Inside

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 is a mid-range desktop combination aimed at 1080p and 1440p gaming, and for a 2016 puzzle platformer like Inside, the data shows it delivers far more performance than the game demands. This combo ranks 1956 out of 3716 tested combinations for Inside, placing it in the upper half of all systems tested, though the game’s modest requirements mean even lower-ranked hardware would likely handle it well. The measured frame rates across all resolutions and presets exceed the 60 FPS playable threshold, with the weakest result being 75 FPS at 4K Ultra settings, indicating this system is effectively overqualified for the title.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 1956 out of 3716 tested systems places it slightly above the median for Inside performance. This positioning is not a reflection of weakness—rather, it shows that Inside is so lightweight that even mid-tier hardware lands in the middle of the pack because the game’s performance ceiling is reached by a wide range of components. The Ryzen 5 5600 sits at the 74th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 20468, while the RTX 4060 sits at the 61st percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 17639.

When looking at the CPU’s nearest rivals, the Ryzen 5 5600 is statistically tied with the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V, which scores 20454 (a 0.1% delta), the AMD Ryzen 5 8500G at 20425 (0.2% delta), and the AMD EPYC 9454P at 20422 (0.2% delta). The AMD EPYC 7713 is also close at 20363 (0.5% delta). This means that for Inside, swapping the Ryzen 5 5600 for any of these processors would produce nearly identical frame rates, since the game is not heavily CPU-bound at any resolution.

On the GPU side, the RTX 4060’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 7790 (average score 17666, delta of -0.2%), the AMD Radeon 780M (17588, 0.3% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro 560 (17551, 0.5% delta), and the AMD Radeon Pro 460 (17509, 0.7% delta). These deltas are all under 1%, meaning the RTX 4060 and these rival GPUs would deliver virtually indistinguishable performance in Inside. The ranking data suggests that the combo is not exceptional for this specific game—many other systems achieve similar results—but it is comfortably within the range of hardware that provides a smooth experience.

CPU and GPU Roles

For Inside, the GPU dominates performance scaling across resolutions, while the CPU plays a minimal role due to the game’s low computational demands. Examining the measured FPS across resolutions and presets reveals a clear pattern: as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, average frame rates drop significantly at every preset, which is the classic signature of GPU-bound rendering.

At 1920x1080 Low, the combo produces 296.1 FPS, which drops to 241.6 FPS at 2560x1440 Low (a 18.4% reduction) and further to 147.3 FPS at 3840x2160 Low (a 50.3% reduction from 1080p). At Medium settings, the same trend appears: 265.8 FPS at 1080p, 190.6 FPS at 1440p, and 119.9 FPS at 4K. High settings show 167.8 FPS at 1080p, 119.6 FPS at 1440p, and 76.6 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings yield 157.2 FPS at 1080p, 112.3 FPS at 1440p, and 75 FPS at 4K.

The scaling between presets at a fixed resolution also points to GPU-bound behavior. At 4K, moving from Low (147.3 FPS) to Medium (119.9 FPS) reduces performance by 18.6%, and from Medium to High (76.6 FPS) by 36.1%, while High to Ultra (75 FPS) is a negligible 2.1% drop. The large gap between Medium and High at 4K suggests that High preset introduces significant GPU workload (likely more complex shading or post-processing), but Ultra adds little extra cost. At 1080p, the differences are smaller percentage-wise: Low (296.1 FPS) to Medium (265.8 FPS) is a 10.2% drop, Medium to High (167.8 FPS) is a 36.9% drop, and High to Ultra (157.2 FPS) is a 6.3% drop. The pattern repeats at 1440p, confirming that the GPU is the primary bottleneck, especially at higher resolutions and presets.

The CPU’s role is minimal. The Ryzen 5 5600 has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz, and its 3DMark single-thread score of 882 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2584 indicate strong single-thread performance. However, Inside is a 2D side-scrolling puzzle platformer that does not stress multi-core CPUs. The fact that the combo achieves over 147 FPS even at 4K Low suggests that the CPU is never the limiting factor—if it were, we would see frame rates plateau across resolutions, which is not the case. The GPU is doing the heavy lifting, and the CPU is merely keeping up without any signs of bottlenecking.

Best Settings per Resolution

The data shows that this combo can run Inside at Ultra settings with average frame rates well above 60 FPS at every resolution tested, making Ultra the best settings choice for all three resolutions.

At 3840x2160, Ultra settings produce an average of 75 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold by 25%. This is the most demanding setting tested at 4K, and it still maintains a comfortable margin over the playable threshold. High settings at 4K yield 76.6 FPS, which is nearly identical to Ultra, so there is no reason to drop below Ultra for performance gains—the 1.6 FPS difference between High and Ultra is within measurement noise. Medium at 4K gives 119.9 FPS, and Low gives 147.3 FPS, but since Ultra already exceeds 60 FPS, those lower presets are unnecessary.

At 2560x1440, Ultra settings deliver 112.3 FPS average, which is 87% higher than the 60 FPS threshold. This gives substantial headroom for any potential frame drops, though the measured data shows no minimum FPS values to confirm consistency. High at 1440p runs at 119.6 FPS, Medium at 190.6 FPS, and Low at 241.6 FPS, but again, Ultra is the best choice because it maximizes visual quality without sacrificing smoothness.

At 1920x1080, Ultra settings hit 157.2 FPS average, which is more than double the 60 FPS threshold. This is the highest performance level relative to the threshold, and the game will run with extremely smooth frame pacing on any 60Hz or 144Hz display. High at 1080p is 167.8 FPS, Medium is 265.8 FPS, and Low is 296.1 FPS, but the visual quality improvements from Ultra are worth the modest FPS reduction, given that even the lowest Ultra result is far above playable.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Based on the nearestRivals data for both the CPU and GPU, several alternative components would deliver nearly identical performance in Inside. The Ryzen 5 5600’s rivals—Intel Core Ultra 7 258V, AMD Ryzen 5 8500G, AMD EPYC 9454P, and AMD EPYC 7713—all have average benchmark scores within 0.5% of the Ryzen 5 5600. Since the CPU is not a limiting factor in this game, any of these processors would produce the same frame rates as the measured data. The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V is a mobile-class chip, while the AMD EPYC parts are server processors, so in practice a gamer would more likely choose the Ryzen 5 8500G, which is a desktop APU with similar performance.

On the GPU side, the RTX 4060’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 7790, AMD Radeon 780M, AMD Radeon Pro 560, and AMD Radeon Pro 460. All of these have average scores within 0.7% of the RTX 4060. The AMD Radeon HD 7790 is an older discrete GPU (from 2013), while the Radeon 780M is a modern integrated GPU found in AMD’s Ryzen 7000-series APUs. The Radeon Pro 560 and Pro 460 are older mobile workstation GPUs. In the context of Inside, any of these GPUs would deliver frame rates within a few FPS of the RTX 4060, meaning a system with a Ryzen 5 5600 and one of these rival GPUs would be just as playable.

It is importantly the RTX 4060’s nearest rivals are not modern gaming GPUs—the HD 7790 is over a decade old, and the Radeon Pro parts are from 2016. This suggests that for Inside, even older or lower-powered GPUs can match the RTX 4060 because the game’s graphical requirements are so low. The RTX 4060’s 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 272.0 GB/s bandwidth are far more than needed for a 2D platformer, and its 15.11 TFLOPS FP32 performance is overkill for this title.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across resolutions and presets. All measurements are average FPS values, with no minimum or maximum data provided, so the analysis relies on averages alone.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the combo achieves 147.3 FPS on Low settings, 119.9 FPS on Medium, 76.6 FPS on High, and 75 FPS on Ultra. The drop from Low to Medium is 27.4 FPS (18.6%), from Medium to High is 43.3 FPS (36.1%), and from High to Ultra is only 1.6 FPS (2.1%). This indicates that the High preset is the most demanding step, while Ultra is nearly identical to High in cost.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), Low settings produce 241.6 FPS, Medium produces 190.6 FPS, High produces 119.6 FPS, and Ultra produces 112.3 FPS. The percentage drops are: Low to Medium is 21.1%, Medium to High is 37.2%, and High to Ultra is 6.1%. Compared to 4K, the absolute FPS values are higher across the board, confirming that resolution scaling is the dominant factor.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), Low settings yield 296.1 FPS, Medium yields 265.8 FPS, High yields 167.8 FPS, and Ultra yields 157.2 FPS. The drops are: Low to Medium is 10.2%, Medium to High is 36.9%, and High to Ultra is 6.3%. The 1080p results show the smallest percentage drop from Low to Medium, suggesting that at this resolution the game is less sensitive to preset changes until you reach High.

Comparing across resolutions at the same preset reveals the GPU scaling. For Low settings, 1080p (296.1 FPS) to 1440p (241.6 FPS) is a 18.4% drop, and 1440p to 4K (147.3 FPS) is a 39.0% drop. For Medium, 1080p (265.8) to 1440p (190.6) is a 28.3% drop, and 1440p to 4K (119.9) is a 37.1% drop. For High, 1080p (167.8) to 1440p (119.6) is a 28.7% drop, and 1440p to 4K (76.6) is a 35.9% drop. For Ultra, 1080p (157.2) to 1440p (112.3) is a 28.6% drop, and 1440p to 4K (75) is a 33.2% drop. The consistent 28-39% reductions per resolution step show that the GPU is the primary performance driver.

The Verdict

This PC can absolutely run Inside, and it does so with substantial headroom at every resolution and preset combination tested. The verdictByResolution data confirms that all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable at all three resolutions, with the playable threshold set at 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the best settings are Ultra with an average FPS of 75, which is 25% above the threshold. This means you can run the game at maximum graphical quality on a 4K display and still maintain smooth gameplay. The fact that High (76.6 FPS) and Ultra (75 FPS) are nearly identical suggests that the Ultra preset is not particularly demanding over High for this title, so there is no reason to compromise on visuals.

At 2560x1440, Ultra settings deliver 112.3 FPS average, which is 87% above the threshold. This provides excellent headroom for any demanding scenes or future patches that might increase the load. Even if frame rates were to drop by half in some unmeasured scenario, the game would still remain above 60 FPS.

At 1920x1080, Ultra settings produce 157.2 FPS average, which is 162% above the threshold. This is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors, as the system can drive a 144Hz display without breaking a sweat. The difference between Ultra (157.2 FPS) and High (167.8 FPS) is only 10.6 FPS, so players can choose Ultra for the best visual experience without worrying about performance.

In practical terms, this combo is overkill for Inside. The game was released in 2016, and even the most demanding 4K Ultra settings only require 75 FPS from this system. The Ryzen 5 5600’s 6-core/12-thread configuration and the RTX 4060’s Ada Lovelace architecture are far more capable than what this puzzle platformer needs. The result is that you can lock the frame rate to your display’s refresh rate (whether that is 60, 120, or 144 Hz) and enjoy the game with all settings maxed out, without any concern for performance dips. The only scenario where this combo might not be ideal is if you are playing on a 240Hz monitor at 1080p and want to exceed 296 FPS (the Low preset result), but that is an unrealistic target for a game like this. Overall, this is a thoroughly capable system for Inside that leaves no performance compromises on the table.