Inside

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Inside at 4K resolution?

A: Yes. The measured data shows playable performance at all four settings at 3840x2160. Even the most demanding setting, Ultra, averages 69 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Q: What is the best setting to use at 2560x1440?

A: Ultra is the best setting, with an average of 107.4 FPS. The database records all four presets as playable at this resolution, so there is no need to compromise on visual quality.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-14600K compare to nearby CPUs?

A: The i5-14600K sits at the 90th percentile among all tested CPUs. Its closest rival, the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H, scores 0.2% lower, while the AMD EPYC 4345P scores 0.3% higher. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX is 0.7% faster, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is 0.8% slower.

Q: How does the RTX 2070 SUPER compare to similar GPUs?

A: The RTX 2070 SUPER ranks at the 65th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, scores 1% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile is 1.2% faster, the Intel Arc B570 is 1.3% faster, and the Intel Arc A750 is 1.5% faster.

Q: Is 1920x1080 performance sufficient for high-refresh-rate monitors?

A: Yes. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 307, which is well beyond what most high-refresh displays can show. Even at Ultra, the average of 148.8 FPS exceeds 144 Hz displays.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU limit performance more in this game?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. Moving from 1080p Ultra to 4K Ultra drops the average from 148.8 FPS to 69 FPS, a 54% reduction. The CPU has ample headroom, as evidenced by the very high frame rates at low settings, where the GPU is doing less work.

CPU and GPU Roles

Inside is a puzzle platformer with modest graphical demands, and the recorded frame rates reflect that. The question of which component matters more depends heavily on resolution. At 1920x1080, the GPU is not heavily taxed. The jump from Low to Ultra at 1080p reduces the average from 307 FPS to 148.8 FPS, which is a sizable drop but still leaves performance far above the 60 FPS threshold. This suggests that even at Ultra settings, the GPU is not being pushed to its absolute limit, and the CPU is capable of feeding frames quickly enough.

At 2560x1440, the scaling pattern becomes clearer. Low averages 220.9 FPS, Medium drops to 179.7 FPS, High falls to 111.5 FPS, and Ultra lands at 107.4 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is larger than the gap between Low and Medium, which indicates the GPU is starting to work harder as settings increase. Still, even the worst case at 1440p is comfortably above 60 FPS.

The picture changes at 3840x2160. Low averages 142 FPS, Medium drops to 113.2 FPS, High falls to 72.3 FPS, and Ultra averages 69 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra is small, only about 3 FPS, which suggests the GPU is nearing its ceiling at this resolution. The CPU's role diminishes as resolution increases because the frame rate becomes bound by the GPU's ability to render pixels. At 4K Ultra, the average is just 9 FPS above the playability threshold, so the GPU is clearly the limiting factor.

The scaling data reinforces this interpretation. At 1080p, going from Low to Ultra cuts performance by roughly half. At 1440p, the same setting change cuts performance by about 51%. At 4K, the reduction is about 51% as well. The consistency of this scaling pattern points to the GPU being the dominant constraint across all resolutions. The CPU, with its high single-thread and multi-thread scores, has enough headroom that it does not become a bottleneck even at 1080p Low, where the average exceeds 300 FPS.

For a game like Inside, which does not feature complex physics simulation or large-scale AI, the GPU is the component that determines whether higher resolutions and presets remain fluid. The CPU's 14 cores and 20 threads are far more than this game requires, so the recorded data shows no scenario where the processor holds back the frame rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the recorded averages are as follows: Low settings produce an average of 307 FPS, Medium produces 245.2 FPS, High produces 154.2 FPS, and Ultra produces 148.8 FPS. The step from Medium to High is the largest drop, about 91 FPS, which indicates a significant increase in GPU workload between those presets. Low to Medium drops by roughly 62 FPS, and High to Ultra drops by only about 5 FPS. The minimum and maximum frame rates were not recorded for any of these configurations, so the averages are the only metric available.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 220.9 FPS for Low, 179.7 FPS for Medium, 111.5 FPS for High, and 107.4 FPS for Ultra. The drop from Medium to High is again the largest, about 68 FPS. Low to Medium falls by about 41 FPS, and High to Ultra falls by about 4 FPS. All four presets remain far above the 60 FPS threshold, with even the lowest average nearly doubling the playability requirement.

At 3840x2160, the averages are 142 FPS for Low, 113.2 FPS for Medium, 72.3 FPS for High, and 69 FPS for Ultra. The drop from Medium to High is the largest, about 41 FPS. Low to Medium falls by about 29 FPS, and High to Ultra falls by about 3 FPS. This is the only resolution where the Ultra preset comes close to the 60 FPS threshold, but it still clears it with a 9 FPS margin.

The data shows a consistent pattern across all resolutions: the largest performance hit occurs when moving from Medium to High, while the difference between High and Ultra is minimal. This suggests that the visual upgrade from High to Ultra is relatively inexpensive in terms of frame rate, making Ultra a sensible choice for users who want the best image quality without a major performance penalty.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the Intel Core i5-14600K has an average benchmark score of 48618 and sits at the 90th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival in the database is the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H, which scores 48698, a difference of 0.2% in favor of the Xeon. The AMD EPYC 4345P scores 48470, which is 0.3% lower. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX scores 48287, 0.7% lower, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 scores 48995, 0.8% higher. In practical terms, any of these processors would deliver nearly identical performance in Inside, since the game does not heavily tax the CPU. The differences between these chips are well within the margin of error for most gaming workloads.

For the GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 20282 and sits at the 65th percentile of all GPUs. The closest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, which scores 20480, 1% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20534, 1.2% higher. The Intel Arc B570 scores 20556, 1.3% higher, and the Intel Arc A750 scores 20582, 1.5% higher. In the context of Inside, these differences are minor. A user with an RTX 3070 Mobile or an Arc B570 would see very similar frame rates at the same settings and resolutions. The Quadro M4000M, despite being a professional card, would also perform nearly identically in this game.

The practical takeaway is that anyone considering the i5-14600K and RTX 2070 SUPER combination could swap in any of these rivals without expecting a noticeable change in how Inside runs. The game is not demanding enough for the small score differences to translate into meaningful FPS gaps.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows that this PC can run Inside at all tested resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, every preset clears the 60 FPS threshold with a wide margin. Ultra averages 148.8 FPS, which is more than double the playability requirement. Even the most demanding configuration at this resolution leaves substantial headroom for future games or higher refresh rate displays.

At 2560x1440, the verdict is similarly positive. Ultra averages 107.4 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold. All four settings are marked as playable in the database, and the best setting is Ultra. There is no reason to lower the preset at this resolution unless the user prefers higher frame rates for competitive play, but the game's genre does not demand that.

At 3840x2160, the verdict is still positive, but the margin narrows. Ultra averages 69 FPS, which clears the threshold by 9 FPS. High averages 72.3 FPS, Medium averages 113.2 FPS, and Low averages 142 FPS. All four presets are recorded as playable, and the best setting is Ultra. Users who want to maintain a larger safety margin could drop to High, but even the most demanding setting is playable.

The overall verdict is that this combination is more than sufficient for Inside. The game is a puzzle platformer with modest graphical requirements, and the RTX 2070 SUPER provides enough performance for 4K Ultra, while the i5-14600K ensures that the CPU never becomes a bottleneck. The only caveat is that 4K Ultra leaves only a 9 FPS buffer, so users who are sensitive to frame rate dips should consider High settings at that resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-14600K and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER ranks at position 2078 out of 3716 tested combos for Inside. This places it in the middle of the database, which is expected given that the RTX 2070 SUPER is an older GPU with a 65th percentile ranking, while the CPU is much newer and ranks at the 90th percentile.

The rank reflects the fact that Inside is not a demanding game, so even mid-range GPUs deliver high frame rates. The combo's position at roughly the 56th percentile of all tested combinations means that many other pairings, particularly those with newer or higher-end GPUs, will achieve higher averages. However, the rank also shows that this combo outperforms a substantial portion of the database, including systems with weaker GPUs or older CPUs.

The CPU's high percentile ranking does not boost the combo's overall position much, because the game's performance is primarily GPU-bound at higher resolutions. A user who upgraded the GPU to a faster model would see the combo's rank improve significantly, while a CPU upgrade alone would have little effect on Inside. The recorded frame rates confirm that the RTX 2070 SUPER is the limiting component in this pairing, and the combo's rank reflects that reality.