Inside

The Intel Core i3-12100F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is a formidable combination for Inside, a 2016 Puzzle Platformer that is not demanding by modern standards. The benchmark data shows this combo delivers overwhelming performance, ranking in the 1889th position out of 3716 tested combinations, placing it in the upper half of all systems tested. This is a pairing that never struggles to maintain fluid frame rates, regardless of how the user configures the graphical options.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested hardware combinations, this specific CPU and GPU pairing holds a rank of 1889 out of 3716 total combos. This places it in the 50th percentile of all tested systems, which is a solid position for a mid-range desktop build. The ranking reflects that while this isn't an extreme enthusiast setup, it sits comfortably above the median performance level for all tested configurations.

The components themselves perform well above average in their respective categories. The Core i3-12100F has a percentile rank of 68 against all tested CPUs, meaning it outperforms more than two-thirds of all processors in the database. Its average benchmark score of 13494 is nearly identical to the Intel Core 3 N355, which scores 13492, showing a mere 0% performance delta between them. The RX 6700 XT is even more impressive, with a percentile rank of 72 against all GPUs, and an average benchmark score of 27425. This puts it in direct competition with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090, which scores 27565, a delta of just -0.5%, meaning the Radeon card is virtually tied with one of NVIDIA's former flagship cards in synthetic benchmarks.

The combination's mid-pack ranking is less about individual component weakness and more about the game's extreme efficiency. Since Inside is a lightweight title, even lower-tier components can achieve high frame rates, which compresses the performance gap between different hardware configurations and pushes this combo to the middle of the pack despite its strong individual component scores.

Best Settings per Resolution

At every tested resolution, this system can run the game at its highest visual quality preset, Ultra, while maintaining frame rates well above the 60 FPS playability threshold. The data indicates that users should simply select the Ultra preset for the best experience, as there is no need to compromise on visual fidelity.

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers an average of 160 FPS. This is the optimal choice as it provides the highest visual quality with a massive performance buffer.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset achieves an average of 115 FPS. Again, this is the best setting, offering crisp resolution and high detail without any risk of dropping below the playable threshold.

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset still manages an average of 72 FPS. While this is the lowest average across the three resolutions, it remains comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold, making Ultra the recommended setting even at 4K.

The data shows that the system is never bottlenecked by the GPU, even at the highest settings and resolution. All other presets are also playable, but Ultra is always the best choice for maximizing visual quality without sacrificing smoothness.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results clearly indicate that this game is far more dependent on the GPU than the CPU, though the CPU's strong single-threaded performance ensures it never becomes a limiting factor. The Core i3-12100F, with its 4 cores and 8 threads, has a single-thread benchmark score of 893 in 3dmark, which is strong for a budget processor. The game's puzzle-platformer nature means it relies heavily on single-core performance for physics and logic, a workload the i3 handles with ease.

The GPU's role becomes more apparent when examining the scaling between resolutions. At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the system produces 160 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at Ultra drops this to 115 FPS, a 28% decrease. Moving further to 3840x2160 at Ultra drops performance to 72 FPS, another 37% decrease from the 1440p result. This scaling pattern is classic GPU-bound behavior — as the pixel count increases, the workload on the Radeon RX 6700 XT grows proportionally, reducing frame rates.

However, the CPU's influence can be seen in the low-resolution results. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system hits 315 FPS. This extreme frame rate suggests the game is no longer GPU-limited at this point and the CPU's 8 threads are being pushed to their limit. The i3-12100F's multi-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11860, is sufficient to handle the game's logic at these high frame rates, but it is clearly the ceiling at this resolution. At higher resolutions, the GPU takes over as the primary performance driver.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For users considering this build, several other processors and graphics cards would deliver nearly identical performance in Inside. The nearest CPU rivals are all within a 1.1% performance delta of the Core i3-12100F, meaning they would produce indistinguishable frame rates in this game.

The Intel Core 3 N355 is the closest match, with an identical average score of 13492 and a 0% delta. The Intel Core i5-9500 is also a strong alternative, scoring 13452, which is just 0.3% lower. The Intel Core 5 120UL is slightly faster at 13594, a -0.7% delta (meaning it is faster), while the Intel Core i7-1250U is 1.1% slower at 13351. All four processors would deliver effectively the same performance in Inside, so users should choose based on platform and price rather than raw gaming capability.

On the GPU side, the RX 6700 XT's nearest rivals include some heavy hitters. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile scores 27435, a 0% delta, making it a direct performance equivalent. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 scores 27565, which is -0.5% (slightly faster), while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 scores 27839, -1.5% (even faster). The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell is 1.1% slower at 27135. Any of these GPUs would provide nearly identical frame rates in Inside, though the RTX 3090 and Radeon Pro Vega 20 are notably different in terms of power consumption and form factor.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured performance data provides a comprehensive look at how this system handles Inside across all settings and resolutions. The game runs exceptionally well in every configuration tested, with no instance of the frame rate dipping below 60 FPS.

1920x1080 Resolution:

• Low: Average 315 FPS (no min/max data)
• Medium: Average 269 FPS, with minimum 229 and maximum 310 FPS
• High: Average 168 FPS (no min/max data)
• Ultra: Average 160 FPS (no min/max data)

2560x1440 Resolution:

• Low: Average 242 FPS (no min/max data)
• Medium: Average 194 FPS, with minimum 165 and maximum 223 FPS
• High: Average 121 FPS (no min/max data)
• Ultra: Average 115 FPS (no min/max data)

3840x2160 Resolution:

• Low: Average 152 FPS (no min/max data)
• Medium: Average 122 FPS, with minimum 103 and maximum 140 FPS
• High: Average 76 FPS (no min/max data)
• Ultra: Average 72 FPS (no min/max data)

The Medium preset data is the most complete, showing consistent frame times with no significant stuttering. For example, at 4K Medium, the system maintains a minimum of 103 FPS, which is still far above the playability threshold. The data shows a clear and predictable scaling pattern: as resolution increases, frame rates drop proportionally, but the system always retains a massive performance headroom.

The Verdict

This PC can absolutely run Inside at maximum settings across all tested resolutions. The verdict data is unambiguous: at every resolution, all four presets (Low, Medium, High, and Ultra) are deemed playable, meaning they all achieve an average frame rate above the 60 FPS threshold.

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers 160 FPS, which is more than enough for even the most demanding high-refresh-rate monitors. At 2560x1440, Ultra still hits 115 FPS, providing a smooth experience on 1440p displays. Even at 3840x2160, the most demanding scenario, the Ultra preset maintains 72 FPS, ensuring a fluid experience on 4K displays.

The only caveat is that the 4K Ultra result of 72 FPS leaves less headroom than the lower resolutions, but it still clears the playability bar by a healthy margin. For any user with a standard 60Hz monitor, this system will never drop below the target frame rate, even in the most demanding configuration. For users with high-refresh-rate displays, the 1080p and 1440p results provide ample performance to take full advantage of monitors with refresh rates up to 144Hz or even 240Hz. This is a highly capable system for Inside, delivering an excellent experience at any resolution.