Inside

Inside is a restrained, atmospheric puzzle platformer from 2016, and the data shows that the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F plus NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 combination handles it with overwhelming headroom. The benchmark results indicate that this pairing does not merely reach playable frame rates; it demolishes the 60 FPS threshold at every resolution, leaving room for higher refresh rates or simply quieter operation. The measured FPS figures reveal a hardware duo that is effectively overkill for this title, shifting the bottleneck almost entirely onto the game's own engine limits rather than the silicon.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which delivers an average of 64 FPS. This is the only resolution where the combo approaches the playable threshold, but it still clears it comfortably. The data shows a clear hierarchy at 4K: High runs at 67 FPS, Medium at 107 FPS, and Low at 134 FPS, meaning even the heaviest settings leave a small but real margin above the 60 FPS line.

Moving to 2560x1440, the story shifts dramatically. The best settings that stay at or above 60 FPS is again Ultra, but here the average jumps to 101 FPS. This is a massive leap from the 4K result, suggesting that the GPU's pixel throughput is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. At 1440p, High runs at 106 FPS, Medium at 170 FPS, and Low at 213 FPS, all far beyond what the game's visual design demands.

At 1920x1080, the combo is unchained. The most demanding preset, Ultra, averages 141 FPS, while High hits 148 FPS. Medium reaches 237 FPS and Low soars to 296 FPS. The 1080p data suggests that the RTX 5050 is nowhere near its limits here; the frame rates are so high that they likely exceed the refresh rate of most monitors, making the CPU's role almost irrelevant. For a game like Inside, which relies on moody lighting and subtle animations rather than fast-paced action, any of these presets would deliver a flawless experience, but Ultra at 1080p is the clear pick for visual fidelity without sacrificing smoothness.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions reveals that the GPU is the dominant component for this game, but only at the higher end of the resolution spectrum. At 3840x2160, dropping from Ultra to Low produces a frame rate increase from 64 FPS to 134 FPS, a 109% improvement. This steep scaling is a classic sign of GPU-bound rendering, where the RTX 5050's fill rate and memory bandwidth are the primary constraints. The 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 128-bit bus are adequate for Inside's modest textures, but the pixel workload at 4K clearly taxes the card.

At 2560x1440, the same preset transition yields 101 FPS to 213 FPS, a 111% jump. The percentage change is nearly identical to 4K, indicating that the GPU remains the bottleneck. However, the absolute numbers are much higher, which suggests that the card's compute units (2560 shading units) are more than enough for the game's geometry and effects, and it is purely the rasterization load that scales with resolution.

At 1920x1080, the pattern changes. The jump from Ultra to Low is 141 FPS to 296 FPS, a 110% increase, but the frame rates are so high that the CPU starts to matter. The Ryzen 5 7500F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads boosting up to 5.00 GHz, is clearly not a bottleneck at any resolution. The data implies that at 1080p, the game's engine—likely limited by draw calls or single-threaded logic—might cap performance before either component reaches full utilization. The fact that the 4K Ultra score (64 FPS) is only slightly above the 60 FPS threshold, while 1080p Ultra hits 141 FPS, points to a GPU that is comfortably capable but not overprovisioned for 4K.

The CPU's role is secondary across the board. The Ryzen 5 7500F's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22799 and single-core score of 3218 are far beyond what a 2016 puzzle platformer requires. Even at 1080p Low, where the CPU might theoretically matter, the 296 FPS average suggests no core is saturated. The GPU is the clear driver of performance scaling, and the CPU is effectively a spectator.

Measured FPS Breakdown

3840x2160: The data shows a tight spread at the high end. Ultra averages 64 FPS, High averages 67 FPS, and Medium averages 107 FPS with a minimum of 91 FPS and a maximum of 123 FPS. Low averages 134 FPS. The Medium preset's min/max range is the only one recorded, indicating that frame pacing is stable in the mid-range settings. The absence of min/max for Ultra and High suggests either the data collection focused on averages or those presets produced consistent enough results to not warrant logging extremes.

2560x1440: Here, the spread widens significantly. Ultra averages 101 FPS, High averages 106 FPS, and Medium averages 170 FPS with a min of 145 FPS and a max of 196 FPS. Low averages 213 FPS. The gap between High and Medium is 64 FPS, which is a substantial jump for a single settings tier, hinting that Medium uses significantly lighter shadow or post-processing effects. The min/max for Medium show a 51 FPS range, which is wider than at 4K, but still well above the playable threshold.

1920x1080: The low-resolution results are almost absurdly high. Ultra averages 141 FPS, High averages 148 FPS, and Medium averages 237 FPS with a min of 201 FPS and a max of 272 FPS. Low averages 296 FPS. The Medium range of 71 FPS is the largest recorded, which could be due to engine-level spikes from loading new areas. Even the minimum at Medium (201 FPS) is more than three times the playable threshold, so there is no risk of stutter.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Inside at 4K with all settings maxed out?

A: Yes. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 64, which is above the playable threshold of 60 FPS. The minimum FPS data is not recorded for Ultra, but the average suggests a stable experience.

Q: What is the best preset for a 144Hz monitor at 1440p?

A: The data shows that at 2560x1440, the Ultra preset averages 101 FPS, which is below 144 Hz. To hit higher refresh rates, consider Medium at 170 FPS or Low at 213 FPS. High averages 106 FPS, which is still above 60 FPS but not enough for a 144Hz display.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game?

A: The GPU is the primary driver. The frame rate scaling between resolutions is steep—dropping from Ultra to Low at 4K increases FPS from 64 to 134—indicating GPU-bound rendering. The CPU's performance, as measured by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3218, is far beyond the game's needs.

Q: How does the combo perform at 1080p compared to 4K?

A: At 1080p, the Ultra preset averages 141 FPS, which is more than double the 4K Ultra score of 64 FPS. The gap shows that the RTX 5050 is heavily pixel-limited at 4K, but at 1080p it has ample headroom.

Q: Are there any settings where the frame rate drops below 60 FPS?

A: No. Across all resolutions and presets, the lowest recorded average is 64 FPS (4K Ultra), and the lowest recorded minimum is 91 FPS (4K Medium). Every configuration clears the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What does the combo's rank among tested systems mean?

A: The combo ranks 2247 out of 3716 tested combinations. This places it in the lower half of all systems, but that ranking reflects the overall hardware pool, not this game's performance. For Inside, the data shows it is more than sufficient.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals, based on average benchmark scores, include the Intel Core i7-11850H with a delta of 0.1% and a score of 24935, the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F with a delta of -0.2% and a score of 25005, and the Intel Core i7-13620H with a delta of 0.2% and a score of 24911. The Intel Core 5 210H trails slightly with a delta of 0.4% and a score of 24872. These processors would deliver near-identical frame rates in Inside, as the game is not CPU-intensive. The Ryzen 5 7500F's own average benchmark score is 24964, placing it squarely among these chips.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL with a delta of -0.6% and a score of 21153, the AMD Radeon HD 8970M with a delta of -1% and a score of 21237, and the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT with a delta of 1.6% and a score of 20713. The NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile is close with a delta of -1.6% and a score of 21379. The RTX 5050's average benchmark score is 21035, so these alternatives would produce very similar frame rates in Inside. In practice, any of these GPUs paired with the Ryzen 5 7500F would likely yield the same 4K Ultra average of around 64 FPS, as the game's demands are modest.

The Verdict

This PC can absolutely run Inside. The verdict by resolution is unambiguous: at 3840x2160, all four presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—are playable, with Ultra averaging 64 FPS. At 2560x1440, Ultra averages 101 FPS, and at 1920x1080, Ultra averages 141 FPS. The lowest minimum FPS recorded anywhere is 91 FPS (4K Medium), so there is no scenario where the frame rate dips below the playable threshold. The data suggests that for the best visual experience, users should select Ultra at any resolution, as the performance headroom is sufficient even at 4K. The only caveat is that 4K Ultra's 64 FPS average leaves little margin for demanding scenes, but the game's slow-paced, side-scrolling nature means this is unlikely to be noticeable.

How This Combo Ranks

Among all tested combinations in the benchmark database, this pairing ranks 2247 out of 3716, placing it in the 60th percentile of overall performance. This ranking is heavily influenced by the GPU's modest standing—the RTX 5050 sits in the 66th percentile among all GPUs—while the CPU is stronger, ranking in the 77th percentile. For Inside specifically, this mid-pack ranking is misleading: the game is so lightweight that even a system in the bottom quartile would likely run it well. The combo's rank reflects its capabilities in modern, demanding titles, not this 2016 puzzle platformer. The data shows that for Inside, this system is effectively in the top tier, as it maxes out the game at all resolutions with frame rates far above what the genre requires.