Inside

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-10400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 ranks 1790 out of 3716 tested combinations in Inside. That placement places this combo in the upper half of the database, but it is not an extreme outlier at the top. The percentile positioning is more instructive when broken down by component: the CPU sits at the 68th percentile among all processors, while the GPU sits at the 69th percentile among all graphics cards. Both components are clustered around the same relative performance tier, which suggests a balanced pairing rather than one component dramatically outperforming the other.

What does rank 1790 out of 3716 actually mean for gameplay? The recorded data shows that this combination clears the 60 FPS threshold at every resolution tested, including 4K with Ultra settings. The fact that the combo is not ranked near the very top of the database is less relevant for a game like Inside, which is a puzzle platformer with modest rendering demands. The rank reflects the combination's standing across all tested games and all hardware pairings, but for this specific title, the performance headroom is substantial. The data indicates that this is a configuration that will not struggle with Inside under any tested condition.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this picture. The CPU's average benchmark score is 14185, and the GPU's average benchmark score is 23877. Both figures place the hardware comfortably in the mid-upper range of the database. When combined, the two components produce frame rates that are far above the playable threshold of 60 FPS in every scenario. The lowest recorded average is 93 FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, which is still more than 50% above the playable threshold.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core i5-10400F are a mix of server and mobile processors that cluster tightly around its average score. The Intel Xeon 6756E posts an average score of 14163, which is just 0.2% behind the i5-10400F. The Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232, a 0.3% advantage over the i5-10400F. The AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115, 0.5% behind, and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14277, 0.6% ahead. All four rivals are within a single percentage point of the i5-10400F's average benchmark score, which means that in CPU-bound scenarios, any of these processors would deliver nearly identical performance. For Inside specifically, the CPU is unlikely to be the limiting factor at any resolution, so swapping the i5-10400F for any of these rivals would produce very similar frame rates.

On the GPU side, the AMD Radeon RX 9070 has nearest rivals that are also tightly grouped. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z scores 23736, which is 0.6% behind the RX 9070. The AMD Radeon RX 6800S scores 24063, 0.8% ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile scores 23628, 1.1% behind, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER scores 24170, 1.2% ahead. The RX 9070 sits in the middle of this cluster, with no rival more than 1.2% away in either direction. For Inside, all of these GPUs would produce frame rates in the same general range. At 1080p and 1440p, the differences would be small in absolute terms because the game is already running at very high frame rates. At 4K, the differences would still be modest, with all of these graphics cards likely remaining well above 60 FPS.

The practical takeaway from the nearest rivals data is that the i5-10400F and RX 9070 combination is not unique in its capabilities. A system built with any of the rival CPUs or GPUs listed would deliver a similar experience in Inside. The frame rate differences would be within a few percentage points, which is unlikely to be perceptible in a puzzle platformer where the visual action is not extremely fast-paced.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data reveals how the CPU and GPU share the workload in Inside across resolutions and presets. The clearest signal is the scaling from 1080p to 4K at each preset level. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 233 FPS at 1920x1080 to 208 FPS at 2560x1440, then to 179 FPS at 3840x2160. That is a 54 FPS drop from 1080p to 4K, or roughly a 23% reduction. At Medium settings, the average drops from 215 FPS at 1080p to 192 FPS at 1440p to 157 FPS at 4K, a 58 FPS drop from 1080p to 4K, or about 27%. At High settings, the averages are 179 FPS at 1080p, 156 FPS at 1440p, and 98 FPS at 4K, a 81 FPS drop, or 45%. At Ultra settings, the averages are 176 FPS at 1080p, 148 FPS at 1440p, and 93 FPS at 4K, an 83 FPS drop, or 47%.

The pattern is clear: as resolution increases, the frame rate drops more steeply at higher presets. This indicates that the GPU becomes progressively more important as both resolution and graphical complexity increase. At Low and Medium settings, the resolution scaling is relatively gentle, suggesting that the CPU can keep up with the frame rate demands even at 4K. At High and Ultra settings, the larger frame rate drops from 1440p to 4K (58 FPS and 55 FPS respectively, compared to 23 FPS and 20 FPS from 1080p to 1440p) indicate that the GPU is shouldering a much heavier load.

The CPU's role is most apparent at lower resolutions and lower presets, where frame rates are very high. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 233 FPS on average. At 1080p Ultra, it still manages 176 FPS. The relatively small gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p (57 FPS) suggests that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with enough data to sustain high frame rates regardless of the preset. At 4K, the gap between Low and Ultra widens to 86 FPS (179 FPS versus 93 FPS), which reinforces that the GPU is the dominant factor at higher resolutions.

The verdict from the data is that Inside is not a CPU-heavy game for this hardware combination. The i5-10400F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, is more than sufficient to drive the RX 9070 at all tested settings. The GPU is the component that determines the frame rate ceiling, especially at 4K with High or Ultra presets.

The Verdict

This PC can absolutely run Inside. The verdict data is unambiguous: at every resolution tested, all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are marked as playable, meaning they all clear the 60 FPS threshold. The best settings at each resolution are the most demanding preset, Ultra, and the average frame rates at Ultra are 93 FPS at 3840x2160, 148 FPS at 2560x1440, and 176 FPS at 1920x1080.

For a game like Inside, which is a puzzle platformer with a deliberate pace, 60 FPS is a comfortable target. The recorded data shows that this combination exceeds that target by a wide margin in every scenario. Even the most demanding combination of 4K resolution and Ultra settings produces an average of 93 FPS, which leaves 33 FPS of headroom above the playable threshold. At 1440p and 1080p, the frame rates are high enough that the game will feel extremely smooth, with averages of 148 FPS and 176 FPS respectively at Ultra.

The minimum frame rates are only recorded for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 133 FPS; at 1440p Medium, the minimum is 164 FPS; at 1080p Medium, the minimum is 183 FPS. These minimums are all well above 60 FPS, which indicates that even in demanding moments, the frame rate will not dip into problematic territory. The absence of minimum data for other presets does not imply poor performance; it simply means that the database only recorded minimums for Medium.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the recorded averages are as follows. Low settings produce 179 FPS. Medium settings produce 157 FPS on average, with a minimum of 133 FPS and a maximum of 180 FPS. High settings produce 98 FPS. Ultra settings produce 93 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a steady decline, with the largest single drop occurring between Medium and High, a 59 FPS reduction from 157 FPS to 98 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra is only 5 FPS, which suggests that the Ultra preset adds relatively little additional load over High at 4K.

At 2560x1440, the averages are higher across the board. Low settings produce 208 FPS. Medium settings produce 192 FPS on average, with a minimum of 164 FPS and a maximum of 221 FPS. High settings produce 156 FPS. Ultra settings produce 148 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 60 FPS, which is a smaller relative reduction than at 4K. The gap between High and Ultra is 8 FPS, again indicating that Ultra is not dramatically more demanding than High at this resolution.

At 1920x1080, the averages are the highest in the dataset. Low settings produce 233 FPS. Medium settings produce 215 FPS on average, with a minimum of 183 FPS and a maximum of 247 FPS. High settings produce 179 FPS. Ultra settings produce 176 FPS. The total drop from Low to Ultra is 57 FPS, and notably, the difference between High and Ultra is only 3 FPS. This suggests that at 1080p, the Ultra preset offers essentially the same frame rate as High, making the choice between them purely a matter of visual preference.

The pattern across all resolutions is that the Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum values, and those minimums are all comfortably above 60 FPS. The frame rate deltas between presets are largest at 4K, which is expected given the increased GPU load at higher resolutions.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which maintains an average of 93 FPS. Since all four presets are playable at this resolution, the recommendation is to use Ultra for the best visual quality. The 93 FPS average provides enough headroom above the 60 FPS threshold that occasional dips are unlikely to cause noticeable stuttering.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are also Ultra, with an average of 148 FPS. This is a substantial margin over the 60 FPS threshold, giving the player room to enable any additional visual features without concern. The 148 FPS average at Ultra is more than double the playable threshold, so the system is not stressed at this resolution.

At 1920x1080, Ultra is again the recommended preset, with an average of 176 FPS. This is the highest frame rate at the most demanding preset across all resolutions. The 176 FPS average is nearly three times the playable threshold, indicating that the system has significant performance headroom at 1080p.

The data shows that there is no resolution or preset combination where this hardware falls below 60 FPS. The Ultra preset is always the best choice, and the frame rates at Ultra are high enough that the game will run smoothly on any of the tested displays.

FAQ

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

A: Yes. The recorded data shows an average of 93 FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the highest average frame rate recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average is 233 FPS, recorded at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: How much performance headroom is there at 1440p Ultra?

A: The average frame rate at 2560x1440 with Ultra settings is 148 FPS, which is 88 FPS above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: Are there any settings where the frame rate drops below 60 FPS?

A: No. All tested presets at all three resolutions are marked as playable, meaning they all clear 60 FPS. The lowest average is 93 FPS at 4K Ultra.

Q: What minimum frame rates were recorded?

A: Minimums were only recorded for the Medium preset. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 133 FPS; at 1440p Medium, it is 164 FPS; at 1080p Medium, it is 183 FPS.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested combinations?

A: It ranks 1790 out of 3716 tested combos in Inside, placing it in the upper half of the database. The CPU is at the 68th percentile and the GPU is at the 69th percentile among all tested components.