Inside

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the recorded data shows a clear stratification across the four presets. The Low preset averages 58.9 FPS, with the minimum and maximum figures not explicitly recorded in the dataset. Medium settings drop to 47.9 FPS on average. High settings are more demanding, yielding an average of 27.6 FPS, while the Ultra preset is the most demanding, averaging 26.8 FPS. This resolution is the most punishing for the hardware, and the gap between Low and Ultra is substantial, a 32.1 FPS difference between the two averages. At 2560x1440, performance improves considerably. The Low preset averages 95.6 FPS, which is a strong result for this pixel count. Medium settings average 76.1 FPS, still comfortably above the playable threshold. High averages 50.1 FPS, and Ultra averages 48.5 FPS. At 1920x1080, the data shows the most headroom. Low settings average 136.3 FPS, an excellent result that suggests the system is not the limiting factor at this resolution. Medium settings average 106.9 FPS, again a very playable result. High settings average 65.8 FPS, and Ultra averages 63.7 FPS. The measured values indicate that the Ultra preset at 1920x1080 is the first setting that dips below the 60 FPS line on average, while all other presets at this resolution stay above it.

The delta between resolutions is significant. From 3840x2160 to 2560x1440, the average FPS roughly doubles across all presets. For example, Low goes from 58.9 to 95.6 FPS, an improvement of approximately 62%. Medium goes from 47.9 to 76.1 FPS, an improvement of 59%. High goes from 27.6 to 50.1 FPS, an improvement of 82%. Ultra goes from 26.8 to 48.5 FPS, an improvement of 81%. This scaling pattern points to a system that is heavily dependent on pixel throughput at 4K, and the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck at that resolution. At 2560x1440, the GPU is still stressed, but the CPU has more room to breathe. At 1920x1080, the CPU and GPU are both able to deliver well above 60 FPS, indicating that the combination is well balanced for this resolution.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results reveal a system where the CPU and GPU contributions shift with resolution. At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the primary constraint. The frame rates at this resolution are below the playable threshold at all presets, which points to the GeForce GTX 1650 being unable to keep up with the pixel workload. The CPU, a six-core Alder Lake part, is not the limiting factor here; even the strongest preset only reaches 26.8 FPS, a result that is far below the 60 FPS target.

At 2560x1440, the balance starts to improve. The GPU is still heavily loaded, but the CPU is doing more work. The fact that Medium settings average 76.1 FPS and Low settings average 95.6 FPS shows that the GPU is not entirely maxed out at this resolution, but it remains the weaker link. The High and Ultra presets, averaging 50.1 and 48.6 FPS respectively, indicate that the GPU is still the limiting factor, but the headroom for improvement is smaller than at 4K.

At 1920x1080, the CPU and GPU combination is finally well matched. Low settings average 136.4 FPS, Medium 106.9 FPS, High 65.8 FPS, and Ultra 63.7 FPS. Here, the rendering workload is moderate enough that both the GPU and the CPU can feed frames well above the 60 FPS target. The scaling from 2560x1440 to 1920x1080 is approximately linear, with FPS improvements of roughly 40% to 50% across the presets. This is consistent with a game where frame rate scales with the number of pixels, rather than with any specific engine feature that would cause a nonlinear spike.

The CPU, an Intel Core i5-12400 with 6 cores and 12 threads, is a capable mid-range part. Its benchmark scores in the database, such as a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15989 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 8564, place it well above the minimum needed for this game at lower resolutions. The GPU, a GeForce GTX 1650 with 896 shader units and 32 ROPs, is a modest part in this pairing. Its measured performance, including a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 305 and a Passmark G3D score of 7880, puts it in the lower middle of the GPU hierarchy. The recorded data shows that the GPU is more often the limiting component across all resolutions, except for 1920x1080 at Low and Medium presets, where the CPU is also not the constraint.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves the 60 FPS target. The Low preset comes closest, averaging 58.9 FPS, but it still falls short. The data indicates that even at Low, the GPU is the limiting factor. Users who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity should consider lowering the internal rendering resolution if the game allows it, but the recorded presets themselves do not cross the playable threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra average 47.9, 27.6, and 26.8 FPS respectively, all firmly in unplayable territory.

At 2560x1440, the playable presets are Low and Medium. Low averages 95.6 FPS, and Medium averages 76.1 FPS. Both provide a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. High and Ultra average 50.1 and 48.5 FPS respectively, meaning they miss the target. The best setting is Medium, which delivers an average of 76.1 FPS. It offers a substantial cushion over 60 FPS while providing a visual upgrade over Low. The data suggests that the GPU is still the main constraint at this resolution, but with more headroom than at 4K.

At 1920x1080, the playable presets include High, Low, Medium, and Ultra. The High preset averages 65.8 FPS, which is just above the threshold, meaning it is only marginally playable. Low averages 136.4 FPS, Medium averages 106.9 FPS, and Ultra averages 63.7 FPS. The best setting is Ultra, which averages 63.7 FPS. It provides the strongest visual quality while still maintaining an average above 60 FPS. The measured margin is small, at roughly 3.7 FPS, so users with particularly demanding scenes may see dips below the threshold.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rival to the Core i5-12400 in the database is the AMD EPYC 7643, with an average benchmark score of 18697, a 0.1% difference from this CPU's average. The Intel Core i7-1355U averages 18730, a 0.3% difference. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 averages 18811, a 0.7% difference. The Intel Core i3-14100F averages 18519, a 0.9% difference. In practical terms, any of these CPUs would deliver very similar CPU-limited frame rates in this game. For the GPU, the closest rival is the Radeon HD 8850M, with an average benchmark score of 7447, a 0.3% difference. The Intel UHD 750 averages 7441, a 0.4% difference. The Radeon R7 350 averages 7425, a 0.6% difference. The Arc A310 averages 7550, a 1% difference. Any of these GPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in GPU-limited scenes.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Inside? Using the recorded data and the resolution-specific results, the answer is conditional on the resolution. At 1920x1080, the system clears the 60 FPS target at Ultra settings, averaging 63.7 FPS. This is the recommended resolution for a fully smooth experience. At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset does not pass, averaging 48.5 FPS, but the Medium preset comfortably passes, averaging 76.1 FPS. At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS; the Low preset averages 58.9 FPS, which is the closest. The verdict is that this PC can run the game at 1080p with all presets playable, and at 1440p with Low or Medium presets playable. At 4K, the GPU is the limiting factor, and the game is not playable at any preset.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Inside at 4K?

A: No. At 3840x2160, even the lowest preset only averages 58.9 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. The GPU is the limiting component at this resolution.

Q: What is the best preset at 1440p?

A: Medium. It averages 76.1 FPS, providing a comfortable margin above 60 FPS while delivering better visuals than Low. High (60.1 FPS) is borderline playable, and Ultra (58.5 FPS) is just below the threshold.

Q: Is the Ultra preset at 1080p smooth?

A: Barely. The Ultra preset averages 63.7 FPS, which is above 60, but the margin is small. For scenes with heavy particle effects or complex geometry, frame rate dips are possible. High averages 65.8 FPS and offers a slightly lower visual load.

Q: Which component matters more at 4K?

A: The GPU. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the bottleneck at 3840x2160. CPU utilization is not high enough to offset the GPU's inability to process the pixel count at the required speed.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this pairing of the Core i5-12400 and GeForce GTX 1650 achieves a combo rank of 3619 out of 3716. This places it in the lower portion of the tested rankings. The CPU is a capable mid-range desktop part, and the GPU is a modest entry-level part by current standards. The pairing is balanced for 1920x1080 gaming, and it is at 1080p where this system should be used. The benchmark results show a playable experience at that resolution across all presets, with the Ultra preset just above the 60 FPS line. For 1440p, the Medium preset is the recommended choice. At 4K, the measured performance falls below the playable threshold at all presets.