Inside

Measured FPS Breakdown

Starting with the most demanding resolution, 3840x2160, the data shows a wide performance spread across the four presets. At Low settings, the combo averages 133.8 FPS, which drops to 106.8 FPS on Medium. High settings come in at 67 FPS, while Ultra averages 62.1 FPS. Interestingly, the gap between High and Ultra is relatively small, only about 5 FPS, suggesting that the Ultra preset's additional visual effects are not particularly taxing on this hardware at 4K. The step from Medium to High is much larger, a 39.8 FPS reduction, which indicates that High introduces a significant rendering load increase over Medium.

Moving down to 2560x1440, the headroom becomes much more comfortable. Low settings deliver 206.9 FPS, Medium reaches 166.2 FPS, and High still holds 108 FPS. Ultra averages 98.9 FPS, which is a smaller drop from High compared to the 4K behavior. The pattern suggests that at 1440p, the GPU is less constrained by pixel throughput, so the gap between presets narrows. The difference between Low and Medium is 40.7 FPS, while the difference between Medium and High is 58.2 FPS, showing that High is the most demanding step in the preset ladder at this resolution.

At 1920x1080, the performance is exceptionally high across the board. Low averages 234.4 FPS, Medium 213.5 FPS, and High 147.6 FPS. Ultra still delivers 137.4 FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium is only 20.9 FPS, which is a modest penalty for the visual upgrade. The larger drop occurs between Medium and High, a 65.9 FPS reduction, which again points to High being the inflection point for this game's rendering complexity. All recorded values are averages; the database does not include minimum or maximum frame time data for this title, so variance and stutter behavior cannot be assessed from the current measurements.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Inside at 4K Ultra settings?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 62.1 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. The database lists Ultra as playable at 4K, along with High, Medium, and Low.

Q: What is the best preset to use at 2560x1440 if aiming for maximum quality?

A: Ultra settings at 1440p produce an average of 98.9 FPS. Since all four presets are listed as playable at this resolution, Ultra is the recommended choice for visual fidelity while still maintaining a high frame rate.

Q: How much performance headroom is there at 1080p?

A: The lowest measured average at 1080p is 137.4 FPS on Ultra. Low settings reach 234.4 FPS. This represents a 97 FPS difference between the lowest and highest presets, indicating substantial headroom for future driver updates or background tasks.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to bottleneck at 4K?

A: The data shows that at 4K, the average FPS drops from 133.8 on Low to 67 on High, a 66.8 FPS reduction. This large scaling with settings indicates the GPU is the primary limiter at this resolution, as the CPU workload for a puzzle platformer like Inside is likely less demanding than the pixel throughput required.

Q: Does the game scale well with settings changes at 1440p?

A: Yes, the scaling is consistent. Low averages 206.9 FPS, Medium 166.2 FPS, High 108 FPS, and Ultra 98.9 FPS. Each preset step reduces performance by a measurable amount, with the largest drop occurring between Medium and High.

Q: What is the playable threshold used in the verdict?

A: The database uses a playable threshold of 60 FPS. All four presets at all three resolutions meet or exceed this threshold, as shown in the measured averages.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 62.1 FPS. This is a narrow margin above the threshold, so users who prefer a larger safety buffer might consider High at 67 FPS, but the data confirms Ultra is technically playable.

For 2560x1440, Ultra is again the best choice, averaging 98.9 FPS. This provides a 38.9 FPS cushion above the 60 FPS threshold, making it a comfortable setting for high refresh rate displays that support up to 100 Hz.

At 1920x1080, Ultra averages 137.4 FPS. This is the optimal preset for maximum quality, as it leaves a 77.4 FPS buffer above the threshold. For users with 144 Hz monitors, Medium at 213.5 FPS or Low at 234.4 FPS would be required to fully saturate the refresh rate, but Ultra remains the best quality option that clears 60 FPS.

The Verdict

The recorded data answers the question directly: yes, this PC can run Inside at all three tested resolutions with every preset enabled. At 3840x2160, the verdict lists High, Low, Medium, and Ultra as playable, with Ultra averaging 62.1 FPS. This is the only resolution where the margin above the 60 FPS threshold is thin, so there is little room for performance degradation from background processes or thermal throttling.

At 2560x1440, the verdict is more decisive. All four presets are playable, and Ultra averages 98.9 FPS. This means users can enable the highest quality settings without worrying about frame rate dips below the threshold. The 38.9 FPS buffer provides a solid margin for consistent gameplay.

At 1920x1080, the verdict is unambiguous. Ultra averages 137.4 FPS, which is more than double the 60 FPS playable threshold. Even the most demanding preset leaves a large performance reserve. The data indicates that this combination of Intel Core i5-10400F and AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is well suited for Inside at any resolution up to 4K, with the only caveat being the relatively small headroom at 4K Ultra.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the CPU benchmarks, the Intel Core i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14185, placing it at the 68th percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Xeon 6756E with an average score of 14163 and a delta of 0.2%, meaning it is essentially tied in performance. The AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115, which is 0.5% lower, and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14277, which is 0.6% higher. The Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232, putting it 0.3% above the i5-10400F. In practical terms, any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Inside, as the game is not likely to be CPU-bound at the tested resolutions.

For the GPU side, the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT has an average benchmark score of 17083, placing it at the 60th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 with a score of 17037 and a delta of 0.3%, meaning the RX 7600 XT is essentially equivalent. The AMD Radeon HD 7970M scores 17019, which is 0.4% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 scores 17208, which is 0.7% higher, making it a slightly faster option. The NVIDIA Tesla M4 scores 16932, which is 0.9% lower. When paired with the i5-10400F, these GPU alternatives would produce very similar FPS numbers in Inside, with the RTX 3070 being the only one that might show a small measurable advantage.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, the Intel Core i5-10400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT ranks 2659 out of 3716 combos for Inside. This places the combo in the lower portion of the rankings, specifically around the 28th percentile of all tested systems. However, this ranking does not reflect playability, since the combo clears the 60 FPS threshold at all resolutions. The rank is more indicative of how this hardware compares to the broader range of systems tested, which likely includes many higher-end configurations with newer CPUs and GPUs. The data shows that despite the modest ranking, the actual gameplay experience is smooth across all settings, which suggests that Inside is not a particularly demanding title for this hardware combination.

CPU and GPU Roles

The division of labor between the Intel Core i5-10400F and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT becomes clearer when examining the FPS scaling across resolutions and presets. At 3840x2160, the FPS drops from 133.8 on Low to 67 on High, a 49.9% reduction. This large sensitivity to settings indicates that the GPU is the dominant factor at 4K, as increasing the preset raises the pixel shading and texture work that the GPU must handle.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds but with a smaller magnitude. Low averages 206.9 FPS, while High drops to 108 FPS, a 47.8% reduction. The GPU still drives the performance difference, but the absolute frame rates are higher, suggesting that the CPU is not limiting at this resolution either. The jump to Ultra only reduces FPS by 9.1 compared to High, which indicates that the Ultra preset adds fewer GPU-intensive effects than the step from Medium to High.

At 1920x1080, the CPU begins to play a more noticeable role. Low averages 234.4 FPS, which is a very high frame rate that could start to approach the limits of what the CPU can feed to the GPU. The drop from Low to Medium is only 20.9 FPS, and from Medium to High it is 65.9 FPS. The fact that High and Ultra still deliver 147.6 and 137.4 FPS respectively suggests that the CPU is still capable at 1080p, but the scaling pattern implies that the GPU is not fully utilized at Low settings, where the frame rate is likely constrained by the CPU's single-thread performance.

The benchmark data supports this interpretation. The i5-10400F has a 3DMark single-thread score of 688 and a Passmark single-thread score of 2541, which are moderate values. The GPU's Passmark G3D score of 17132 is relatively strong. In a game like Inside, which is a puzzle platformer with relatively simple geometry but potentially complex lighting and post-processing, the GPU's rasterization and shading capabilities are the primary drivers of performance at higher resolutions and presets. The CPU's role becomes more relevant only at lower resolutions and settings, where the frame rate ceiling is high enough to expose any per-frame CPU overhead.

The data also shows that at 4K, the difference between Low and Ultra is 71.7 FPS, while at 1080p, the same comparison yields a 97 FPS difference. This wider gap at 1080p indicates that the GPU has more headroom at lower resolutions, allowing the preset changes to have a larger absolute impact. At 4K, the GPU is already working closer to its limit, so the preset changes have a smaller absolute effect. This pattern is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario at 4K and a more balanced scenario at 1080p.