Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer from Playdead, and it turns out to be one of those games that almost any reasonably modern discrete GPU can crush. The pairing of an Intel Core i5-9400 with an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is, on paper, massive overkill for a title that shipped two years before either component existed. The recorded data confirms this: every resolution tested, from 1080p up to 4K, clears the 60 FPS threshold at every preset, including Ultra. Below is the full breakdown of what the measurements show, how this hardware compares to nearby alternatives, and how the combo ranks against other configurations in the database.

FAQ

Q: Can the i5-9400 + RTX 2060 SUPER run Inside at 4K?

A: Yes, and comfortably. At 3840x2160 the combo averages 63 FPS on High, 102 FPS on Medium (with a recorded minimum of 86), 127 FPS on Low, and 60 FPS on Ultra. Every preset at 4K meets the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the maximum setting this build can use at 1080p?

A: Ultra, without compromise. At 1920x1080 the average is 134 FPS on Ultra, rising to 141 FPS on High, 205 FPS on Medium (peaking at 235), and 222 FPS on Low. There is no preset at 1080p that drops below the threshold.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in Inside?

A: Neither component is meaningfully stressed at playable frame rates. The RTX 2060 SUPER sits in the 62nd percentile of all GPUs in the database, and the i5-9400 sits in the 47th percentile of all CPUs. For a game of this type and age, both are well above what the engine demands. The data shows GPU-limited scaling: frame rates fall as resolution rises (222 FPS at 1080p Low versus 127 FPS at 4K Low), which points to the graphics card setting the ceiling rather than the processor.

Q: How does the RTX 2060 SUPER compare to rival GPUs?

A: Its average benchmark score of 18093 places it within a fraction of a percent of several nearby cards: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile (-0.4%), AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (-0.5%), AMD Radeon RX 460 (-1.5%), and Intel Arc A770M (-1.6%). In practice, any of these would deliver a near-identical Inside experience.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p on Ultra?

A: 96 FPS on average at 2560x1440 with Ultra settings. Dropping to High raises that to 101 FPS, Medium to 162 FPS (minimum 137), and Low to 199 FPS.

Q: Does the Core i5-9400 have hyper-threading or an unlocked multiplier?

A: No on both counts. It is a 6-core, 6-thread Coffee Lake Refresh chip with a 2.90 GHz base clock, a 4.10 GHz boost clock, and a locked multiplier. None of that limits it here, since Inside never pushes the CPU hard enough for core count or threading to matter at these frame rates.

Similar Performance Alternatives

On the CPU side, the database places the i5-9400 (average benchmark score 2254, 47th percentile) in a tight cluster with four rivals. The Intel Core i7-1068NG7 averages 2259, a difference of just -0.2%. The Intel Core i7-10710U sits at 2248 (0.3% away), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 at 2246 (0.4% away), and the Intel Core i3-10305 at 2264 (-0.4% away). All of these processors would produce effectively indistinguishable Inside results. Notably, one of the closest rivals is a mobile part and another is a first-generation Ryzen PRO chip, which reinforces how little CPU horsepower this game needs. A 94-point Cinebench R15 single-core score and 668-point multi-core score are more than sufficient for a puzzle platformer released in 2016.

The GPU alternatives are equally interchangeable. The RTX 2060 SUPER carries an average score of 18093, and its nearest rivals are the RTX 3060 Mobile at 18159 (-0.4%), the Radeon Pro 5700 at 18189 (-0.5%), the Radeon RX 460 at 18373 (-1.5%), and the Arc A770M at 18383 (-1.6%). Anyone running one of those cards alongside a comparable CPU should expect the same story: Ultra settings playable at every resolution. The 2060 SUPER brings 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448 GB/s of bandwidth, 2176 shading units, and 7.181 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, but none of that specification headroom gets meaningfully exercised by Inside.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling data makes the division of labor clear. From 1080p to 1440p, Ultra drops from 134 FPS to 96 FPS, and from 1440p to 4K it drops again to 60 FPS. That is a steady, resolution-driven decline, the classic signature of GPU limitation. When a CPU is the constraint, raising the resolution does not reduce frame rates much because the processor cap is already in effect. Here, frame rates fall substantially at each step, so the RTX 2060 SUPER is the component defining the performance ceiling.

Within each resolution, the preset spread also points at the GPU. At 4K, going from Ultra to Low nearly doubles the frame rate, from 60 to 127 FPS. At 1080p, the spread runs from 134 to 222 FPS across the same presets. The i5-9400, meanwhile, shows no sign of struggling: with six cores reaching a 4.10 GHz boost, it handles the game's logic and physics without ever becoming the limiter, even at the 222 FPS low-setting ceiling. For a genre built on precise 2.5D platforming rather than simulation-heavy systems, that is expected.

The practical takeaway: at 1080p and 1440p, the GPU has headroom to spare and the CPU is essentially idle. At 4K, the GPU is working at its limit on Ultra (60 FPS exactly at the threshold), and that is the only scenario where component choice genuinely matters.

The Verdict

Yes, without qualification. This build runs Inside at 60 FPS or above at all three tested resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160) and at all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). The verdict data lists every setting as playable at every resolution.

The margins vary. At 1080p, Ultra delivers 134 FPS, more than double the threshold. At 1440p, Ultra still delivers 96 FPS. At 4K, Ultra lands exactly at 60 FPS, right on the line, while High (63 FPS), Medium (102 FPS, minimum 86), and Low (127 FPS) all clear it with room to spare. If you want guaranteed headroom at 4K, High is the safer pick; if you accept a borderline average, Ultra is technically playable there too.

Best Settings per Resolution

• 1920x1080: Ultra, at 134 FPS average. The most demanding preset stays well over double the playable threshold. High is nearly identical at 141 FPS, so the visual difference between the two comes at almost no cost.
• 2560x1440: Ultra, at 96 FPS average. High gives 101 FPS if you prefer a small margin, but Ultra is already 60% above the threshold.
• 3840x2160: Ultra, at 60 FPS average. This is the edge case. Ultra sits exactly at the playable threshold, so Medium (102 FPS, with recorded minimums of 86 and maximums of 117) or High (63 FPS) are the settings to choose if dips below 60 are unacceptable. Low reaches 127 FPS but sacrifices visuals the GPU barely needs to sacrifice.

In short, max everything at 1080p and 1440p. At 4K, max settings are technically viable but Medium is the sweet spot if you want a stable buffer.

How This Combo Ranks

Within Inside specifically, this pairing ranks 2827 out of 3716 tested combinations in the database. That places it in the bottom portion of the rankings for this game, which requires context: a 2016 puzzle platformer generates enormous numbers of modest hardware configurations that all run it flawlessly, and rankings in such a title are dominated by combinations pushing far higher frame rates on lightweight settings.

The ranking reflects surplus, not adequacy. A combo that averages 134 FPS at 1080p Ultra and clears 60 FPS at 4K Ultra is fully capable; it simply is not chasing the 200-plus FPS figures that top-tier pairings post in this particular title. Both components are also end-of-life parts now, with the i5-9400 released in October 2018 and the RTX 2060 SUPER in July 2019 at a launch MSRP of 399 USD, so newer combinations naturally outrank it. For actually playing Inside, none of that matters: the data shows a build that maxes out the game at any common resolution and never falls below the playable line.