Inside

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX paired with the AMD Radeon 760M is a combination that sits at the very bottom of the database for Inside, ranking 3705 out of 3716 tested combos. This places it in the 0.3rd percentile of all configurations, meaning it outperforms only a tiny fraction of systems tested. The data shows a fundamental mismatch: a top-tier 16-core CPU is paired with an integrated GPU that ranks in the 35th percentile of all graphics chips. This is not a combination that will push high refresh rates, but for a 2D puzzle platformer, the question is whether it can clear the 60 FPS playable threshold at common resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 3705 out of 3716 is a stark indicator of where this system stands. It is nearly at the very bottom of the database, suggesting that the Radeon 760M holds the system back significantly. The CPU alone is a powerhouse, sitting in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, but the GPU's 35th percentile ranking drags the combined performance down to the bottom tier. In practical terms, this means that for Inside, the system will behave more like a low-end notebook than a high-performance gaming rig. The data implies that the integrated graphics are the primary bottleneck, and no amount of CPU horsepower can compensate for the GPU's limited fill rate and shader throughput. When compared to other tested combos, this pairing is only barely above the worst possible configuration, which is a critical fact for anyone expecting smooth gameplay at high settings.

CPU and GPU Roles

The division of labor between the Ryzen 9 8945HX and the Radeon 760M is extremely lopsided in this game. The CPU is a 16-core, 32-thread Zen 4 part with a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, and it is thoroughly overqualified for Inside. The game is a 2D puzzle platformer from 2016, and its CPU demands are minimal. The GPU, however, is the limiting factor at every resolution. The data shows that dropping settings from High to Low at 1080p doubles the average frame rate from 48 to 96 FPS, a 100% increase. At 1440p, the same settings change increases performance from 34 to 69 FPS, a 103% jump. This is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario, where reducing pixel shading load and texture complexity directly translates to higher frame rates. The CPU's role is largely irrelevant here; even a mid-range processor would likely produce identical results because the GPU is saturated. The scaling between resolutions further confirms this: at Low settings, moving from 1080p to 1440p reduces the average from 96 to 69 FPS (a 28% drop), and then to 2160p it falls to 43 FPS (a 55% drop from 1080p). This resolution scaling is entirely consistent with a GPU that has 512 shading units and 16 ROPs, and it indicates that the CPU is never the limiting factor.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best performance. With Low settings, the average frame rate is 96 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium settings drop this to 77 FPS, with a minimum of 65 FPS and a maximum of 88 FPS. High settings reduce the average to 48 FPS, which is below the threshold, and Ultra settings further drop it to 46 FPS. The data shows that at 1080p, the system can handle Low and Medium presets with comfort, but High and Ultra are not playable at a consistent 60 FPS. The margin between Medium and High is significant, a 29 FPS drop, which suggests that the Medium preset uses less demanding shaders or lower texture filtering that the integrated GPU can manage.

At 2560x1440, the picture changes. Low settings produce an average of 69 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold, but this is the only playable preset. Medium settings drop to 55 FPS, with a minimum of 47 FPS and a maximum of 63 FPS, which is borderline but below the average threshold. High settings fall to 34 FPS, and Ultra to 33 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium at 1440p is a 14 FPS drop, while the jump from Medium to High is 21 FPS, indicating that the High preset introduces effects that are disproportionately expensive on this GPU. The minimum frame rate of 47 FPS at Medium settings also shows that the system will stutter in busy scenes, making it a poor choice for a smooth experience.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles. Low settings average 43 FPS, which is below the playable threshold. Medium settings average 35 FPS, with a minimum of 29 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS. High settings drop to 22 FPS, and Ultra to 21 FPS. No preset at 4K reaches 60 FPS, and even the lowest preset is 17 FPS short of the threshold. The minimum frame rate of 29 FPS at Medium settings indicates that the game will feel choppy and unresponsive at this resolution. The data is clear: 4K is not a viable option for this combination.

The Verdict

Based on the verdict by resolution, this PC can run Inside, but only under strict conditions. At 1920x1080, the system clears 60 FPS on Low and Medium settings, with Medium being the best playable preset at 77 FPS average. At 2560x1440, only Low settings achieve a playable average of 69 FPS. At 3840x2160, no preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold, making it unplayable by the benchmark's standard. The data indicates that a 1080p monitor is the sweet spot for this system, allowing for a comfortable margin above the playable threshold. At 1440p, users must be willing to accept Low settings, which will look noticeably less detailed but will remain responsive. For 4K, the system is simply not capable, and users should not expect a playable experience. The integrated Radeon 760M is the clear limiting factor, and even with the powerful Ryzen 9 8945HX, the system cannot overcome the GPU's bandwidth and compute limitations.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for the CPU and GPU provides context for what other hardware would behave similarly. The CPU, the Ryzen 9 8945HX, has an average benchmark score of 76212. Its nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX, which scores 76155, a delta of 0.1% (meaning the Intel part is effectively identical in performance). The AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P scores 76492, which is 0.4% higher, and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX scores 76513, also 0.4% higher. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D scores 75779, which is 0.6% lower. For the purposes of Inside, any of these CPUs would perform identically, as the game is not CPU-bound. The GPU, the Radeon 760M, has an average benchmark score of 6019. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 6400, which scores 6001, a delta of 0.3% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M scores 6000, also 0.3% higher. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server scores 5996, which is 0.4% higher, and the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 6049, which is 0.5% lower. In practice, swapping the Radeon 760M for any of these GPUs would yield nearly identical frame rates in Inside, as their average scores are within a fraction of a percent of each other. For a user looking at upgrade paths, these are the only data points available; the differences are negligible.

FAQ

*Q: Can this system run Inside at 1080p with High settings?*

A: No. The data shows an average of 48 FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Only Low and Medium settings clear 60 FPS at this resolution.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo?

A: The best resolution is 1920x1080, where the system achieves 77 FPS on Medium settings and 96 FPS on Low settings. At 2560x1440, only Low settings reach 69 FPS, and at 3840x2160, no preset is playable.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival?

A: The Ryzen 9 8945HX has an average score of 76212, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX scores 76155, a delta of 0.1%. They are effectively identical in overall performance, and for Inside, the CPU is not a factor.

Q: Is the Radeon 760M similar to the Radeon RX 6400?

A: Yes. The Radeon 760M has an average score of 6019, and the Radeon RX 6400 scores 6001, a delta of 0.3%. In Inside, they would produce nearly identical frame rates.

Q: What is the minimum FPS at 1440p Medium settings?

A: The minimum FPS is 47 at 2560x1440 with Medium settings, with an average of 55 FPS. This is below the 60 FPS threshold, indicating stuttering may occur.

Q: Does the system reach 60 FPS at 4K on any preset?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average is 43 FPS on Low settings, which is 17 FPS below the playable threshold. No preset at 4K is playable.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the best playable preset is Medium, which delivers an average of 77 FPS, with a minimum of 65 FPS and a maximum of 88 FPS. This provides a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold. At 2560x1440, the only playable preset is Low, which averages 69 FPS. This is the most demanding settings level that stays at or above 60 FPS at this resolution. At 3840x2160, there is no playable preset, as even Low settings only average 43 FPS. The data suggests that users should stick to 1080p for the best balance of visual quality and performance, with Medium settings being the recommended sweet spot. At 1440p, Low settings are the only viable option, and the lower visual fidelity may be a trade-off for the higher resolution. For 4K, the system is simply not capable, and no settings adjustment will bring it to the playable threshold.