 FPS barrier (though it does not reach it), and it represents the peak of the system's capability in this title.

Q: How does the Arc B390 compare to its closest rivals in terms of raw benchmark scores?

A: The Arc B390's average benchmark score is 1482. It is 1.3% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, 1.5% faster than the GeForce 800M, 2.5% faster than the GeForce GT 625 OEM, and 2.7% faster than the GeForce GT 710. These are all very low-performing cards, confirming the B390's position in the entry-level segment.

Q: What kind of frame rate can I get at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the data shows an average frame rate of 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS. This is a playable, though not smooth, experience for a flight simulator.

Q: Does the Ryzen 9 7900X have enough processing power for this game?

A: Absolutely. The CPU's benchmark scores are very high, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 29300 and a single-core score of 2016.5. It has 12 cores and 24 threads, which is far more than enough for Microsoft Flight Simulator's physics and AI calculations. The bottleneck is clearly on the graphics side.

Q: Is the Intel Arc B390's performance consistent across different settings?

A: The data shows a clear degradation as settings increase. At 1080p, performance drops from 56 FPS at Low to 43 FPS at Medium, 33 FPS at High, and 31 FPS at Ultra. This consistent drop indicates that the GPU is being progressively overloaded by the increasing graphical demands.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the definitive performance limiter in this configuration. Its specifications paint a picture of an integrated-class part trying to handle a AAA simulation. It operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, a wide range that suggests the silicon is capable but power and thermal constraints may be significant. The memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning the GPU uses the system's main DDR5 memory rather than having its own dedicated VRAM. This is a critical point for a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which streams vast amounts of terrain and scenery data. The bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," which can become a bottleneck as the GPU competes with the CPU for memory access.

In terms of raw compute, the Arc B390 has 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 render output units. It also includes 12 ray tracing cores, though the data suggests their benefit is minimal here. The measured FP32 performance is 7.680 TFLOPS. This is a modest amount of processing power for a game known for its immense graphical load. The GPU's percentile rank of 9 versus all other GPUs underscores its position at the very bottom of the performance spectrum. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482 places it just 2.7% above the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710, an ancient entry-level card. The benchmark results show this stark reality: at 4K Ultra, the system manages only 19 FPS, which is essentially a slideshow for a flight simulator.

The GPU's performance is not just low; it is also inconsistent, which is typical for a part with shared memory. The measured FPS at 1440p Medium shows a range from 30 to 40 FPS, a 10 FPS swing. This variance is likely due to the dynamic memory bandwidth usage, where sudden data requests from the GPU can stall the system. For a smooth flight experience, this is a significant drawback. The GPU is not just slow; it is also potentially stutter-prone, making the already low frame rates feel even less stable. The data strongly suggests that this GPU is designed for light workloads or as a basic display adapter, not for demanding gaming.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling data clearly illustrates the GPU-limited nature of this system. As resolution increases, the number of pixels the GPU must render grows exponentially, and the Arc B390 struggles to keep up. The measured FPS values show a consistent and predictable decline.

At Low settings, the system achieves 56 FPS at 1080p, 45 FPS at 1440p, and 33 FPS at 4K. This is a drop of approximately 20% from 1080p to 1440p, and another 27% from 1440p to 4K. This scaling pattern is typical for a GPU that is already near its maximum capacity at 1080p. The CPU is not the limiting factor here, as it has ample headroom to process the frames the GPU can produce at each resolution.

The trend is even more pronounced at higher settings. At Ultra, the frame rates are 31 FPS at 1080p, 25 FPS at 1440p, and 19 FPS at 4K. The absolute drop is smaller, but the percentage decline is significant. The performance is so low at 1080p Ultra that the GPU is completely saturated, and increasing resolution just further reduces the already poor output. The fact that the 4K High and 4K Ultra results are both 19 FPS suggests the GPU has hit a hard performance floor, likely due to other bottlenecks like memory bandwidth or pixel fill rate.

The data indicates that the limiting component is unequivocally the GPU. The Ryzen 9 7900X, with its high single-thread performance (Geekbench single-core score of 2617), is more than capable of handling the game's logic at any of these resolutions. The FPS is dictated entirely by how many pixels the Arc B390 can push. For a user, this means that lowering the resolution is the single most effective way to gain performance, far more so than adjusting detail settings. The jump from 45 FPS at 1440p Low to 56 FPS at 1080p Low is substantial and demonstrates that the GPU is the bottleneck.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the system's capabilities across different settings and resolutions.

At 1920x1080, the system performs best. With Low settings, it achieves an average of 56 FPS. Moving up to Medium settings yields an average of 43 FPS, with a minimum of 37 FPS and a maximum of 50 FPS, showing some frame-time variance. High settings drop the average to 33 FPS, and Ultra settings bring it down to 31 FPS. This is the only resolution where the system approaches playable performance, and only on the lowest presets.

At 2560x1440, the performance dips noticeably. Low settings produce an average of 45 FPS, which is still quite playable. Medium settings average 35 FPS, with a range of 30 to 40 FPS. High settings average 26 FPS, and Ultra settings average 25 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is a significant 10 FPS drop, while the steps from Medium to High and High to Ultra are smaller, indicating the GPU is becoming more limited by other factors, such as shader complexity, rather than just raw pixel count.

At 3840x2160, the experience is severely compromised. Low settings are the only option that yields an average above 30 FPS, hitting 33 FPS. Medium settings average 26 FPS, with a range of 22 to 30 FPS, which will feel very stuttery. High and Ultra settings both average just 19 FPS, making them unplayable. The data shows a hard limit at 4K, where even the lowest settings cannot provide a smooth experience.

The overall ranking for this combo is 2665 out of 2996 combinations tested, placing it in the bottom 11% of systems for this game. This ranking is a direct reflection of the GPU's weaknesses. The CPU's high performance is effectively wasted, as it is never given enough work to do by the GPU. The numbers consistently show that this is a system for 1080p gaming at best, and likely only on Low or Medium settings.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X is a high-end desktop processor, and its performance in the benchmark data is exceptional. It is a 12-core, 24-thread part based on the Zen 4 architecture, built on a 5 nm process. It has a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. This high clock speed is crucial for Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for its heavy single-threaded workloads, such as flight model calculations and AI traffic.

The CPU's benchmark scores reflect its power. It scores 29300 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 2016.5 in single-core. Its Geekbench scores are 19267 for multicore and 2617 for single-core. These are top-tier results, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals in the benchmark database are the AMD EPYC 7313P (0.2% faster), the Intel Xeon Phi 7290 (0.3% slower), the Intel Xeon 634 (0.6% faster), and the Intel Core i7-14700F (0.6% slower). This shows that the 7900X is in the same performance class as these other high-end server and desktop chips.

In the context of this game, the CPU is not the problem. With 24 threads, it has more than enough computational resources to handle the game's complex simulation logic, which can utilize multiple cores for tasks like weather simulation and terrain loading. The high single-thread performance ensures that the main game loop runs efficiently. However, the data shows that the system's FPS is entirely constrained by the GPU. The CPU is constantly waiting for the GPU to finish rendering a frame, meaning its massive potential is left untapped.

The CPU also supports DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. This is important because the GPU relies on "System Shared" memory. A fast CPU and memory subsystem can help mitigate the GPU's memory bandwidth limitations, but it cannot eliminate them. The benchmark results indicate that even with this fast CPU, the shared memory architecture of the GPU is a fundamental bottleneck at higher resolutions. The CPU is ready to deliver high frame rates, but the GPU is unable to deliver them.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the recommended settings for this system depend heavily on the user's target resolution and tolerance for low frame rates.

For a 60 FPS target, there is no setting combination that achieves this. The absolute maximum is 56 FPS at 1080p Low. This is the only configuration that approaches a smooth experience. If the user can tolerate slightly lower performance, 1080p Medium at 43 FPS is a better experience in terms of visual quality and is still playable. The data shows that Low settings are the only way to get near the target frame rate.

For a 30 FPS target, which is often considered the minimum for a playable flight simulator, there are more options. At 1080p, all settings except Ultra (31 FPS) achieve above 30 FPS, with Low at 56 FPS, Medium at 43 FPS, and High at 33 FPS. At 1440p, only Low settings (45 FPS) comfortably exceed 30 FPS; Medium is borderline at 35 FPS. At 4K, only Low settings (33 FPS) barely meet this target.

Therefore, the practical advice is to prioritize resolution and preset based on the visual fidelity the user wants. The best balance of visual quality and playability is 1080p Medium, offering 43 FPS with better detail than Low. If the user prefers higher resolution, 1440p Low at 45 FPS is the best option. For those who must play at 4K, 4K Low at 33 FPS is the only playable setting.

The data strongly suggests avoiding High and Ultra presets entirely, as they provide a negligible visual benefit relative to the massive performance cost. For example, moving from Medium to High at 1080p drops the frame rate from 43 to 33 FPS, a 23% reduction. The impact of these settings is too severe for the Arc B390 to handle. The best experience per the measured rows is to keep settings at Low or Medium and use the saved performance to increase resolution if desired. This system is fundamentally a 1080p machine for this game, and trying to push it further will result in a subpar experience.