Inside

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 74.8 FPS. This is a considerable margin above the 60 FPS threshold, meaning the system has headroom even at the highest settings. High settings at this resolution average 78.4 FPS, while Medium reaches 129.1 FPS and Low climbs to 159.2 FPS.

At 2560x1440, Ultra again qualifies as the best playable setting, averaging 118.4 FPS. This is 58% higher than the 4K Ultra result, demonstrating that the GPU has ample capacity at this resolution. High settings produce 126.6 FPS, Medium reaches 192.6 FPS, and Low hits 207.5 FPS.

At 1920x1080, Ultra settings average 168.4 FPS, which is nearly three times the 60 FPS playability floor. High settings deliver 178.8 FPS, Medium produces 213.4 FPS, and Low reaches 233.5 FPS. Every preset at 1080p clears the threshold by a wide margin, so the choice of settings comes down to visual preference rather than performance necessity.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data shows a workload that scales primarily with resolution, with the GPU becoming the dominant factor as pixel count rises. The frame rate gap between Low and Ultra settings widens dramatically at higher resolutions, which indicates the GPU is the constraining component at 4K. At 3840x2160, Low averages 159.2 FPS while Ultra drops to 74.8 FPS, a 113% performance spread driven entirely by GPU load.

At 2560x1440, the same settings spread shows Low at 207.5 FPS versus Ultra at 118.4 FPS, a 75% difference. At 1920x1080, Low averages 233.5 FPS and Ultra averages 168.4 FPS, a 39% spread. This narrowing gap as resolution decreases suggests the CPU begins to play a more meaningful role at lower resolutions, where the GPU is less saturated and the Intel Core i5-10400F's six cores and twelve threads are more frequently called upon.

The Intel Core i5-10400F shows strong single-thread capabilities in the database, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1451 and a Passmark single-thread score of 2541. Multi-threaded results are also solid, including a Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 4318 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 6257. These figures place the CPU in the 68th percentile among all CPUs, which is sufficient to feed the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT at most settings.

The RX 6750 XT, with its 2560 shading units and 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivers 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory throughput becomes critical at 4K, where the GPU's 13.31 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is the main bottleneck. The data confirms this: at 4K Ultra, the system drops to 74.8 FPS, only 25% above the threshold, while at 1080p Ultra it runs at 168.4 FPS, 181% above the threshold.

Measured FPS Breakdown

3840x2160:

• Low: average 159.2 FPS
• Medium: average 129.1 FPS
• High: average 78.4 FPS
• Ultra: average 74.8 FPS

The step from Medium to High is the largest single drop at this resolution, falling from 129.1 FPS to 78.4 FPS, a 39% reduction. The gap between High and Ultra is smaller, at 4.6%, indicating diminishing returns at the top end.

2560x1440:

• Low: average 207.5 FPS
• Medium: average 192.6 FPS
• High: average 126.6 FPS
• Ultra: average 118.4 FPS

At 1440p, the High to Ultra transition costs only 6.5% performance, while the Medium to High step costs 34%. Low and Medium are both well above 190 FPS, showing that the GPU is not stressed until High settings are enabled.

1920x1080:

• Low: average 233.5 FPS
• Medium: average 213.4 FPS
• High: average 178.8 FPS
• Ultra: average 168.4 FPS

At 1080p, all presets stay above 168 FPS. The largest relative drop is from Medium to High, which falls 16%. Low to Medium costs 8.6%, and High to Ultra costs 5.8%. The system is consistently GPU-bound at this resolution, but the CPU keeps up without issue.

The Verdict

This PC can run Inside at every resolution and preset combination recorded in the database. The verdict by resolution confirms that all four settings at each of the three resolutions are playable, meaning they all average above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the best playable setting is Ultra at 74.8 FPS. This is the only resolution where the system approaches the threshold, but it still clears it by 24.7%. At 2560x1440, Ultra averages 118.4 FPS, nearly double the threshold. At 1920x1080, Ultra averages 168.4 FPS, almost triple the threshold.

The combo rank of 2069 out of 3716 combinations places this hardware in the upper half of tested configurations for this game. The RX 6750 XT sits in the 71st percentile of all GPUs, and the i5-10400F sits in the 68th percentile of all CPUs. Together, they provide a consistent experience that never dips below 74.8 FPS in the most demanding scenario tested.

For players targeting a locked 60 FPS experience, every preset at every resolution qualifies. The minimum headroom is 24.7% at 4K Ultra, which is sufficient for typical frame-time variance. There is no scenario in the measured data where this hardware fails to meet the playability threshold.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals to the Intel Core i5-10400F, based on average benchmark scores, are all within 0.6% of its performance. The Intel Xeon 6756E scores 14163 versus the i5-10400F's 14185 average, a 0.2% delta. The Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232, which is 0.3% higher. The AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115, 0.5% lower, and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14277, 0.6% higher. These CPUs would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Inside, with differences too small to notice in practice.

For the GPU, the AMD Radeon R9 M395X scores 25891 against the RX 6750 XT's 26011 average, a 0.5% delta. The AMD FirePro W7100 scores 25856, 0.6% lower. The AMD FirePro D700 scores 25842, 0.7% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile scores 25740, 1.1% lower. All four rival GPUs fall within 1.1% of the RX 6750 XT's average benchmark score, meaning any of them would produce essentially identical FPS results in Inside at the tested settings.

The practical implication is that swapping the CPU or GPU for any of these near-identical performers would not change the verdict. All configurations would still clear 60 FPS at 4K Ultra, and the ranking relative to other hardware combinations would remain stable.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Inside at 4K with everything maxed out?

A: Yes. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the system averages 74.8 FPS, which is 24.7% above the 60 FPS playability threshold. This is the most demanding scenario in the measured data.

Q: What is the best preset to use at 1440p?

A: Ultra settings at 2560x1440 average 118.4 FPS. Since this is well above 60 FPS and every preset at this resolution is playable, choosing Ultra gives the best visual quality without sacrificing smoothness.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals for this game?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14185. Its nearest rivals, the Intel Xeon 6756E, Intel Core 7 160UL, AMD EPYC 7552, and AMD Ryzen 3 7320C, are all within 0.6% of that score. Any of these CPUs would produce essentially the same frame rates in Inside.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU more important for this game at 4K?

A: The data shows the GPU is the primary constraint at 3840x2160. The frame rate drops from 159.2 FPS on Low to 74.8 FPS on Ultra, a 113% difference, while the CPU's workload remains consistent. The GPU's 432.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 13.31 TFLOPS of compute define the performance ceiling at this resolution.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1080p on High settings?

A: The measured average is 178.8 FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings. This is nearly triple the 60 FPS threshold, leaving substantial headroom for any frame-time spikes or background activity.

Q: Does the system ever drop below 60 FPS in the recorded data?

A: No. The lowest recorded average is 74.8 FPS at 4K Ultra. Every other resolution and preset combination averages higher, from 78.4 FPS at 4K High to 233.5 FPS at 1080p Low.