Microsoft Flight Simulator

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D paired with the Intel Arc B370 lands at rank 2770 out of 2996 tested combinations in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This places the combo in the bottom 8% of all tested configurations, a position that reflects the severe imbalance between the two components. The CPU is a top-tier processor, sitting in the 91st percentile against all CPUs, while the GPU sits in the 5th percentile against all GPUs. The pairing produces results that are almost entirely dictated by the graphics card's limitations.

Benchmark results indicate that this combination is not competitive for modern flight simulation at playable frame rates. With 2996 total tested combos, the 2770th rank means that roughly 226 other configurations performed worse, but the overwhelming majority of systems deliver better results. The data shows a consistent pattern: the Arc B370 becomes the bottleneck at every resolution and setting tested, dragging down what would otherwise be a high-performance platform. The CPU's enormous compute headroom is effectively wasted in this configuration, as the GPU cannot translate that processing power into rendered frames.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D brings substantial processing resources to this pairing. It features 12 cores and 24 threads based on the Zen 5 architecture, manufactured on TSMC's 4 nm process. The base clock runs at 4.40 GHz with a boost clock reaching 5.50 GHz, and the processor carries 128 MB of L3 cache alongside 1 MB of L2 cache per core. This is a desktop-class CPU designed for demanding workloads, with a 120 W TDP and support for DDR5 memory across a dual-channel interface.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU demonstrates its strength. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 47737 and single-core score of 6739 indicate exceptional performance across both heavily threaded and lightly threaded workloads. The Geekbench multi-core score of 22884 and single-core score of 3041 reinforce this picture. The 3DMark results show scaling from 1269 in single-thread to 13795 in max-thread tests, confirming that the processor scales well as more threads are utilized.

For Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU's role is to handle flight dynamics, weather simulation, and world streaming logic. The processor's 3DMark 8-thread score of 9002 and 16-thread score of 12490 suggest it can manage these simulation tasks without breaking a sweat. However, the measured FPS data tells a different story about the overall system. At 1080p Low settings, the combo achieves 50 FPS average, which is the highest result across all tested configurations. This indicates that even at the lowest graphical load, the GPU is still the limiting factor, as the CPU could certainly push far beyond 50 FPS in this scenario.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, with system-shared memory that has system-dependent bandwidth. The GPU contains 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output pipelines, along with 10 ray tracing cores. Its compute capabilities include 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 12.29 TFLOPS of FP16 performance.

The GPU's benchmark profile is minimal, with only one recorded test: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184. This places it in the 5th percentile against all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, -0.2% delta), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, -0.5% delta), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, -0.7% delta), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, +1.4% delta). These are all legacy or low-power parts from over a decade ago, which contextualizes the Arc B370's performance class.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU is responsible for rendering the detailed terrain, aircraft models, and atmospheric effects that define the game's visual experience. The measured FPS data shows that the GPU consistently delivers low frame rates across all resolutions. At 4K Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 17, which is barely above a slideshow. Even at 1080p Low, the average FPS of 50 represents the ceiling of what this GPU can achieve in this title. The TDP of 25 W and integrated nature of the GPU indicate it was never designed for demanding 3D workloads like flight simulation.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160) and four settings levels (Low, Medium, High, and Ultra). The results show a clear and consistent pattern of performance degradation as both resolution and settings increase.

At 1920x1080, the combo achieves its best results. Low settings produce an average of 50 FPS, which is the only configuration in the entire dataset to reach or exceed the 50 FPS threshold. Medium settings drop to 39 FPS average, with a minimum of 33 FPS and maximum of 45 FPS. High settings reduce the average to 30 FPS, and Ultra settings bring it down to 28 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 22 FPS, representing a 44% drop in average frame rate.

At 2560x1440, performance degrades further. Low settings yield 41 FPS average, which is 9 FPS lower than the equivalent 1080p result. Medium settings produce 32 FPS average, with a minimum of 27 FPS and maximum of 36 FPS. High settings drop to 24 FPS average, and Ultra settings fall to 23 FPS. The resolution increase from 1080p to 1440p costs approximately 18% of the frame rate at Low settings, and the gap narrows at higher settings where the GPU is already strained.

At 3840x2160, the results become largely unplayable. Low settings achieve 30 FPS average, which is the only 4K configuration to reach 30 FPS. Medium settings drop to 23 FPS average, with a minimum of 20 FPS and maximum of 27 FPS. High settings fall to 18 FPS average, and Ultra settings bottom out at 17 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is only 13 FPS, indicating that the GPU is so saturated that settings changes have diminishing returns.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling behavior reveals important information about the limiting component in this system. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings, the average FPS drops from 50 to 41, a decrease of 9 FPS or 18%. Moving from 1440p to 4K at Low settings, the average FPS drops from 41 to 30, a further decrease of 11 FPS or 27%. The combined drop from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is 20 FPS, representing a 40% reduction.

At High settings, the scaling is different. From 1080p to 1440p, the average FPS drops from 30 to 24, a 20% reduction. From 1440p to 4K, it drops from 24 to 18, a 25% reduction. The total drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings is 12 FPS, representing a 40% reduction as well. This consistency in percentage terms across different settings levels indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at all configurations.

If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see smaller FPS differences between resolutions, as the CPU workload remains relatively constant while the GPU workload scales with pixel count. The data shows significant FPS drops with each resolution increase, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. The Arc B370's system-shared memory and system-dependent bandwidth further compound this issue, as the memory subsystem cannot provide the bandwidth needed for high-resolution textures and frame buffers.

FAQ

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

A: The highest measured average FPS is 50, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the CPU's performance percentile compare to the GPU's performance percentile?

A: The CPU sits in the 91st percentile against all CPUs, while the GPU sits in the 5th percentile against all GPUs, indicating a massive performance disparity between the two components.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The lowest average FPS is 17, recorded at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings.

Q: Which resolution and settings combination provides the most consistent frame rate?

A: The 1920x1080 Medium configuration shows an average of 39 FPS with a minimum of 33 FPS and maximum of 45 FPS, providing a narrow 12 FPS range. The 2560x1440 Medium configuration shows a similar pattern with an average of 32 FPS and a 9 FPS range (27 to 36).

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

A: The combo ranks 2770 out of 2996 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 8% of all systems tested.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1080p, Low settings produce 50 FPS average while Ultra settings produce 28 FPS average, a difference of 22 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution and the user's tolerance for frame rate variability. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers an average of 39 FPS with a minimum of 33 FPS and maximum of 45 FPS. This is the only configuration in the dataset that maintains a minimum FPS above 30, which is generally considered the threshold for acceptable playability in flight simulation. The Low preset achieves 50 FPS average but lacks the visual fidelity that Medium provides, and the jump from Low to Medium costs 11 FPS while delivering a noticeable improvement in visual quality.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset delivers 32 FPS average with a minimum of 27 FPS and maximum of 36 FPS. The minimum FPS dips below 30, which may cause noticeable stuttering during complex scenes. The Low preset at 41 FPS average is smoother but sacrifices visual detail. For users who prioritize frame rate consistency at 1440p, Low is the safer choice, while Medium offers a better visual experience at the cost of occasional frame drops.

At 3840x2160, none of the settings produce playable results. The Low preset achieves 30 FPS average, which is marginal at best, while Medium drops to 23 FPS average and High/Ultra fall to 18 and 17 FPS respectively. The data suggests that 4K gaming is not viable with this combo, and users should either reduce resolution or accept severely compromised performance.

The overall recommendation is to play at 1920x1080 with Medium settings, as this configuration provides the best balance of visual quality and frame rate consistency. The 39 FPS average with a 33 FPS minimum ensures that the experience remains smooth in most scenarios. Users who require higher frame rates can drop to Low settings for 50 FPS average, while those who prioritize visuals over performance can attempt High at 30 FPS average, though the minimum FPS data is not available for this configuration. For 1440p users, Low settings at 41 FPS average is the most playable option, while 4K should be avoided entirely given the sub-30 FPS results across all settings.