Inside

The Intel Core i5-14400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 delivers a decisive performance margin for Inside, a 2016 puzzle platformer. Measured data shows this combination comfortably exceeds the 60 FPS playability threshold across every tested resolution and preset, with headroom that ranges from modest at 4K Ultra to overwhelming at 1080p Low. The benchmark results reveal a system that is never bottlenecked by the game’s modest visual demands, though the scaling patterns between resolutions and settings offer useful insight into where the CPU and GPU each contribute.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160 (4K), the RTX 5050 and Core i5-14400F maintain an average of 67 FPS on High settings, which is only 7 FPS above the playable threshold. Dropping to Medium raises the average to 107 FPS, with a minimum of 91 FPS and a maximum of 123 FPS. Low settings push the average to 134 FPS, while Ultra drops to 64 FPS — still playable, but with only 4 FPS of margin above 60. The spread from 64 FPS (Ultra) to 134 FPS (Low) shows that 4K is the only resolution where preset choice materially affects the experience; even the most demanding setting stays barely above the threshold.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), the same combo delivers 106 FPS on High, 170 FPS on Medium (with a minimum of 145 and maximum of 196), 213 FPS on Low, and 101 FPS on Ultra. The gap between Ultra and High is just 5 FPS, while Low nearly doubles the Ultra average. Every preset here offers at least 41 FPS of headroom above the 60 FPS threshold, making 1440p a comfortable zone regardless of visual quality.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the numbers become extreme: 148 FPS on High, 237 FPS on Medium (minimum 201, maximum 272), 296 FPS on Low, and 141 FPS on Ultra. The difference between Ultra and High is a mere 7 FPS, while Low exceeds Ultra by more than double. Even the lowest average — 141 FPS on Ultra — is more than 2.3 times the playable threshold. The 1080p results indicate that the CPU and GPU are nowhere near their limits; the frame rates are likely capped by the game’s engine or vsync rather than hardware capability.

The only preset with both minimum and maximum values recorded is Medium at each resolution: 91–123 FPS at 4K, 145–196 FPS at 1440p, and 201–272 FPS at 1080p. These ranges show consistent frame pacing, with no severe drops that would cause stutter. For High, Low, and Ultra presets, only average FPS was captured, so variance cannot be assessed for those settings.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data shows a clear pattern: as resolution increases, average FPS drops by a near-constant factor, which points to a GPU-bound workload. Moving from 1080p Ultra (141 FPS) to 1440p Ultra (101 FPS) is a 28% reduction, and from 1440p Ultra to 4K Ultra (64 FPS) is a 37% reduction. The same scaling appears across all presets: 1080p High (148 FPS) to 1440p High (106 FPS) is a 28% drop, and 1440p High to 4K High (67 FPS) is a 37% drop. This consistent ratio indicates the GPU’s pixel throughput is the limiting factor, not the CPU.

However, the CPU still matters at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 296 FPS, which is 2.1 times the 4K Low score of 134 FPS. If the CPU were the bottleneck at 1080p, the scaling would flatten out; instead, the frame rate continues to rise steeply, meaning the Core i5-14400F’s 10 cores and 16 threads are not holding back even at very high frame rates. The CPU’s single-core performance — a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3055 and a Geekbench single-core of 2058 — is more than adequate for a puzzle platformer that rarely stresses thread counts.

The GPU’s role becomes more pronounced at 4K, where the RTX 5050’s 13.17 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 320.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are taxed. At 1440p and 1080p, the GPU still dominates the scaling, but the absolute frame rates suggest that both components are operating well within their capabilities. The fact that Ultra and High presets differ by only 5-7 FPS at every resolution indicates that the game’s visual preset slider has a limited impact on GPU load beyond a certain point — likely because Inside uses a simple art style that doesn’t scale shading complexity dramatically.

How This Combo Ranks

Among all 3,716 tested CPU-GPU combinations in this database, this pairing ranks 2,247th for Inside. That places it in the 60th percentile of all combos, meaning roughly 40% of tested systems deliver higher average FPS. However, the ranking is heavily influenced by systems with far more powerful GPUs; the absolute frame rates here are already far above playable, so the rank reflects headroom rather than capability.

Relative to the CPU’s overall standing, the Core i5-14400F sits in the 83rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32,279. The RTX 5050 ranks in the 66th percentile among GPUs, with an average score of 21,035. The combo’s in-game rank (60th percentile) is slightly lower than the CPU’s percentile but higher than the GPU’s, suggesting that the game is more GPU-sensitive than the synthetic benchmarks would indicate. The CPU’s 83rd percentile and the GPU’s 66th percentile combine to produce a result that is closer to the GPU’s ranking — consistent with the resolution scaling analysis that identified the GPU as the primary limiter.

The combo’s rank of 2,247 out of 3,716 also implies that a significant number of lower-end GPUs (such as integrated graphics or older discrete parts) fall below the 60 FPS threshold at higher resolutions, while this pairing clears it everywhere. In practical terms, the rank is a measure of overkill: the system could be paired with a weaker GPU and still hit 60 FPS at 1080p, but at 4K Ultra it would likely dip below that mark.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Core i5-14400F in synthetic benchmarks are all within a 0.5% margin of its average score of 32,279. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U scores 32,233 (0.1% slower), the Intel Core i9-11900 scores 32,226 (0.2% slower), the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS scores 32,354 (0.2% faster), and the Intel Core i7-12800H scores 32,121 (0.5% slower). In Inside, any of these CPUs would behave nearly identically to the i5-14400F, since the game’s frame rates are limited by the GPU at all resolutions. The Ryzen 7 6800HS would be a slight upgrade for CPU-bound scenarios, but those are not present in this game at the tested settings.

For the RTX 5050, the nearest rivals show a wider spread. The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL scores 21,153 (0.6% faster), the AMD Radeon HD 8970M scores 21,237 (1% faster), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT scores 20,713 (1.6% slower), and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile scores 21,379 (1.6% faster). In practice, the RX 5600 XT would likely deliver slightly lower FPS in Inside at 4K Ultra (possibly dipping below 60), while the RTX A4000 Mobile would provide a small boost at 4K High. None of these alternatives would change the fundamental verdict: the game remains playable at 4K Ultra only with the fastest of these GPUs, and all clear 60 FPS at 1080p and 1440p with ease.

It is importantly the RTX 5050’s nearest rivals are a mix of mobile and desktop parts from different generations. The RX Vega M GL and HD 8970M are older or lower-tier products, while the RX 5600 XT is a desktop card from a previous generation. The 1.6% delta between the slowest and fastest rival is small enough that real-world game performance would fall within a few FPS of the RTX 5050’s results.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which averages 64 FPS. This is a thin margin — only 4 FPS above the threshold — so players who experience any frame-time spikes might prefer High (67 FPS) or Medium (107 FPS) for stability. The data only provides averages for Ultra, so no minimum is available to confirm whether it ever dips below 60.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are Ultra at 101 FPS. This provides 41 FPS of headroom above the threshold, making it a safe choice even if occasional drops occur. Medium (170 FPS) and High (106 FPS) are also available, but Ultra is the highest preset and still leaves ample margin.

At 1920x1080, the best settings are Ultra at 141 FPS. This is more than double the threshold, so there is no practical risk of dropping below 60 FPS. Low (296 FPS) and Medium (237 FPS) are options for players with high-refresh monitors, but Ultra with 141 FPS already exceeds the refresh rate of most standard 60 Hz displays and is suitable for 144 Hz panels.

The pattern across resolutions is that the game’s preset slider has a modest effect on FPS — the difference between Ultra and High is 3-7 FPS at every resolution. This means players can almost always choose Ultra without a meaningful performance penalty, except at 4K where the margin becomes narrow.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC can run Inside at every tested resolution and preset. The verdict by resolution is unambiguous: at 3840x2160, all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable, with the best being Ultra at 64 FPS. At 2560x1440, Ultra runs at 101 FPS. At 1920x1080, Ultra runs at 141 FPS.

The only cautionary note is 4K Ultra, where the 64 FPS average leaves just 4 FPS of headroom above the playable threshold. For players with a 4K display who want absolute stability, dropping to High (67 FPS) or Medium (107 FPS) is advisable. At 1440p and 1080p, there is no such concern — the system has abundant performance for any setting.

The Core i5-14400F and RTX 5050 combination is, if anything, overkill for this game. Inside is a puzzle platformer with a minimalist art style, and the benchmark data confirms that even the lowest-end settings produce frame rates that exceed 60 FPS by a wide margin. The GPU becomes the limiting factor only at 4K Ultra, and even then it barely misses the mark. For anyone targeting 1080p or 1440p gaming, this pair delivers a flawless experience with maximum visual quality.