Instant compatibility check with FPS benchmarks and optimization tips
Inside
Performance
1080p (Full HD)
1440p (2K / QHD)
4K (Ultra HD)
Requirements Check
Recommendations
Your hardware doesn't meet minimum requirements for this game.
Your GPU supports ray tracing.
Average FPS: resolution vs quality settings
| Ultra | High | Medium | Low | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4K Ultra HD | 106 | 111 | 177 | 222 |
| 1440p QHD | 168 | 176 | 282 | 321 |
| 1080p Full HD | 234 | 245 | 331 | 359 |
Cell color: green is 120+ FPS, teal is 60+, amber is 30+, red is below 30. Cards marked Estimated above have no measured row and are scaled from your GPU benchmark percentile.
Performance Analysis: Inside on Your System
The Intel Core i5-12600KF paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 delivers an exceptionally high level of performance in Inside, a puzzle platformer that is far more demanding on the GPU than its minimalist aesthetic suggests. Benchmark data across three resolutions and four quality presets shows that this combination never drops below the 60 FPS playability threshold, with average frame rates that often exceed 100 FPS even at maximum settings. The following analysis breaks down the measured performance, component roles, and how this specific hardware pairing ranks against other tested configurations.
Best Settings per Resolution
At 3840x2160 (4K), the most demanding preset that maintains an average of at least 60 FPS is Ultra, which achieves an average of 106 FPS. This is a significant margin above the 60 FPS baseline, indicating that the RTX 5070 has substantial headroom even at 4K with the highest quality settings. The Ultra preset at 4K delivers 106 FPS average, while High drops to 111 FPS and Medium to 177 FPS, showing that the performance cost of stepping from Medium to Ultra is steep but still results in a fully playable experience.
At 2560x1440 (1440p), the best settings remain Ultra, with an average of 168 FPS. The gap between presets is narrower here: High yields 176 FPS, Medium 282 FPS, and Low 321 FPS. The 1440p results show that even at Ultra, the system is running at nearly three times the 60 FPS threshold, making this resolution entirely GPU-bound with no risk of frame rate dips affecting gameplay.
At 1920x1080 (1080p), the best settings are again Ultra, producing an average of 234 FPS. The 1080p Ultra result is more than double the 4K Ultra figure, illustrating how resolution scaling affects this hardware. Low at 1080p reaches 359 FPS, Medium 331 FPS, and High 245 FPS. The 1080p Ultra average of 234 FPS remains well above any refresh rate concern for standard displays, though users with 240 Hz monitors could benefit from dropping to High or Medium for even higher frame rates.
CPU and GPU Roles
The data indicates that the GPU is the dominant performance factor at all three resolutions, but the CPU's influence becomes more apparent as resolution decreases. At 4K, the frame rates range from 106 FPS (Ultra) to 222 FPS (Low), a spread of roughly 2.1x. At 1440p, the range extends from 168 FPS (Ultra) to 321 FPS (Low), a spread of 1.9x. At 1080p, the range widens to 234 FPS (Ultra) to 359 FPS (Low), a spread of 1.5x. This narrowing spread at lower resolutions suggests that the i5-12600KF begins to limit the RTX 5070's full potential when the GPU load is reduced.
The scaling from 4K to 1440p at Ultra shows a 58% increase in frame rate (106 to 168 FPS), while the scaling from 1440p to 1080p at Ultra shows a 39% increase (168 to 234 FPS). This diminishing return in scaling efficiency at lower resolutions points to the CPU becoming a more significant constraint. The i5-12600KF, with its 10 cores and 16 threads, is a capable desktop processor, but the RTX 5070's raw throughput at 1080p exceeds what this CPU can fully feed in terms of frame generation.
At Low settings, the CPU's role is even more pronounced. The 1080p Low average of 359 FPS is only 12% higher than the 1440p Low average of 321 FPS, despite the 55% reduction in pixel count. This indicates that at Low settings, the system is approaching a CPU-bound ceiling where additional GPU headroom does not translate into proportional frame rate gains. The 4K Low result of 222 FPS, however, shows that the GPU is still the primary constraint at that resolution, as the frame rate scales nearly linearly with pixel count.
Measured FPS Breakdown
At 3840x2160, the measured results are as follows: Low settings produce an average of 222 FPS, Medium settings produce an average of 177 FPS with a minimum of 151 FPS and a maximum of 204 FPS, High settings produce an average of 111 FPS, and Ultra settings produce an average of 106 FPS. The Medium preset is the only one at 4K with recorded minimum and maximum values, showing a 53 FPS range between the 151 FPS floor and 204 FPS ceiling. The step from Medium to High at 4K is substantial, a 66 FPS drop, while the step from High to Ultra is a much smaller 5 FPS reduction.
At 2560x1440, the measured averages are 321 FPS for Low, 282 FPS for Medium, 176 FPS for High, and 168 FPS for Ultra. The Medium preset at 1440p shows a minimum of 240 FPS and a maximum of 325 FPS, a range of 85 FPS. The transition from Medium to High at 1440p costs 106 FPS, which is the largest single-preset drop across all resolutions. The difference between High and Ultra at 1440p is only 8 FPS, suggesting that the Ultra preset's additional effects are relatively cheap to render at this resolution.
At 1920x1080, the averages are 359 FPS for Low, 331 FPS for Medium, 245 FPS for High, and 234 FPS for Ultra. The Medium preset records a minimum of 281 FPS and a maximum of 381 FPS, a 100 FPS spread. The 1080p results show the smallest relative differences between presets: Low to Medium is a 28 FPS drop, Medium to High is an 86 FPS drop, and High to Ultra is an 11 FPS drop. The 1080p Ultra average of 234 FPS is still 3.9x the 60 FPS playability threshold, demonstrating that this combination has massive performance reserves at the most common gaming resolution.
The Verdict
This PC can run Inside at every tested resolution and settings combination, and does so with frame rates that far exceed the 60 FPS playability threshold. The verdict by resolution is unambiguous: at 3840x2160, all four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable, with Ultra averaging 106 FPS. At 2560x1440, all presets are playable, with Ultra averaging 168 FPS. At 1920x1080, all presets are playable, with Ultra averaging 234 FPS.
The data confirms that the RTX 5070 provides enough performance to run Inside at maximum settings in 4K with a 76% margin above the 60 FPS threshold. For users seeking the highest possible frame rates, the 1080p Low preset at 359 FPS represents the ceiling of this configuration's capabilities, though the practical benefit over the 234 FPS Ultra result is limited to high-refresh-rate displays. The minimum recorded frame rate across all tests is 151 FPS at 4K Medium, which is still more than double the playability threshold, indicating that even transient frame drops will not compromise the gameplay experience.
FAQ
*Q: What is the highest average frame rate this combination achieves in Inside?*
A: The highest recorded average is 359 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings.
*Q: Can this PC run Inside at 4K with Ultra settings?*
A: Yes, the 3840x2160 Ultra preset averages 106 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS playability threshold.
Q: How does the 1440p Ultra performance compare to the 4K Ultra performance?
A: The 1440p Ultra average is 168 FPS, which is 58% higher than the 4K Ultra average of 106 FPS.
Q: At which resolution does the CPU start to limit performance?
A: The data shows that at 1080p, the frame rate scaling from 1440p diminishes significantly, suggesting the i5-12600KF becomes a more relevant constraint at lower resolutions.
Q: What is the lowest minimum frame rate recorded in the benchmark data?
A: The lowest minimum is 151 FPS, recorded at 3840x2160 with Medium settings.
Q: Are there any settings presets that fail to reach 60 FPS?
A: No, every preset at every resolution exceeds 60 FPS, with the lowest average being 106 FPS at 4K Ultra.
How This Combo Ranks
The Intel Core i5-12600KF and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 combination ranks 547th out of 3716 tested combos in Inside's benchmark database. This places the configuration in the top 15% of all tested hardware pairings, which is notable given that the database includes many high-end enthusiast systems. The rank reflects the RTX 5070's strong GPU compute capabilities, which are the primary driver of Inside's frame rates, while the i5-12600KF provides sufficient CPU throughput to avoid bottlenecking at higher resolutions. The percentile rankings for the individual components support this: the GPU sits at the 82nd percentile against all GPUs, while the CPU sits at the 79th percentile against all CPUs. The combo's overall rank of 547 suggests that the pairing is well-balanced for this game, with the GPU's performance being the more influential factor in the final ranking.
Similar Performance Alternatives
The CPU's nearest performance rivals, based on average benchmark scores, include the Intel Core i9-10900K, which scores 0.3% lower than the i5-12600KF, and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D, which scores 0.3% higher. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800U also sits 0.3% lower, while the AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE is 0.3% higher. These deltas are negligible, meaning that swapping the i5-12600KF for any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Inside. The Ryzen 7 5800X3D, with its 3D V-Cache, might show slightly different behavior in CPU-bound scenarios, but at the resolutions tested here, the GPU remains the limiting factor.
On the GPU side, the RTX 5070's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro 580 (0.1% higher average score), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 (0.8% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (1.2% lower), and the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile (2.0% lower). These professional-grade GPUs are not typical gaming products, but their benchmark scores indicate that the RTX 5070's performance in Inside would be nearly matched by the Radeon Pro 580 and Radeon Pro WX 7100. The RTX A500 Mobile, being a laptop part, would deliver approximately 2% lower performance, which translates to a few frames per second difference at the frame rates this game produces. None of these alternatives would meaningfully change the playability verdict, as all would still comfortably exceed 60 FPS at every resolution and settings combination.