Inside

Inside is a modest puzzle platformer from 2016, and the data for this Intel Core i5-14400F plus AMD Radeon RX 7600 combination shows it handles the game with overwhelming headroom. The measured results span three resolutions and four quality presets, with every single configuration clearing the 60 FPS playability threshold. The weakest recorded average is 61 FPS at 4K Ultra, which is still exactly at the target, and the strongest is 281.6 FPS at 1080p Low. This is a combo that never struggles with Inside, regardless of how you configure it.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the frame rates are exceptionally high across all settings. The Low preset delivers an average of 281.6 FPS, which is the highest score recorded in the entire dataset for this game. Moving to Medium, the average drops to 229.2 FPS, still far beyond what any standard display can use. The High preset produces 139.8 FPS on average, and the Ultra preset, which is the most demanding setting available, still averages 133.8 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is small, only a 6 FPS difference, suggesting the game's Ultra preset adds little extra load at this resolution. These numbers indicate that the GPU is not the limiting factor at 1080p; the CPU and memory bandwidth are more than sufficient to feed the Radeon RX 7600 at these elevated rates.

At 2560x1440, the performance remains robust but shows a clear scaling pattern as resolution increases. The Low preset averages 202.7 FPS, which is a 27.9% reduction from the 1080p Low result. Medium averages 160.8 FPS, High averages 100.8 FPS, and Ultra averages 96.6 FPS. The delta between Medium and High at this resolution is 60 FPS, which is a substantial jump, indicating that the High preset introduces significant rendering work. The difference between High and Ultra is only 4.2 FPS, reinforcing the pattern seen at 1080p where Ultra is not much heavier than High. The 1440p results remain far above the 60 FPS target, with even the lowest preset average being over three times the threshold.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates finally approach the point where the GPU begins to show its limits, though it never actually fails to deliver. The Low preset averages 129.5 FPS, which is still more than double the playability threshold. Medium averages 101.1 FPS, High averages 64.8 FPS, and Ultra averages 61 FPS. The step from Medium to High is a 36.3 FPS drop, the largest single-preset decline in the dataset at any resolution. The step from High to Ultra is only 3.8 FPS, showing that the Ultra preset at 4K is nearly identical in cost to High. The 4K Ultra result of 61 FPS is the only measurement in the entire dataset that sits close to the 60 FPS boundary, but it does clear it.

The data shows no minimum or maximum FPS values, only averages, so there is no information about frame time spikes or worst-case drops. However, given the massive margins at lower resolutions and the still-comfortable averages at 4K, it is reasonable to expect consistent performance. The game's 2016 release date and its puzzle platformer genre suggest it is not a demanding title, and the measured numbers confirm that this hardware combination is overpowered for the task.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the best setting is Ultra, which averages 133.8 FPS. This is the highest quality preset available, and it maintains a frame rate that is more than double the 60 FPS target. The data shows no reason to drop below Ultra at this resolution, as even the most demanding preset leaves enormous headroom for any future content or background processes.

At 2560x1440, the best setting is also Ultra, with an average of 96.6 FPS. This is well above the playability threshold, leaving a comfortable margin of 36.6 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1440p is noticeably heavier than at 1080p, with a 37.2 FPS drop, but it remains fully playable. There is no need to compromise on quality here; the hardware handles the maximum settings without issue.

At 3840x2160, the best setting is Ultra, averaging 61 FPS. This is the only configuration in the dataset where the frame rate sits at the edge of the 60 FPS target. The margin is just 1 FPS, which is tight, but the average still clears the threshold. For players who prioritize frame rate stability over absolute visual fidelity, dropping to High at 4K would provide a 3.8 FPS higher average of 64.8 FPS, but the data indicates Ultra is technically playable. The verdict data explicitly lists Ultra as playable at this resolution, so it is the recommended setting.

Every resolution and preset combination in the measured data is playable, meaning there is no scenario where this combo fails the 60 FPS test. The only borderline case is 4K Ultra, but it passes. For a game like Inside, which is a side-scrolling puzzle platformer with limited motion complexity, a 61 FPS average at 4K Ultra is likely to feel smooth in practice, though it leaves less room for dips than the other configurations.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data shows that Inside is far more sensitive to resolution than to preset changes, which indicates the GPU is the primary scaling factor. At 1080p Low, the system produces 281.6 FPS, but at 4K Low it drops to 129.5 FPS. That is a 52.1% reduction from simply increasing resolution, with settings held constant. This pattern repeats across all presets: 1080p Medium to 4K Medium drops from 229.2 to 101.1 FPS (a 55.9% reduction), 1080p High to 4K High drops from 139.8 to 64.8 FPS (a 53.6% reduction), and 1080p Ultra to 4K Ultra drops from 133.8 to 61 FPS (a 54.4% reduction). The consistency of these drops, roughly half the frame rate when going from 1080p to 4K, points to the GPU's pixel throughput being the limiting factor.

The CPU's role is less prominent. The Intel Core i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads, with a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, and its benchmark scores are strong, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21645 and a single-core score of 3055. The game's low geometric complexity and simple physics do not appear to stress the CPU heavily, as evidenced by the extremely high frame rates at 1080p Low. At that resolution, the system reaches 281.6 FPS, which is likely near the engine's internal limit or the CPU's ability to issue draw calls, but it is far beyond any playable need. The CPU's 83rd percentile ranking among all CPUs and its average benchmark score of 32279 place it well above the requirements for a 2016 puzzle game.

Between resolutions, the scaling is almost entirely attributable to the GPU. The RX 7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, and its passmark G3D score is 16634. The 4K results show the GPU working harder, with the average FPS dropping to roughly half of the 1080p values. The CPU's performance is unlikely to change between 1080p and 4K, since the same number of draw calls and physics calculations are required regardless of resolution. The data confirms this: the frame rate scaling is uniform across all presets when moving resolutions, which is classic GPU-bound behavior.

At lower resolutions, the CPU becomes relatively more important because the GPU has less work per frame. The fact that 1080p Low reaches 281.6 FPS suggests the CPU can feed the GPU fast enough to hit that rate, but the engine or driver may cap performance there. The i5-14400F's single-thread performance, with a Geekbench single-core score of 2058 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3055, is more than adequate for this title. The data does not show any CPU bottleneck symptoms, such as frame rates that fail to scale with lower settings at a fixed resolution. For example, at 1440p, going from Low to Medium only drops from 202.7 to 160.8 FPS, which is a 41.9 FPS reduction, and that is clearly GPU work increasing, not CPU limitation.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals, the Intel Core i5-14400F has an average benchmark score of 32279. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U scores 32233, which is 0.1% lower, meaning it would deliver virtually identical performance in Inside. The Intel Core i9-11900 scores 32226, 0.2% lower, and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS scores 32354, which is 0.2% higher. The Intel Core i7-12800H scores 32121, 0.5% lower. All four of these CPUs are within a 0.5% delta of the i5-14400F, so any of them would produce the same measured FPS results in this game. The differences are within noise for a title this undemanding.

For the GPU, the AMD Radeon RX 7600 has an average benchmark score of 15171. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM, which scores 15199, 0.2% higher. The AMD Radeon Pro 560X scores 15082, 0.6% lower, and the AMD Radeon 680M scores 15270, 0.7% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti scores 15063, 0.7% lower. These deltas are all under 1%, meaning any of these GPUs would produce nearly the same frame rates in Inside. The GTX 660 Ti is a much older card, but its benchmark score is close enough that it would still handle this game at similar settings, though it lacks modern features like DirectX 12 Ultimate and ray tracing support that the RX 7600 offers.

In practice, if a builder had any of these rival CPUs or GPUs paired together, the performance in Inside would be indistinguishable from the i5-14400F and RX 7600 combo. The game is so light that even the weakest of these rivals, the GTX 660 Ti, would likely exceed 60 FPS at most settings. The data shows that the combo's performance is not unique; it falls within a tight cluster of similar hardware. The CPU's 83rd percentile and the GPU's 57th percentile among their respective categories indicate that this is mid-range hardware, but Inside does not require high percentile parts to run well.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-14400F and AMD Radeon RX 7600 ranks 2497 out of 3716 tested combos for Inside. This places it in the 32.8th percentile of all tested systems, meaning roughly two-thirds of the hardware combinations tested perform better. That ranking might seem low, but it reflects the fact that Inside is an old, lightweight game that many high-end systems can run at extremely high frame rates. The absolute performance here is still excellent, with the lowest average being 61 FPS at 4K Ultra.

The rank is more a measure of how much headroom exists than whether the game is playable. A combo that scores 4000 FPS at 1080p Low would rank higher, but that does not make it more useful for a 60 Hz display. The i5-14400F and RX 7600 sit in the middle of the pack because they are mid-range parts, but their actual performance in Inside is far beyond what the game requires. The 3716 total combos include many with much more powerful GPUs, such as RTX 4090-class cards, which naturally score higher. For the purpose of playing Inside, this rank is irrelevant because the game runs at playable speeds at every measured configuration.

The Verdict

This PC can run Inside at every resolution and preset combination measured. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset averages 133.8 FPS, which is more than double the 60 FPS target. At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset averages 96.6 FPS, leaving a 36.6 FPS margin above the threshold. At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset averages 61 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS target by just 1 FPS. The verdict data confirms that all four settings at all three resolutions are playable, with the best settings being Ultra at each resolution.

The only caveat is 4K Ultra, where the 61 FPS average is close to the boundary. If you value a strict 60 FPS minimum with no dips, the High preset at 4K provides 64.8 FPS average, which is slightly safer. But the data shows Ultra is technically playable at 4K. For 1080p and 1440p, there is no reason to lower any setting; the hardware has massive headroom. Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer, and this mid-range combo from 2023 and 2024 obliterates it. The game's 2016 release date means it predates many modern rendering techniques, and the measured FPS numbers confirm that the i5-14400F and RX 7600 are far more capable than needed. If you have a 144 Hz or 240 Hz monitor, you can take advantage of the high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, though the game's slow-paced nature may not benefit much from them. For standard 60 Hz displays, every configuration is smooth, and the only decision is whether 4K Ultra's 61 FPS average is acceptable, which the data says it is.