Microsoft Flight Simulator

The pairing of the Intel Core i5-10400F with the Intel Arc B390 in Microsoft Flight Simulator produces a specific, data-defined performance profile. The benchmark results place this combination at rank 2665 out of 2996 tested combos, placing it in the lower percentile of systems. This analysis examines the measured FPS across resolutions and settings, the distinct roles of the CPU and GPU, and what the data implies about the system's limitations in this demanding flight simulator.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall rank of this CPU and GPU combination in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The combo ranks 2665 out of 2996 tested combinations. This places it in the lower tier of systems, indicating that while it is capable of running the game, its performance is below the majority of other tested hardware pairings.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-10400F compare to its closest rivals in terms of average benchmark score?

A: The i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14185. Its closest rival, the Intel Xeon 6756E, scores 14163, which is a negligible 0.2% difference. The AMD EPYC 7552 is 0.5% slower, while the Intel Core 7 160UL and AMD Ryzen 3 7320C are 0.3% and 0.6% faster, respectively. The performance is effectively a statistical tie with all its nearest competitors.

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo, and at which settings?

A: The highest average FPS is 56, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only configuration in the measured data that breaks the 60 FPS barrier, and it is substantially higher than the 43 FPS average seen at Medium settings on the same resolution.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded, and under what conditions?

A: The lowest average FPS is 19, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution under both High and Ultra settings. This indicates that at 4K, the system is heavily constrained and cannot maintain a playable frame rate even when lowering settings from Ultra to High.

Q: What is the performance difference between 1080p and 4K at Medium settings?

A: At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 43 at 1920x1080 to 35 at 2560x1440, and finally to 26 at 3840x2160. This represents a significant 39.5% decrease in performance when moving from 1080p to 4K, showing how resolution heavily impacts the system.

Q: How does the GPU's benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1482 from the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. It is 1.3% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, 1.5% faster than the GeForce 800M, and 2.5-2.7% faster than the GeForce GT 625 OEM and GT 710. The performance difference is minimal, suggesting these are all in a similar performance class.

How This Combo Ranks

The comboRankInGame data is unambiguous: this system sits at position 2665 out of 2996 tested combinations. That places it in the bottom 11% of all systems tested for Microsoft Flight Simulator. This is not a marginal placement; it is a clear indicator that the combination of the i5-10400F and Arc B390 is at the lower end of the performance spectrum for this specific title.

The rank reflects the measured FPS data. With a maximum average of 56 FPS at the lowest settings and resolution, and dipping to 19 FPS at 4K Ultra, the system simply cannot deliver the high frame rates that many other tested combos achieve. The data suggests that this pairing is best suited for lower resolutions and settings compromises. It is important to contextualize this rank with the CPU and GPU's individual percentiles. The CPU is in the 68th percentile of all CPUs, meaning it outperforms a majority of processors. However, the GPU is only in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, meaning it is outperformed by 91% of graphics cards. The GPU is the primary anchor dragging the combo rank down.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Comet Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. Its 12 MB of shared L3 cache is a significant resource for gaming. The CPU's benchmark scores show a solid multi-threaded capability, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10283 and a single-core score of 1451. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 4748 is nearly identical to the max-thread score of 4735, indicating that the 12 threads are fully utilized without significant scaling losses.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, which is known for its heavy reliance on single-core performance for flight dynamics and physics, the i5-10400F's single-thread score is adequate but not exceptional. The data shows that at lower resolutions, where the GPU is less of a bottleneck, the CPU is still able to push the frame rate to 56 FPS on Low settings at 1080p. When moving to 4K, the CPU's role diminishes as the GPU becomes the limiting factor. The CPU's performance is consistent with its percentile rank of 68, meaning it is a capable mid-range processor, but it is not a top-tier part that would be expected to drive high frame rates in a demanding simulation when paired with a weak GPU.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system's capabilities across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system delivers an average of 56 FPS on Low, 43 FPS on Medium, 33 FPS on High, and 31 FPS on Ultra. The Medium setting at this resolution shows a min FPS of 37 and a max of 50, indicating a relatively stable frame time variance.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages drop to 45 FPS on Low, 35 FPS on Medium, 26 FPS on High, and 25 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset at 1440p shows a min of 30 and max of 40, maintaining a similar frame pacing pattern to 1080p. The step-up in resolution costs roughly 11 FPS on Low settings and 8 FPS on Medium settings.

At 3840x2160, the performance falls off a cliff. The averages are 33 FPS on Low, 26 FPS on Medium, 19 FPS on High, and 19 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset shows a min of 22 and max of 30. The difference between High and Ultra at 4K is non-existent in terms of average FPS, both hitting 19. The data reveals that the system cannot maintain playable frame rates at 4K, regardless of the settings chosen.

The data also shows diminishing returns when moving between settings. At 1080p, the jump from Low to Medium costs 13 FPS, but the jump from High to Ultra only costs 2 FPS. This pattern repeats at 1440p, where the High to Ultra transition costs only 1 FPS. This suggests that the Ultra preset offers minimal visual benefit for the performance cost in this particular configuration.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the clear performance bottleneck in this pairing. Its benchmark score of 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rivals, which include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX and GT 710, are all within a 2.7% performance margin, confirming that the Arc B390 is in the entry-level performance class. The GPU has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with a boost clock of 2500 MHz. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, but its raw compute power is limited to 7.680 TFLOPS.

The GPU's system-shared memory configuration means its bandwidth is dependent on the system's main memory, which for the i5-10400F is DDR4 with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. This is a significant limitation for a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator, which streams vast amounts of terrain and scenery data. The data shows that even at 1080p Low settings, the system only achieves 56 FPS, suggesting the GPU is already working near its limit. The performance drop from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is from 56 to 33 FPS, a 41% decrease, which is a direct consequence of the GPU's inability to handle the increased pixel count.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal experience is achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings, which delivers an average of 56 FPS. This is the only configuration that approaches the 60 FPS threshold and is the most playable option. The Medium preset at 1080p, with an average of 43 FPS, is a viable alternative for those who prioritize visual fidelity, but it comes with a significant 23% performance penalty.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset at 45 FPS is the only recommended option for smooth gameplay. The Medium preset at 35 FPS is borderline, and the High and Ultra presets at 26 and 25 FPS respectively are likely to feel stuttery in a flight simulator where smooth camera panning is essential. The data clearly shows that the system cannot handle 4K resolution adequately, with all presets averaging 33 FPS or lower. Even the Low preset at 4K, which yields 33 FPS, is not recommended as it is below the threshold for a fluid experience.

The data suggests that users should prioritize resolution and settings to maintain a minimum of 40 FPS. This means either 1080p Medium or 1440p Low. The step from 1080p Low to 1440p Low costs 11 FPS, which is a significant trade-off for the increased resolution. For most users, 1080p Medium provides the best balance of visual quality and performance, as the 43 FPS average is more immersive than the 56 FPS on Low settings, while still being responsive enough for the simulation.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K illustrates a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-limited. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 56 at 1080p to 45 at 1440p and finally to 33 at 4K. This represents a 41% decrease in performance from 1080p to 4K. At Medium settings, the drop is from 43 to 35 to 26, a 39.5% decrease. The scaling pattern is consistent across all settings presets, indicating that the bottleneck is the GPU's rendering throughput.

The data also shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor at higher resolutions. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain relatively flat as resolution increases, because the CPU's workload would be similar. Instead, the FPS drops proportionally with the increase in pixel count, which is the classic sign of a GPU bottleneck. The i5-10400F, with its 68th percentile ranking, has enough headroom to feed the GPU at all resolutions, but the Arc B390 simply cannot process the frames fast enough.

The implication is that upgrading the GPU would yield massive performance gains. Moving from 1080p to 4K at Medium settings costs 17 FPS, but the system's total output at 4K is only 26 FPS. A more powerful GPU would not only increase the 4K performance but also allow for higher settings at 1080p and 1440p. The current setup is severely hamstrung by the GPU, and the CPU's potential is largely unrealized in this configuration. The data points to the GPU as the primary component to upgrade for any meaningful performance improvement in Microsoft Flight Simulator.