Inside

The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 combination delivers exceptionally high frame rates in Inside, a 2016 puzzle platformer that is far from demanding by modern standards. The measured data shows this system clears the 60 FPS playable threshold with massive headroom at every resolution and preset tested, making it a case of overwhelming hardware capability for the game's requirements.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU in this pairing each have close competitors in the benchmark database that would produce nearly identical gameplay results. For the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D, the nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755, which scores 75,738 in the average benchmark suite compared to the 9950X3D's 75,779 — a negligible 0.1% delta. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D is essentially tied as well at 75,716 (0.1% difference), while the AMD EPYC 8224P sits at 75,582 (0.3% behind) and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 at 75,488 (0.4% behind). In practical terms for Inside, any of these processors would deliver indistinguishable performance, as the game's workload is far below what even a mid-range CPU can saturate.

On the graphics side, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070's nearest rival is the NVIDIA Tesla P4, with an average score of 37,628 versus the RTX 4070's 37,648 — again a 0.1% gap that translates to zero perceptible difference in this game. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 trails by 0.4% at 37,507, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile actually scores slightly higher at 38,135 (1.3% above) and the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 is 1.3% behind at 37,157. For Inside specifically, the RTX 4070 is so far beyond the game's requirements that any of these GPUs would provide essentially the same experience — all would easily maintain triple-digit frame rates.

The CPU sits in the 95th percentile of all tested processors, while the GPU ranks in the 81st percentile of all GPUs. This means both components are top-tier hardware, and the nearest rivals are all similarly high-performing parts. The delta percentages are all under 1.5%, which in gaming terms means the frame rate differences would be imperceptible, especially in a game as lightweight as Inside.

CPU and GPU Roles

For Inside, the GPU is overwhelmingly the dominant component for frame rate scaling across resolutions and presets. The data shows a clear pattern: as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, average frame rates drop substantially, which is classic GPU-bound behavior. At Ultra settings, the system delivers 215.9 FPS at 1080p, drops to 157.4 FPS at 1440p, and falls further to 102.1 FPS at 4K. This scaling — roughly 47% higher frame rate at 1080p compared to 4K at the same Ultra preset — indicates the GPU is doing the heavy lifting when resolution increases.

The CPU's role becomes apparent when comparing presets at the same resolution. At 4K, the jump from Low to Medium costs 37.7 FPS (from 205.4 to 167.7), and from Medium to High costs another 64 FPS (down to 103.7). The difference between High and Ultra is minimal at 1.6 FPS (103.7 versus 102.1), suggesting that at 4K the GPU is approaching its limits and the Ultra preset's additional effects don't scale the frame rate penalty proportionally. At 1080p, however, the preset scaling is more dramatic: Low runs at 432.8 FPS, Medium at 366.5 FPS, High at 228 FPS, and Ultra at 215.9 FPS. The 204.3 FPS gap between Low and High at 1080p shows that the GPU still has headroom to process more visual effects, but the CPU is never the bottleneck — even at 432.8 FPS, the frame pacing is clearly GPU-limited.

The resolution scaling at each preset confirms this split. At Low settings, the system goes from 432.8 FPS at 1080p to 330 FPS at 1440p to 205.4 FPS at 4K. At High settings, the same progression is 228 → 163.4 → 103.7 FPS. The consistent pattern — roughly halving the frame rate when pixel count quadruples — is textbook GPU-bound behavior. The Ryzen 9 9950X3D's 16 cores and 32 threads, with a 5.70 GHz boost clock, are never the limiting factor in this game; its massive thread count and high single-core performance are far beyond what Inside requires.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the best playable setting is Ultra, which delivers an average of 215.9 FPS. This is dramatically above the 60 FPS threshold, leaving enormous headroom for frame drops or background tasks. The fact that Ultra is recommended here is a straightforward call — there is no reason to sacrifice visual quality when the system has more than three times the required performance.

At 2560x1440, Ultra is again the best settings choice, with an average of 157.4 FPS. This is still 2.6 times the playable threshold, meaning even the most demanding scenes in Inside will remain smooth. The drop from 1080p Ultra to 1440p Ultra is 58.5 FPS, but the absolute frame rate remains so high that the visual quality trade-off is unnecessary.

At 3840x2160, Ultra settings remain the best option, averaging 102.1 FPS. This is the first resolution where the system dips below triple-digit frame rates, but 102.1 FPS is still well above 60 FPS. The margin here is 42.1 FPS, which provides a comfortable buffer. The measured data shows all four settings — Low, Medium, High, and Ultra — at 4K stay above 100 FPS, with Low at 205.4 FPS, Medium at 167.7 FPS, and High at 103.7 FPS. Since even the most demanding preset clears the threshold by a wide margin, Ultra is the only sensible recommendation at every resolution.

The Verdict

This PC can absolutely run Inside, and the verdict is unambiguous: every resolution and preset combination in the measured data clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. At 1920x1080, the best setting is Ultra at 215.9 FPS average. At 2560x1440, Ultra delivers 157.4 FPS. At 3840x2160, Ultra still achieves 102.1 FPS. The verdict by resolution confirms all four settings — Low, Medium, High, and Ultra — are playable at each of the three resolutions tested.

The weakest measured result is 4K Ultra at 102.1 FPS, which is still 42.1 FPS above the playable threshold. There is no scenario in this dataset where the system drops below 60 FPS, and the margin is substantial even in the most demanding configuration. For a game like Inside, which is a side-scrolling puzzle platformer without intense real-time rendering demands, this hardware is effectively overkill. Players can run the game at maximum visual quality on any display up to 4K without concern. The only practical consideration is that the frame rates are so high that users with 120 Hz or 144 Hz displays will benefit at 1080p and 1440p, while 4K users on standard 60 Hz panels will see a perfectly smooth experience with headroom to spare.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rate data covers three resolutions and four settings, with average FPS recorded for each combination. Minimum and maximum frame rates were not captured in this dataset, so the analysis relies solely on averages.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 205.4 FPS, Medium averages 167.7 FPS, High averages 103.7 FPS, and Ultra averages 102.1 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a cumulative drop of 103.3 FPS, with the steepest single-step decline occurring between Medium and High at 64 FPS. The High to Ultra transition is negligible at just 1.6 FPS, indicating diminishing returns from the final preset tier at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 330 FPS, Medium averages 262.1 FPS, High averages 163.4 FPS, and Ultra averages 157.4 FPS. The gap from Low to Ultra is 172.6 FPS, with the Medium to High step accounting for 98.7 FPS of that decline. Again, the High to Ultra difference is small at 6 FPS, suggesting the Ultra preset adds little visual cost beyond High at this resolution.

At 1920x1080, Low averages 432.8 FPS, Medium averages 366.5 FPS, High averages 228 FPS, and Ultra averages 215.9 FPS. The total range from Low to Ultra spans 216.9 FPS. The largest single drop is from Medium to High at 138.5 FPS, while High to Ultra costs only 12.1 FPS. This pattern repeats across all resolutions: the jump from Medium to High carries the largest performance penalty, while High to Ultra is comparatively cheap.

Across all resolutions, the Low to Medium transition costs between 37.7 FPS (at 4K) and 66.3 FPS (at 1080p). The Medium to High transition is the most expensive, ranging from 64 FPS at 4K to 138.5 FPS at 1080p. The High to Ultra transition is consistently minor, between 1.6 FPS and 12.1 FPS. This suggests that the High preset includes most of the visual features that matter, while Ultra adds marginal effects at a very small frame rate cost.

How This Combo Ranks

In the benchmark database, this specific CPU-GPU combination ranks 540th out of 3,716 tested combos for Inside. That places it in the top 14.5% of all configurations tested for this game. The rank reflects the combined performance of the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070, and given the game's low requirements, the ranking is driven more by the raw capability of the components than by any game-specific optimization.

The 540th rank out of 3,716 combos means there are 539 configurations that achieve higher average frame rates in Inside. These are likely systems with even more powerful GPUs, such as the RTX 4080 or RTX 4090 class parts, or combinations with higher-end cards paired with similarly strong CPUs. However, the practical significance of the rank is limited because the measured frame rates are already so far above the playable threshold. A combo ranked higher might deliver 250 FPS at 4K Ultra instead of 102.1 FPS, but the visual experience on a standard display would be identical — both are locked well above 60 FPS.

The percentile positions of the individual components put the CPU at 95th percentile and the GPU at 81st percentile, and the combined rank of 540/3716 reflects a system that is in the upper tier of what was tested. For Inside, the gameplay experience is determined entirely by whether the system clears 60 FPS, and this combo does so by a factor of at least 1.7 at the most demanding setting. The rank is a useful data point for comparing hardware, but in this case, it does not translate into meaningful gameplay differences — the system is so far beyond the game's needs that almost any modern configuration would deliver a smooth experience.