Inside

The Intel Core i5-12400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 presents a clear case of a modern processor supporting an older, entry-level graphics card. The recorded data for Inside shows this combination is highly dependent on resolution and quality settings, with the CPU rarely being the limiting factor. The benchmark results reveal a system that can deliver smooth gameplay at standard resolutions but struggles when pushed to 4K with high visual fidelity.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The database contains average FPS measurements for this specific combo across three resolutions and four quality presets. Minimum and maximum FPS values were not recorded for any of the tested configurations, so the analysis relies entirely on average frame rates.

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest performance. On Low settings, the average FPS is 135.9. Moving to Medium drops the average to 108.9 FPS, while High settings produce an average of 64.8 FPS. The most demanding preset, Ultra, still maintains an average of 62.1 FPS. The scaling between Low and Ultra shows a reduction of roughly 54% in average frame rate, indicating that the GPU is doing significant work as settings increase.

At 2560x1440, the performance curve steepens. Low settings yield a strong 93.9 FPS average. Medium settings remain fluid at 79.5 FPS. High settings fall to 47.5 FPS, which dips below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Ultra is the heaviest load, producing an average of 44 FPS. The drop from Medium to High represents a decrease of about 40%, showing that the GTX 1650 hits a performance wall at this resolution when quality is raised.

At 3840x2160, the results are the most constrained. Low settings achieve an average of 60.9 FPS, barely clearing the playable mark. Medium settings drop to 50.7 FPS. High settings average 29.4 FPS, and Ultra is the lowest recorded result at 29 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium is roughly 17%, but the jump from Medium to High is a severe 42% decline, making High and Ultra presets impractical at this resolution.

The data shows no min or max FPS values, so frame time consistency cannot be assessed. However, the average FPS figures alone are sufficient to define the playable envelope for this title.

Best Settings per Resolution

The playable threshold in the database is set at 60 FPS. Based on the measured averages, the best settings for each resolution are defined by the highest preset that remains at or above this mark.

At 1920x1080, all four presets clear the 60 FPS line. The best settings are Ultra, with an average FPS of 62.1. This is the most demanding preset that stays playable, and it does so with a small margin of just 2.1 FPS above the threshold.

At 2560x1440, only Low and Medium achieve playable averages. The best settings are Medium, which records an average of 79.5 FPS. This leaves a comfortable margin of 19.5 FPS over the 60 FPS threshold, suggesting stable performance. High and Ultra fall short at 47.5 and 44 FPS respectively.

At 3840x2160, the only playable preset is Low. It averages 60.9 FPS, which is just 0.9 FPS above the 60 FPS threshold. This is a razor-thin margin, and any slight variation in scene complexity could potentially push it below the playable line. Medium, High, and Ultra all fail to meet the 60 FPS requirement, with averages of 50.7, 29.4, and 29 FPS.

The verdict data confirms these findings. The best settings per resolution are Low at 4K, Medium at 1440p, and Ultra at 1080p.

CPU and GPU Roles

The interaction between the Intel Core i5-12400F and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 becomes clear when comparing performance scaling across resolutions and presets.

At 1920x1080, the GPU is the primary constraint. The CPU, which scores 12,380 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 1,680 in single-core, has ample headroom. The FPS drop from Low (135.9) to Ultra (62.1) is a 54% reduction, which is typical of a GPU-bound scenario where pixel and shader work increase with settings.

At 2560x1440, the GPU continues to dominate the performance picture. The 4.4% reduction in FPS from Low at 1080p (135.9) to Low at 1440p (93.9) is proportional to the increase in pixel count. The CPU's capabilities, such as its 6 cores and 12 threads, are not evidenced as a bottleneck here, as the frame rate scales with the GPU's workload.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is overwhelmingly the limiting factor. The gap between Low (60.9) and High (29.4) is a 48% reduction, and the Ultra preset (29 FPS) performs nearly identically to High (29.4). This plateau at the higher presets suggests the GTX 1650's 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 128-bit memory bus are saturated, preventing further scaling. The CPU's role is minimal, as even the lightest preset at 4K produces lower FPS than the heaviest preset at 1080p.

The CPU benchmark scores, such as 5,895 in 3DMark 16-thread and 1,759 in Cinebench R15 multicore, indicate a processor capable of feeding the GPU. The data shows no scenario where FPS is higher at a lower resolution with a heavier preset, which would hint at CPU limitation. Instead, FPS consistently rises as resolution drops, confirming the GPU is the performance gate at all tested settings.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The database lists nearest rivals for both components, providing context for how other hardware might behave in this system.

For the Intel Core i5-12400F, the closest alternatives by average benchmark score are the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, Intel Core 3 201E, Intel Core i5-1335U, and AMD EPYC 7773X. The Ryzen 5 7535HS scores 19,047, a 0% delta from the i5-12400F's 19,039. The Core 3 201E scores 19,056, a -0.1% delta. The Core i5-1335U scores 18,982, a 0.3% delta, and the EPYC 7773X scores 18,979, also a 0.3% delta. These differences are negligible, meaning any of these CPUs would likely produce nearly identical FPS results in Inside when paired with the GTX 1650. The CPU's percentile rank of 73 against all CPUs further indicates it sits well above average, reinforcing that the processor is not a weak link.

For the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon HD 8850M, Intel UHD Graphics 750, AMD Radeon R7 350, and Intel Arc A310. The Radeon HD 8850M scores 7,447, a 0.3% delta from the GTX 1650's 7,472. The UHD Graphics 750 scores 7,441, a 0.4% delta. The Radeon R7 350 scores 7,425, a 0.6% delta. The Arc A310 scores 7,550, a -1% delta. These GPUs would deliver essentially the same frame rates. However, the GTX 1650's percentile rank of 40 means it is below average, and the measured FPS results reflect that positioning. The Arc A310, despite being 1% faster on average, would still struggle with High presets at 1440p and 4K.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-12400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 3,609 out of 3,716 tested combos for Inside. This places it in the bottom 3% of all systems in the database. The low ranking is driven almost entirely by the GPU, as the CPU's performance is well above the median for processors.

This rank aligns with the measured FPS data. The combo can only achieve playable frame rates at 4K with the lowest preset, and at 1440p it is limited to Medium. Only at 1080p can it run the game with all presets above 60 FPS. The rank of 3,609 suggests that most other tested combinations, likely with newer or higher-tier GPUs, deliver better performance in this title.

The wide gap between the CPU's 73rd percentile ranking and the GPU's 40th percentile ranking illustrates the imbalance. The i5-12400F is a strong processor, but the GTX 1650 holds the system back, resulting in a very low overall combo rank.

The Verdict

The data shows that this PC can run Inside, but with significant caveats depending on the target resolution.

At 1920x1080, the system clears the 60 FPS threshold on all presets. Ultra settings average 62.1 FPS, making this the ideal resolution for the best visual experience. The playable settings list includes High, Low, Medium, and Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the system is playable only on Low and Medium settings. Medium averages 79.5 FPS, which is the recommended preset for this resolution. High and Ultra are not playable, with averages of 47.5 and 44 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the system barely reaches the playable threshold on Low settings, with an average of 60.9 FPS. This is too close to the 60 FPS line for comfort, and the other presets are far below it. The verdict data confirms that Low is the only playable setting at 4K.

Overall, this combo is suitable for 1080p gaming with full quality settings and for 1440p gaming with reduced settings. It is not recommended for 4K gaming beyond the lowest preset.

FAQ

*Q: Can this PC run Inside at 1080p with Ultra settings?*

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 62.1, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 2560x1440?

A: The best settings at 2560x1440 are Medium, which achieves an average of 79.5 FPS. High and Ultra settings fall below 60 FPS at 47.5 and 44 FPS respectively.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-12400F or the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 the limiting factor?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The i5-12400F has a 73rd percentile rank among CPUs, while the GTX 1650 has only a 40th percentile rank. The FPS scaling across resolutions and presets indicates the GPU is saturated, especially at 4K where High and Ultra presets produce nearly identical averages of 29.4 and 29 FPS.

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

A: This combo ranks 3,609 out of 3,716 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 3% of systems for this game.

Q: What GPU would perform similarly to the GTX 1650 in this game?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8850M, Intel UHD Graphics 750, AMD Radeon R7 350, and Intel Arc A310 are the closest rivals, with average benchmark score deltas ranging from -1% to 0.6%. They would deliver similar FPS results.

Q: What is the average FPS at 3840x2160 with Low settings?

A: The average FPS at 3840x2160 with Low settings is 60.9, which is just above the 60 FPS playable threshold.