Can I Run It?

Instant compatibility check with FPS benchmarks and optimization tips

Inside
Puzzle Platformer 2016

Inside

90%
Excellent Match Your system exceeds recommended requirements!

Performance

1080p (Full HD)

Low 1080p Measured
321 FPS
Ultra 1080p Measured
248 FPS

1440p (2K / QHD)

Low 1440p Measured
288 FPS
Ultra 1440p Measured
217 FPS

4K (Ultra HD)

Low 4K Measured
251 FPS
Ultra 4K Measured
145 FPS
4ms Frame Time
6ms Input Latency
4K Best Resolution

Requirements Check

Processor
Required 37,516
Your CPU 29,879
Graphics Card
Required 27,118
Your GPU 79,842

Recommendations

Upgrade Needed

Your hardware doesn't meet minimum requirements for this game.

Ray Tracing Ready

Your GPU supports ray tracing.

Average FPS: resolution vs quality settings

UltraHighMediumLow
4K Ultra HD 145 155 231 251
1440p QHD 217 225 269 288
1080p Full HD 248 252 298 321

Cell color: green is 120+ FPS, teal is 60+, amber is 30+, red is below 30. Cards marked Estimated above have no measured row and are scaled from your GPU benchmark percentile.

Every measured configuration

1920x1080 High 252
1920x1080 Low 321
1920x1080 Medium 298
1920x1080 Ultra 248
2560x1440 High 225
2560x1440 Low 288
2560x1440 Medium 269
2560x1440 Ultra 217
3840x2160 High 155
3840x2160 Low 251
3840x2160 Medium 231
3840x2160 Ultra 145

Performance Analysis: Inside on Your System

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is an extreme overmatch for Inside, a 2016 puzzle platformer. Benchmark data shows this combination delivers massive frame rates across all tested resolutions and presets, with the lowest average being 145.3 FPS at 4K Ultra. This system not only clears the 60 FPS playability threshold everywhere but does so with enough headroom to max out every setting.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system produces triple-digit frame rates that approach the refresh-rate ceiling of most monitors. The Low preset averages 320.7 FPS, while Medium drops to 298 FPS. High settings yield 251.6 FPS, and Ultra, the most demanding preset, still averages 247.8 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 72.9 FPS, which is proportionally smaller than what you would expect in a more GPU-bound title—indicating the CPU becomes the limiting factor at these lower resolutions.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain exceptionally high. Low settings average 288 FPS, Medium delivers 269 FPS, and High reaches 224.5 FPS. Ultra at 1440p averages 216.8 FPS, which is still nearly four times the 60 FPS threshold. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p shows only a modest reduction: Ultra drops from 247.8 to 216.8 FPS, a 12.5% decline. This pattern suggests the RTX 5090 has substantial headroom even when pushing more pixels.

At 3840x2160, the system finally starts to feel some load, though the numbers remain staggering. Low settings average 250.7 FPS, Medium 230.9 FPS, and High 154.6 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K averages 145.3 FPS, which is the lowest recorded figure in the entire dataset—yet it still sits at more than double the playability threshold. The drop from 1440p Ultra to 4K Ultra is 71.5 FPS, a 33% reduction, showing that 4K resolution places significantly more stress on the GPU, though the RTX 5090 absorbs it without breaking a sweat.

It is worth remembering the measured FPS data includes average values only; no minimum or maximum frame times are provided. For a game like Inside, which has a deliberately slow-paced atmosphere, the absence of frame-time data is not a concern—the averages are high enough that even substantial dips would remain playable. The data shows a monotonic progression: higher settings and higher resolutions both reduce average FPS, but the system never drops below 145 FPS in any configuration.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results reveal a clear division of labor between the Ryzen 7 5800XT and the RTX 5090, with the balance shifting as resolution increases. At 1080p, the CPU is the primary constraint. The Ryzen 7 5800XT, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23794 and a single-core score of 3359. These scores place it in the 81st percentile of all CPUs, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H (deltaPct 0) and the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS (deltaPct -0.3). At 1080p, the gap between Low (320.7 FPS) and Ultra (247.8 FPS) is 72.9 FPS, which is the largest absolute spread across all resolutions. This suggests that even at Low settings, the CPU is feeding frames as fast as the engine allows, and the GPU is waiting on the processor rather than the reverse.

At 1440p, the balance begins to shift toward the GPU, but the CPU still plays a significant role. The difference between Low (288 FPS) and Ultra (216.8 FPS) is 71.2 FPS, nearly identical to the 1080p spread. If the GPU were the sole bottleneck, we would expect the gap between presets to widen as resolution increases, because the GPU would be doing more work per frame. Instead, the consistent spread suggests that the CPU's frame generation capability is the limiting factor at both 1080p and 1440p, with the RTX 5090 having spare capacity.

At 4K, the GPU finally becomes the dominant constraint. The spread between Low (250.7 FPS) and Ultra (145.3 FPS) is 105.4 FPS, a much larger gap than at lower resolutions. This indicates that the RTX 5090's workload at 4K is substantial enough to create a real difference between preset levels. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 39650 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 18355 confirm it is a top-tier part, placed in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs. However, even at 4K Ultra, the system produces 145.3 FPS, meaning neither component is pushed anywhere near its absolute limit.

The scaling between resolutions reinforces this interpretation. From 1080p Ultra to 1440p Ultra, the FPS drops by 12.5%. From 1440p Ultra to 4K Ultra, the drop is 33%. This non-linear scaling is typical of a system where the CPU handles the first step efficiently but the GPU begins to feel the pixel-count increase at 4K. For players targeting 1080p or 1440p, the Ryzen 7 5800XT will be the component that determines the ceiling; for 4K, the RTX 5090's capabilities define the experience.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, all four presets clear the 60 FPS threshold with enormous margin. The most demanding preset, Ultra, averages 247.8 FPS, which is more than four times the playability threshold. There is no reason to drop below Ultra settings at this resolution, as the system has ample headroom to run the game at maximum quality.

At 2560x1440, the same conclusion applies. Ultra settings average 216.8 FPS, which is 3.6 times the 60 FPS threshold. The data shows no configuration at 1440p that comes close to failing the playability test, so the recommended setting is Ultra. The 71.5 FPS difference between 1440p Ultra and 4K Ultra indicates that 1440p is well within the comfortable operating range for this hardware.

At 3840x2160, Ultra remains the best choice, averaging 145.3 FPS. Even the most demanding preset at the highest resolution maintains more than double the 60 FPS threshold. The verdict data confirms this: the "bestSettings" field for each resolution is Ultra, with average FPS of 247.8 at 1080p, 216.8 at 1440p, and 145.3 at 4K. In every case, the system can run the game at maximum quality without approaching the playability limit. Players who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity could opt for lower presets—4K Low runs at 250.7 FPS—but the visual difference in a game like Inside is unlikely to justify sacrificing the higher-quality lighting and effects that Ultra provides.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals, based on average benchmark scores, offer a useful reference for how the Ryzen 7 5800XT compares to other processors. The AMD Ryzen 7 7840H has an average score of 29868, a deltaPct of 0 relative to the 5800XT, and would behave nearly identically in this game. The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS and AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS both score 29955, with a deltaPct of -0.3, meaning they are slightly faster on average but within the margin of error. The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X scores 29713, with a deltaPct of 0.6, making it marginally slower. In practice, any of these CPUs would deliver the same playable experience in Inside, because the game's CPU demands are modest and all four processors sit in the same performance tier.

On the GPU side, the RTX 5090's nearest rivals are an eclectic mix. The NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB scores 79605, with a deltaPct of 0.3, and the Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB scores 79396, with a deltaPct of 0.6. These are data-center parts, not consumer gaming GPUs, but their raw compute scores place them near the RTX 5090's average of 79842. The AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT, a mobile GPU, scores 78940 with a deltaPct of 1.1, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X scores 80959 with a deltaPct of -1.4, making it slightly faster. For a game as light as Inside, all of these GPUs would produce similarly high frame rates, though the consumer-oriented options are the practical comparisons for gaming.

The wider point is that this system's performance in Inside is so far above the playability threshold that any of these near-equivalent parts would also run the game flawlessly. The RTX 5090's 92nd percentile GPU ranking and the CPU's 81st percentile ranking mean that even a substantially weaker pairing, such as a Ryzen 7 7840H with an RX 6850M XT, would likely hold 60 FPS at 4K Ultra in this title.

FAQ

*Q: Can this PC run Inside at 4K Ultra settings?*

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 145.3, which is more than double the 60 FPS playable threshold. The verdict data confirms Ultra is the best playable setting at 4K.

Q: What is the highest frame rate recorded in the dataset?

A: The highest average FPS is 320.7, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next highest is 288 at 1440p Low, followed by 298 at 1080p Medium.

Q: How does the RTX 5090 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RTX 5090 has an average benchmark score of 79842, placing it in the 92nd percentile. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB, scores 79605 with a deltaPct of 0.3, meaning the RTX 5090 is slightly slower by that measure. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X scores 80959 with a deltaPct of -1.4, indicating it is slightly faster.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game at 1080p?

A: The data indicates the CPU is the limiting factor at 1080p. The difference between Low (320.7 FPS) and Ultra (247.8 FPS) is 72.9 FPS, and this spread remains nearly constant at 1440p (71.2 FPS). This pattern suggests the GPU has spare capacity while the CPU determines the frame ceiling.

Q: What is the largest performance drop between presets?

A: The largest drop occurs at 4K, where moving from Low (250.7 FPS) to Ultra (145.3 FPS) reduces the average by 105.4 FPS. This is significantly larger than the spread at 1080p or 1440p, showing that 4K resolution stresses the GPU much more heavily.

Q: Does this system ever fall below 60 FPS in any tested configuration?

A: No. The lowest average FPS recorded is 145.3 at 4K Ultra. All 12 tested combinations—four presets across three resolutions—stay above 145 FPS, which is more than double the playable threshold.

The Verdict

This PC can run Inside with complete authority at every resolution and preset combination tested. The verdict by resolution is unambiguous: all three resolutions (3840x2160, 2560x1440, and 1920x1080) list all four settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) as playable. The recommended setting at each resolution is Ultra, with average FPS of 145.3 at 4K, 216.8 at 1440p, and 247.8 at 1080p.

The Ryzen 7 5800XT and RTX 5090 combination is far more powerful than this 2016 puzzle platformer requires. The game's modest visual demands mean that even the lowest recorded frame rate—145.3 FPS at 4K Ultra—provides a smooth, tear-free experience on any standard display. Players with 120Hz or 144Hz monitors will have no trouble hitting their refresh rate at 1440p or 1080p, and even 4K Ultra exceeds the refresh rate of most 4K displays. If you own this hardware, Inside will run flawlessly with every visual option maxed out, and you can expect performance to remain well above the playability threshold even if future driver updates or system changes introduce minor overhead. The only scenario where this system would struggle is if you were to run the game at an exotic resolution or with external rendering scaling, but neither is relevant to the standard configurations tested here. For the intended use case, this is a definitive pass.