Inside

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 combination delivers an exceptional experience in Inside, with benchmark results showing every tested resolution and preset configuration clearing the 60 FPS playable threshold by a wide margin. The data, measured directly rather than estimated, places this pairing at rank 698 out of 3716 tested combos for this game, indicating a top-tier performance tier. Across all three resolutions—1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160—even the most demanding Ultra preset maintains average frame rates well above 90 FPS, with the lowest observed minimum frame rate being 135 FPS at 4K Medium settings. This hardware combination effectively turns a puzzle platformer into a showcase of high-refresh-rate capability, making it a definitive yes for running Inside at maximum quality on standard displays.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The data within the nearestRivals fields provides a clear picture of which hardware would deliver nearly identical performance to this CPU and GPU pairing. For the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F, the processor sits at the 94th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 69996. Its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, scores 69875, a mere 0.2% lower, meaning these two chips are effectively interchangeable in real-world gaming scenarios. The Intel Core i7-14700KF is the next contender, with an average score of 70163, which is 0.2% higher than the 9700F; again, this difference is imperceptible in practice. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, scoring 69515, is 0.7% lower, and the Intel Core i7-14700K, scoring 69355, sits 0.9% lower. For a game like Inside, which is not CPU-bound at the tested resolutions, any of these processors would deliver virtually identical frame rates, so users upgrading from one of these to the 9700F should expect no measurable change in Inside.

On the GPU front, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 sits at the 68th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 23172. Its nearest rivals, however, appear anomalous when compared to its actual gaming performance. The three closest entries are the NVIDIA P106-100 (23249, -0.3%), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23250, -0.3%), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23273, -0.4%). While these deltaPct values are tiny, they reflect synthetic benchmark averages rather than the specific requirements of Inside. The RTX 3080’s strengths—such as its 10 GB GDDR6X memory and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth—are more relevant to modern games, and the measured FPS data shows this GPU achieving 95 FPS at 4K Ultra, a figure that would be unattainable for the listed rivals. The data indicates that while the benchmark scores place them close, the RTX 3080’s gaming performance in Inside is in a different class, and users should rely on the measured FPS rather than these synthetic scores for game-specific decisions. The closest practical alternatives would be other high-end cards from the same era, though the FACT PACK does not provide rival GPU names with specific Inside scores, so the only reliable comparison is the RTX 3080 itself.

CPU and GPU Roles

In Inside, the data reveals that the GPU is the dominant component, but the CPU remains more than sufficient to avoid any bottleneck. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combination achieves an average of 431 FPS, which is a starling figure; at Medium, it drops to 352 FPS, and at High, it reaches 220 FPS. The fact that even the lowest resolution with the lightest settings almost quadruples the 60 FPS threshold shows that the CPU, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, is not the limiting factor. The jump from Low to Medium at 1080p costs 79 FPS (from 431 to 352), and from Medium to High another 132 FPS (to 220), while the step from High to Ultra costs only 10 FPS (from 220 to 210). This pattern indicates that the game’s rendering path, which is GPU-bound, scales with the GPU’s workload.

The scaling across resolutions reinforces this. At 3840x2160, the average FPS for High settings is 99, while at 2560x1440 it is 158, and at 1920x1080 it is 220. This means that going from 1440p to 1080p yields a 62 FPS increase, and going from 4K to 1440p yields a 59 FPS increase—a proportional response to pixel count. The RTX 3080’s memory bandwidth of 760.3 GB/s and its 320-bit bus width are the primary drivers here, as the pixel rate of 164.2 GPixel/s must fill more pixels at higher resolution. The CPU’s role is more apparent in the minimum FPS values. At 3840x2160 Medium, the minimum frame rate is 135 FPS, while at 2560x1440 Medium it is 215 FPS, and at 1920x1080 Medium it is 299 FPS. These minimums show that the CPU is more than capable of feeding the GPU; the gap between average and minimum FPS is small, indicating no stuttering or CPU stalls.

The Ultra settings further prove the GPU’s dominance. At 4K Ultra, the average is 95 FPS, which is just 4 FPS lower than High. This small delta suggests that Ultra preset adds effects that are lightly taxing to the GPU, but the CPU is unaffected. In contrast, the Low preset at 4K achieves 199 FPS, which is more than double the Ultra rate, showing that the GPU has a headroom that is limited only by the rendering workload. For Inside, the data supports the conclusion that the GPU is the constraining factor at all resolutions, and the Ryzen 7 9700F provides more than enough headroom. A weaker CPU would still likely achieve the same FPS, but the measured results here show that the 9700F does not introduce any bottlenecks, as the minimum FPS values stay high.

FAQ

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and RTX 3080 combination able to maintain 60 FPS at 3840x2160 with the highest settings?

A: Yes. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the measured average FPS is 95, which is 35 FPS above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The same resolution with High settings achieves 99 FPS, and Medium achieves 159 FPS. All presets at 4K clear 60 FPS.

Q: What is the best preset to use at 2560x1440 for the highest visual quality without dropping below 60 FPS?

A: The Ultra preset is the best choice at 2560x1440, as the measured average FPS is 151. This is the most demanding preset and still leaves a 91 FPS cushion above the playable threshold, ensuring smooth gameplay.

Q: How many more FPS does the Low preset yield compared to Ultra at 1920x1080?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset produces an average of 431 FPS, while the Ultra preset produces 210 FPS. The difference is 221 FPS, meaning the Low preset is over double the frame rate of Ultra.

*Q: Does the RTX 3080 have the same performance as the AMD Radeon RX 6600M in Inside, based on benchmark scores?*

A: The benchmark data shows the RTX 3080 has an average score of 23172, while the AMD Radeon RX 6600M has a score of 23273, a delta of -0.4% in favor of the RX 6600M. However, this is a synthetic score; the measured FPS in Inside is only provided for the RTX 3080, so the real-world gaming performance for the RX 6600M is not available from the data.

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 9700F a better CPU than the Intel Core i7-14700KF for this game?

A: The CPU benchmark scores show the Ryzen 7 9700F at 69996, while the Intel Core i7-14700KF has a delta of -0.2%, meaning the Intel chip scores approximately 70% of the AMD chip’s score. In Inside, the CPU is not the bottleneck; the measured FPS is identical regardless of the CPU type, as the GPU dominates.

Q: What is the lowest minimum FPS recorded in the measured data, and at which settings?

A: The lowest minimum FPS is 135, recorded at 3840x2160 with Medium settings. This is still 75 FPS above the 60 FPS threshold, and it occurs at 4K resolution only.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: this PC can run Inside with exceptional ease. The verdictByResolution field lists all four settings—High, Low, Medium, and Ultra—as playable at every resolution, with the playableThreshold of 60 FPS. At 1920x1080, the best settings are Ultra, yielding an average of 210 FPS. At 2560x1440, the best settings are also Ultra, with an average of 151 FPS. At 3840x2160, the best settings are Ultra, with an average of 95 FPS. The 60 FPS threshold is cleared by a minimum of 35 FPS (at 4K Ultra) and by a maximum of 371 FPS (at 1080p Low). The system’s rank of 698 out of 3716 confirmed combos (top 18.8%) corroborates this. There is no scenario in the measured data where the frame rate approaches the playable threshold, and no minimum FPS recorded is below 135. For any user with a 60 Hz, 144 Hz, or even 240 Hz display, this system will provide a smooth experience. The only scenario that would strain it would be if the user expects the 431 FPS from 1080p Low, but even that is achievable.

Measured FPS Breakdown

This section lists every measured frame rate from the FACT PACK, organized by resolution and settings. All values are exact from the data, with no interpolations.

3840x2160 (4K)

• High: Average FPS 99. Minimum and maximum are not provided.
• Low: Average FPS 199. Minimum and maximum are not provided.
• Medium: Average FPS 159, minimum FPS 135, maximum FPS 183.
• Ultra: Average FPS 95. Minimum and maximum are not provided.

At 4K, the Medium preset is the only one with a recorded minimum and maximum. The minimum of 135 FPS is still 75% above the playable threshold, and the maximum of 183 FPS shows a 48 FPS variance. The Ultra preset’s average of 95 FPS is the lowest in the entire dataset, but it remains above 60 FPS.

2560x1440 (1440p)

• High: Average FPS 158. Minimum and maximum are not provided.
• Low: Average FPS 317. Minimum and maximum are not provided.
• Medium: Average FPS 253, minimum FPS 215, maximum FPS 291.
• Ultra: Average FPS 151. Minimum and maximum are not provided.

The 1440p measurements show a wider spread between presets. The Low preset at 317 FPS is more than double the Ultra’s 151 FPS. The Medium preset has a 76 FPS range from minimum to maximum, which is the largest variance in the data, but still completely fluid.

1920x1080 (1080p)

• High: Average FPS 220. Minimum and maximum are not provided.
• Low: Average FPS 431. Minimum and maximum are not provided.
• Medium: Average FPS 352, minimum FPS 299, maximum FPS 405.
• Ultra: Average FPS 210. Minimum and maximum are not provided.

At 1080p, the Low preset reaches 431 FPS, the highest in the entire dataset. The Medium preset shows a minimum of 299 FPS and a maximum of 405 FPS, which is a 106 FPS spread. The Ultra preset at 210 FPS is the lowest at 1080p but still 150 FPS above the playable threshold.

The pattern across all resolutions is consistent: Ultra is the most demanding preset, and the average FPS scales with resolution. The data does not include any settings below Low, and no resolution above 4K was tested.

Best Settings per Resolution

For each resolution, the best preset is the one that provides the highest visual quality while maintaining an average FPS of at least 60. Since all presets in the dataset clear 60 FPS, the most demanding preset—Ultra—is the best setting for every resolution.

3840x2160 (4K): The Ultra preset delivers an average of 95 FPS. This is 35 FPS above the playable threshold, so it is the most visually demanding setting that still runs smoothly. The High preset runs at 99 FPS, which is slightly faster, but Ultra offers higher quality for a negligible 4 FPS loss. The Medium preset at 159 FPS and Low at 199 FPS are also options if the user prefers higher frame rates, but Ultra is the best for visual fidelity.

2560x1440 (1440p): The Ultra preset runs at an average of 151 FPS. This is 91 FPS above the threshold, making it the best choice. The High preset is 158 FPS, Medium is 253 FPS, and Low is 317 FPS. The difference between Ultra and High is only 7 FPS, so Ultra is recommendable without hesitation.

1920x1080 (1080p): The Ultra preset achieves 210 FPS. This is 150 FPS above the threshold. The High preset is 220 FPS, Medium is 352 FPS, and Low is 431 FPS. While Low provides more than double the frame rate, Ultra still provides a smooth experience that is limited by the display’s refresh rate.

In summary, the measured data shows that the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 combination is vastly overqualified for Inside. The game, released in 2016, does not stress this modern hardware, and the resultant frame rates are high enough for any display. The only reason to choose a lower preset would be to push frame rates to extreme levels for competitive play, or to reduce GPU load, but the 60 FPS target is achieved with the maximum preset at all resolutions.