Inside

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-9400 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT ranks 1959th out of 3716 tested combinations for Inside. That places this combo in the upper half of the database, roughly 53rd percentile among all CPU/GPU pairings tested for this game. The ranking reflects a system that is clearly capable of running Inside at high frame rates across all common resolutions, though the CPU sits in a modest position relative to the broader hardware landscape.

The processor itself holds a 47th percentile ranking when compared against all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 2254. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (score 2259, delta -0.2%), the Intel Core i7-10710U (score 2248, delta 0.3%), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (score 2246, delta 0.4%), and the Intel Core i3-10305 (score 2264, delta -0.4%). These deltas are all within a fraction of a percent, meaning the i5-9400 sits in a tightly packed cluster of similarly performing CPUs. For a game like Inside, which is not particularly demanding on processor resources, this level of CPU performance is more than adequate.

The Radeon RX 9070 XT, by contrast, holds a 55th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 13543. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon HD 7770M (score 13536, delta 0.1%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 (score 13515, delta 0.2%), the NVIDIA P106-090 (score 13470, delta 0.5%), and the AMD Radeon Pro 555 (score 13407, delta 1%). These are surprisingly close scores, but the RX 9070 XT's modern architecture and raw compute capabilities are far beyond what those older cards can deliver in real-world gaming scenarios. The recorded data for Inside confirms this: the GPU is the dominant component in this pairing, and its performance headroom is substantial.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data reveals an interesting dynamic between the Intel Core i5-9400 and the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT when running Inside. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the system delivers 222.1 FPS on Low settings, 204.5 FPS on Medium, 168.9 FPS on High, and 166.5 FPS on Ultra. The gap between Low and Ultra is roughly 55 FPS, indicating that the GPU is doing most of the heavy lifting as settings scale. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 6 threads, is not a bottleneck at this resolution; the frame rates are consistently high regardless of preset.

Moving to 2560x1440, the pattern shifts slightly. Low settings produce 197.7 FPS, Medium drops to 181.7 FPS, High settles at 151 FPS, and Ultra reaches 148.5 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra here is about 49 FPS, slightly narrower than at 1080p. This suggests that the GPU is still the primary driver of performance, but the CPU's role becomes marginally more visible as resolution increases and the GPU has more pixels to process. The i5-9400's 2.90 GHz base clock and 4.10 GHz boost clock, combined with its 9 MB shared L3 cache, provide enough single-thread performance to keep feeding the GPU without creating a significant bottleneck.

At 3840x2160, the highest resolution tested, the frame rates tell a clearer story. Low settings deliver 169.6 FPS, Medium drops to 159.2 FPS, High falls to 101.1 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 97.9 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra here is roughly 72 FPS, the largest of any resolution. This widening gap indicates that at 4K, the GPU is almost entirely responsible for performance scaling. The CPU's influence is negligible at this resolution; the RX 9070 XT's 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth are what determine how quickly each frame can be rendered.

The data shows a clear trend: as resolution increases, the GPU's dominance grows. At 1080p, the CPU still contributes meaningfully to overall performance, but by 4K, the RX 9070 XT is the sole determinant of frame rates. The i5-9400's 47th percentile CPU ranking is sufficient for this game at any resolution, but it is the GPU's 55th percentile ranking and modern RDNA 4.0 architecture that push this combo into high-performance territory.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded measurements for Inside provide a complete picture of how this combo performs across three resolutions and four presets.

At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the system achieves 222.1 FPS on Low settings, 204.5 FPS on Medium, 168.9 FPS on High, and 166.5 FPS on Ultra. These numbers are all well above the 60 FPS playable threshold, and even the most demanding preset clears the bar by a wide margin. The difference between High and Ultra is only 2.4 FPS, suggesting that Ultra adds visual fidelity without a proportional performance cost.

At 2560x1440, performance remains strong but begins to scale with settings more visibly. Low settings produce 197.7 FPS, Medium delivers 181.7 FPS, High reaches 151 FPS, and Ultra settles at 148.5 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium is 16 FPS, from Medium to High is roughly 31 FPS, and from High to Ultra is only 2.5 FPS. The diminishing returns at the top end of the preset scale are evident, but every preset at this resolution comfortably exceeds the 60 FPS threshold.

At 3840x2160, the highest resolution tested, the performance curve steepens. Low settings deliver 169.6 FPS, Medium drops to 159.2 FPS, High falls to 101.1 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 97.9 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium is about 10 FPS, but the drop from Medium to High is a significant 58 FPS. This suggests that High settings at 4K introduce substantially more rendering work for the GPU, likely through increased shadow quality, post-processing effects, or draw distances. The gap between High and Ultra is only 3.2 FPS, mirroring the pattern seen at lower resolutions.

Across all resolutions, the minimum and maximum FPS values were not recorded in the database, so the analysis relies solely on average frame rates. The consistency of the averages, however, indicates that the system maintains stable performance without major frame-time spikes. Inside is a puzzle platformer with relatively static scenes, which typically translates to predictable frame pacing.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Inside at 60 FPS on Ultra settings at 1920x1080?

A: Yes. The recorded average FPS at 1080p Ultra is 166.5, which is more than double the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at 2560x1440?

A: All four presets at 1440p exceed 60 FPS. Ultra settings deliver an average of 148.5 FPS, making it the best choice for maximum visual quality.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, scores 2259, a delta of -0.2%. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, a delta of 0.4%. These differences are negligible in real-world gaming.

Q: Is the GPU the bottleneck at 3840x2160?

A: The data indicates yes. At 4K, the frame rate drops from 169.6 FPS on Low to 97.9 FPS on Ultra, a 42% reduction, showing that the GPU is doing the majority of the rendering work. The CPU's 6 cores and 6 threads are sufficient at this resolution.

Q: What is the best preset for maximum visual quality at 3840x2160?

A: Ultra settings at 4K deliver an average of 97.9 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold. This makes Ultra the best choice for players who prioritize visual fidelity over raw frame rate.

Q: How does the GPU's benchmark score compare to its nearest rival?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT has an average benchmark score of 13543. The AMD Radeon HD 7770M scores 13536, a delta of 0.1%, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 scores 13515, a delta of 0.2%. These are statistical near-ties, but the RX 9070 XT's modern architecture delivers far better real-world gaming performance.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which delivers an average of 166.5 FPS. This is the clear choice for maximum visual quality at this resolution, and it still leaves substantial headroom above the 60 FPS threshold.

At 2560x1440, Ultra settings also deliver the best visual experience, with an average of 148.5 FPS. This is comfortably above the 60 FPS playable threshold, so there is no need to compromise on graphical fidelity at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 97.9 FPS. This is the only resolution where the frame rate dips below 100 FPS at the highest settings, but it still clears the 60 FPS threshold by a significant margin. Players who prefer even higher frame rates could drop to High settings for 101.1 FPS, but Ultra remains fully playable.

The Verdict

The Intel Core i5-9400 and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT combination can run Inside at 60 FPS or higher at every resolution and preset tested. The verdict by resolution confirms this across the board.

At 1920x1080, all four presets are playable, with Ultra delivering 166.5 FPS. At 2560x1440, all four presets are playable, with Ultra delivering 148.5 FPS. At 3840x2160, all four presets are playable, with Ultra delivering 97.9 FPS. There is no resolution or preset combination in the recorded data that falls below the 60 FPS threshold.

The GPU is the star of this pairing. The RX 9070 XT's 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, 644.6 GB/s bandwidth, and 48.66 TFLOPS of FP32 compute provide enormous headroom for a visually modest game like Inside. The CPU, while not top-tier by modern standards, does not hold the system back at any resolution. The i5-9400's 9 MB shared L3 cache and 4.10 GHz boost clock are sufficient for the game's single-threaded workloads.

For players aiming for the smoothest experience, the data shows that even the most demanding preset at 4K stays well above 60 FPS. The only consideration is whether the visual improvements from Low to Ultra are worth the frame rate trade-off at 4K, where the difference is roughly 72 FPS. At 1080p and 1440p, there is no meaningful reason to avoid Ultra settings, as the frame rates remain exceptionally high. This combo is a definitive yes for running Inside, regardless of resolution or settings.