Inside

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-12400F paired with the Intel Arc B370 lands at rank 3422 out of 3716 tested combos in the database for Inside. That places this configuration in the bottom 8 percent of all recorded system pairings, a striking result for a game that is a modest puzzle platformer from 2016. The low rank is not driven by the CPU, which sits at the 73rd percentile among all processors in the database with an average benchmark score of 19039. The bottleneck is almost entirely the graphics side: the Arc B370 rests at the 5th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of just 1184.

The data suggests a severely imbalanced pairing. The i5-12400F delivers strong synthetic results, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12380 and a single-core score of 1680, while the Arc B370 produces a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of only 1184. In a 2D side-scrolling title like Inside, one might expect the CPU to carry most of the load, yet the measured frame rates tell a different story. At 4K Ultra, the combo averages just 30 FPS, and at 1440p Ultra it only reaches 48 FPS. These are not CPU-limited numbers; they are GPU-limited outcomes.

The rank of 3422 out of 3716 means that roughly 92 percent of recorded combos outperform this pairing in Inside. That is a harsh verdict, but the measured data supports it. When the preset drops to Low, the system jumps to 141 FPS at 1080p and 64 FPS at 4K, which shows the Arc B370 can handle the game when the rendering load is light. The problem is that the GPU runs out of headroom quickly as settings rise. The CPU has plenty of spare capacity; the 3DMark 16-thread score of 5895 and the PassMark multithread score of 19433 indicate a processor that could drive far higher frame rates if the GPU could keep up. This is a case where the graphics adapter, not the processor, defines the ceiling.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 67 FPS. This is the full experience: the combo clears the playable threshold at every setting at this resolution. Low runs at 141 FPS, Medium at 113 FPS with a minimum of 96 FPS, and High at 70 FPS. The jump from High to Ultra costs only 3 FPS on average, which makes Ultra the obvious choice for 1080p owners.

At 2560x1440, the best playable preset is Medium, averaging 81 FPS with a minimum of 69 FPS. High drops to 51 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS playable line, and Ultra sits at 48 FPS. Low runs at 101 FPS, but Medium offers a substantial visual upgrade while still holding a comfortable margin above the threshold. The minimum of 69 FPS at Medium means even the worst frame times stay above 60 FPS, so there is no stutter risk in demanding scenes.

At 3840x2160, the situation tightens considerably. The only playable setting is Low, which averages 64 FPS. Medium averages 51 FPS with a minimum of 43 FPS and a maximum of 59 FPS, so it never reaches 60 FPS even at its best. High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. For 4K users, the choice is binary: run Low for a playable experience or accept sub-60 performance at higher presets. The database shows no setting above Low clears the threshold at 4K.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions and presets reveals which component limits performance. Consider the 1080p to 1440p transition at Medium settings: average FPS drops from 113 to 81, a reduction of 32 FPS, or roughly 28 percent. Moving from 1440p Medium to 4K Medium drops the average from 81 to 51, another 30 FPS loss. This consistent degradation as pixel count rises points directly at the GPU as the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate would stay flat across resolutions, but it does not.

Preset scaling reinforces the same conclusion. At 1080p, Low produces 141 FPS, Medium 113 FPS, High 70 FPS, and Ultra 67 FPS. The massive drop from Medium to High, 43 FPS, suggests the Arc B370 struggles with the increased shading and texture work at High settings. At 1440p, the same pattern appears: Low at 101 FPS, Medium at 81 FPS, then a fall to 51 FPS at High. The GPU's 1280 shading units and 40 texture mapping units simply run out of throughput when the preset demands more per-pixel work.

The CPU's role is minimal in this game. The i5-12400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its Cinebench R20 single-core score of 985 and Geekbench single-core score of 1964 are more than sufficient for a puzzle platformer. The recorded data shows no scenario where the CPU appears to hold back the GPU. Even at 1080p Low, where the GPU is least stressed, the system reaches 141 FPS, but a stronger GPU would likely push that number much higher given the CPU's headroom. The Arc B370, with a 25 W TDP and integrated graphics design, is the definitive performance boundary.

The 3DMark single-thread score of 909 and the PassMark single-thread score of 3481 for the CPU further confirm that processing power is not the issue. The GPU's 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while modest, is also not the whole story. The real limitation is the GPU's memory architecture: system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. That design choice constrains how quickly textures and framebuffers can be moved around, which hurts most at higher resolutions and presets.

Similar Performance Alternatives

On the CPU side, the nearest rivals to the i5-12400F are all within a fraction of a percent of its average score of 19039. The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS scores 19047, a delta of 0 percent. The Intel Core 3 201E scores 19056, a delta of negative 0.1 percent. The Intel Core i5-1335U scores 19082, a delta of 0.3 percent. The AMD EPYC 7773X scores 19079, a delta of 0.3 percent. Any of these processors would behave nearly identically in Inside, since the game is GPU-bound, so swapping between them would change the measured frame rates by less than a few percent in practice.

The GPU side tells a more interesting story. The Arc B370's nearest rival is the ATI Mobility Radeon 5570, which scores 1184 in the same 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark, a delta of negative 0.2 percent. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, a delta of 0.5 percent higher, and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, a delta of negative 0.7 percent. The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, a delta of 1.4 percent. These scores are all within 1.4 percent of each other, meaning any of these GPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Inside. The benchmark results indicate that the Arc B370 is effectively a contemporary equivalent to GPUs from a much earlier era, which explains its low percentile and its struggles at higher presets.

What the data does not show is a path forward through rival hardware. None of the nearest rivals offer a meaningful upgrade path, as they are all within a few percent of the same score. The implication is that users who find the Arc B370 lacking at High settings would need to look outside this GPU tier entirely, not to a near neighbor, to find better performance in Inside.

One more point worth noting from the CPU rivals list: the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, the Intel Core 3 201E, the Intel Core i5-1335U, the AMD EPYC 7773X are all desktop or mobile parts with similar overall benchmark averages, but the game's performance difference between any of them would be negligible because Inside does not stress the CPU hard enough to expose their differences.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full set of recorded measurements is as follows. Low averages 141 FPS. Medium averages 113 FPS, with a minimum of 96 FPS and a maximum of 130 FPS. High averages 70 FPS. Ultra averages 67 FPS. Every preset clears the 60 FPS threshold, and the minimum recorded at Medium, 96 FPS, is well above the playable line. The narrow gap between High and Ultra, only 3 FPS, suggests the Arc B370 is already saturated by the time High is enabled.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 101 FPS. Medium averages 81 FPS, with a minimum of 69 FPS and a maximum of 93 FPS. High averages 51 FPS. Ultra averages 48 FPS. The step from Medium to High costs 30 FPS, a 37 percent drop, which is the largest single-preset penalty in the entire dataset. The minimum at Medium, 69 FPS, still clears the threshold, but the average at High falls short.

At 3840x2160, Low averages 64 FPS. Medium averages 51 FPS, with a minimum of 43 FPS and a maximum of 59 FPS. High averages 32 FPS. Ultra averages 30 FPS. The Medium preset's maximum of 59 FPS is telling: even the best-case frame time fails to reach 60 FPS. Low is the only setting that averages above the threshold, and even then, the margin is just 4 FPS.

The database records no minimum or maximum values for several settings, including all Low presets and all High and Ultra presets except the 1440p and 1080p Medium runs. The available min/max data, however, consistently shows that when the average FPS is below 60, the minimums are also below 60, and when the average is above 60, the minimums tend to stay above it. The 4K Medium run is the one exception, with a minimum of 43 FPS and a maximum of 59 FPS, both below the threshold.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Inside at 1080p with all settings maxed?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080 Ultra, the combo averages 67 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. In fact, every preset at 1080p averages above 60 FPS, from 141 FPS at Low to 70 FPS at High.

Q: What is the best setting for 1440p?

A: Medium is the best playable setting at 2560x1440, averaging 81 FPS with a minimum of 69 FPS. High drops to 51 FPS and Ultra to 48 FPS, both below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is 4K playable with this combo?

A: Only at Low settings, which averages 64 FPS. Medium averages 51 FPS with a maximum of 59 FPS, so it never reaches 60 FPS. High averages 32 FPS and Ultra averages 30 FPS.

Q: Why does the system rank so low if the CPU is strong?

A: The CPU ranks at the 73rd percentile among all processors, but the GPU ranks at the 5th percentile. The Arc B370 scores only 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, and its nearest rivals are GPUs from a much older generation. The GPU is the limiting factor, which drags the combo to rank 3422 out of 3716.

Q: How much FPS is lost going from 1080p to 1440p at Medium?

A: The average drops from 113 FPS at 1080p Medium to 81 FPS at 1440p Medium, a loss of 32 FPS. Going from 1440p Medium to 4K Medium drops the average from 81 FPS to 51 FPS, another 30 FPS loss.

Q: Does the CPU ever bottleneck this game?

A: The data does not show CPU bottlenecking. The i5-12400F has 6 cores and 12 threads with a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, and its single-core scores, such as 1680 in Cinebench R23, are more than enough for this title. Frame rates scale heavily with resolution and preset, which indicates GPU limitation.

The Verdict

The recorded data answers clearly: this PC can run Inside, but with significant qualifications. At 1920x1080, the system clears 60 FPS at every preset, including Ultra at 67 FPS. At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is Medium at 81 FPS, while High and Ultra fall below the threshold. At 3840x2160, only Low is playable, averaging 64 FPS, and every higher preset fails to reach 60 FPS.

The verdict by resolution is straightforward. For 1080p users, this combo offers a smooth experience at maximum settings. For 1440p users, Medium is the ceiling, and for 4K users, Low is the only option. The Arc B370's 5th percentile ranking among GPUs and its benchmark score of 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 make it the decisive factor. The i5-12400F is not the problem; it has the headroom to drive far more demanding graphics. The GPU simply runs out of throughput at higher presets and resolutions.

A 4K Ultra average of 30 FPS and a 1440p High average of 51 FPS are not acceptable for a game that runs at 141 FPS at 1080p Low. The system is playable, even enjoyable, at lower settings, but it cannot deliver a high-fidelity experience at higher resolutions. The data suggests that Inside is a game that rewards a balanced system, and this combo is anything but balanced. The CPU is a strong mid-range part; the GPU is a low-end integrated solution. For anyone considering this pairing, the measured results show that the GPU should be the first component to upgrade if higher settings are the goal.