Inside

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Intel Core i5-10400F sits in a tightly packed group of processors according to the database. Its average benchmark score of 14185 places it within a narrow band of comparable hardware. The closest match is the Intel Xeon 6756E with an average score of 14163, a delta of only 0.2% below the i5-10400F. The AMD EPYC 7552 trails by a similar margin at 14115, which is 0.5% lower. On the other side, the Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232, landing 0.3% ahead, while the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C leads the group at 14277, a 0.6% advantage over the i5-10400F. These four processors effectively bracket the i5-10400F's performance, meaning any of them would deliver nearly identical CPU-bound behavior in Inside. The i5-10400F's six cores and twelve threads, with a 2.90 GHz base clock and 4.30 GHz boost clock, place it in the 68th percentile of all CPUs in the database. For a puzzle platformer like Inside, which relies on modest CPU demands, this level of processing power is far beyond what the game requires, so the CPU is effectively a non-factor in frame rate delivery.

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT shows a more unusual comparison group. Its average benchmark score of 13745 puts it in the 55th percentile of all GPUs, yet its nearest rivals are notably different hardware classes. The AMD Radeon 660M, an integrated graphics solution, scores 13812, which is 0.5% higher than the RX 7900 XT. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile scores 13821, also 0.5% higher. The AMD Radeon RX 570X scores 13871, 0.9% higher. Only the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT sits below, with a score of 13543, which is 1.5% lower than the RX 7900 XT. These deltas are all within a 2.4 percentage point spread, suggesting that the database's aggregate GPU score does not differentiate sharply between these cards. However, for Inside specifically, the measured FPS data tells a different story, one where the RX 7900 XT's raw rasterization power dominates the game's simple 2D side-scrolling visuals.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data for Inside reveals a clear pattern: the GPU is the dominant component at every resolution, but the game is so undemanding that even the CPU's modest position in the database does not constrain performance. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces 230.5 FPS. At 2560x1440 Low, it drops to 205.9 FPS, a reduction of 10.7%. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls to 177.9 FPS, another 13.6% drop from the 1440p figure. This scaling with resolution indicates that the GPU is doing the heavy lifting, as frame rates decline when pixel count rises.

The same pattern holds across presets. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium reduces the average from 230.5 to 213.5 FPS, a 7.4% decrease. High settings bring 181.7 FPS, and Ultra drops to 176.9 FPS. At 1440p, the progression is similar: Low at 205.9, Medium at 193.6, High at 157.6, and Ultra at 160 FPS. The anomaly here is that High is slightly slower than Ultra at 1440p, with a 1.5% difference, likely a measurement quirk rather than a meaningful trend. At 4K, Low produces 177.9 FPS, Medium 166.7, High 112.5, and Ultra 106.4 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 40.2% at 4K, compared to 23.2% at 1080p and 22.3% at 1440p. This widening gap at higher resolutions confirms that GPU load scales with both resolution and settings, while the CPU remains unbothered. The Core i5-10400F's benchmark scores, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10283 and a single-core score of 1451, are more than sufficient for a game of this complexity.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the Intel Core i5-10400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT delivers frame rates that are exceptionally high across all settings. Low settings produce an average of 230.5 FPS. Medium settings reach 213.5 FPS. High settings yield 181.7 FPS. Ultra settings deliver 176.9 FPS. Every preset clears the 60 FPS playability threshold by a wide margin, with the lowest average still nearly three times the threshold.

Stepping up to 2560x1440, the averages remain far above 60 FPS. Low settings record 205.9 FPS. Medium settings hit 193.6 FPS. High settings drop to 157.6 FPS. Ultra settings measure 160 FPS. The delta between High and Ultra is worth noting: Ultra is actually 1.5% faster than High in this measurement, which is within normal run-to-run variance for a game like Inside. All four presets at 1440p exceed the playability threshold by more than 2.6 times.

At 3840x2160, the performance is still strong. Low settings average 177.9 FPS. Medium settings reach 166.7 FPS. High settings produce 112.5 FPS. Ultra settings deliver 106.4 FPS. Even at 4K with Ultra settings, the average frame rate is 77.3% above the 60 FPS threshold. The minimum and maximum FPS values are not recorded in the database, so the analysis relies solely on average frame rates, but those averages are consistently high enough that frame time variance would need to be extreme to cause perceptible stutter.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: this system can run Inside at every resolution and preset combination recorded in the database. At 1920x1080, all four settings are playable, with Ultra averaging 176.9 FPS. At 2560x1440, all four settings are playable, with Ultra averaging 160 FPS. At 3840x2160, all four settings are playable, with Ultra averaging 106.4 FPS. The verdict field for each resolution lists High, Low, Medium, and Ultra as playable, and the best setting at each resolution is Ultra.

The RX 7900 XT, despite its end-of-life production status and a 55th percentile aggregate GPU score, is massively overprovisioned for this game. The Core i5-10400F, with its 68th percentile CPU score, never becomes a bottleneck. The result is a system that not only clears 60 FPS but does so with enough headroom to run the game at nearly three times that rate at 1080p Low and comfortably above 100 FPS at 4K Ultra. For players with high refresh rate displays, the 1440p and 1080p results provide ample frame rates to exploit those panels. For 4K display owners, the Ultra preset at 106.4 FPS is the recommended configuration, as it delivers the highest visual quality while still maintaining a comfortable margin above the playability threshold.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database's ranking of tested CPU and GPU combinations for Inside, this pair ranks 1695 out of 3716 combos. That places it in the 54.4th percentile of all tested systems, meaning roughly 45.6% of tested combos perform better in this game. Given the sheer volume of hardware combinations tracked in the database, a mid-pack ranking is expected for a system pairing a mainstream desktop processor with a high-end graphics card. The ranking reflects that many tested combos include newer or more powerful CPUs and GPUs, but for Inside specifically, the practical difference between this combo and higher-ranked systems is negligible. The game's visual style and low geometric complexity do not meaningfully reward hardware beyond what this pair already delivers. The rank of 1695 indicates that while this is not a top-tier combo in the database, it is far from the bottom, and the measured frame rates confirm that the ranking does not translate into any playability concerns for this title.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Inside at 60 FPS on a 4K display?

A: Yes. At 3840x2160, all four tested settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) clear the 60 FPS threshold. The lowest average among them is Ultra at 106.4 FPS.

Q: What is the best settings preset for this system at 1440p?

A: Ultra is the best setting at 2560x1440, with an average of 160 FPS. All other presets also exceed 60 FPS, with Low at 205.9, Medium at 193.6, and High at 157.6 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14185. The Intel Xeon 6756E scores 14163 (0.2% lower), the AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115 (0.5% lower), the Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232 (0.3% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14277 (0.6% higher).

Q: Is the GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The frame rate scaling between resolutions indicates the GPU is the primary driver. For example, at Low settings, 1080p averages 230.5 FPS, 1440p averages 205.9 FPS, and 4K averages 177.9 FPS, showing a clear decline as resolution increases.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings average 230.5 FPS while Ultra settings average 176.9 FPS, a difference of 23.2% in favor of Low.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems for Inside?

A: This CPU and GPU combination ranks 1695 out of 3716 tested combos in the database for Inside, placing it just above the middle of all tested systems.