Inside

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 sits in the 90th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 48995. The nearest rivals are remarkably tightly clustered: the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G scores 49196, just 0.4% higher; the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 scores 49228, 0.5% higher; the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H trails by 0.6% at 48698; and the Intel Core i5-14600K is 0.8% behind at 48618. In practical terms, any of these processors would deliver nearly indistinguishable CPU-bound performance in Inside, with differences well below one percent. The Core Ultra 5 245's 14 cores and 14 threads, paired with a 24 MB shared L3 cache and boost clock up to 5.10 GHz, place it in a performance envelope where the game's logic, physics, and scene management are unlikely to be limiting factors.

The GPU side is a different story. The Intel Arc B370, an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, holds only the 5th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its sole recorded benchmark, 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, yields a score of 1184. The nearest rivals are all legacy or low-end parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (0.2% higher), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% higher), and the AMD FirePro M2000 trails at 1168 (1.4% lower). This clustering means the Arc B370 behaves like a decade-old entry-level discrete GPU or a modest integrated solution. For a puzzle platformer like Inside, which has a stylized, relatively simple visual presentation, this level of graphics horsepower can still produce playable frame rates, but the margins are thin at higher resolutions.

The practical implication is that the CPU is not the bottleneck in this pairing. The recorded data consistently shows the GPU defining the performance ceiling. When considering alternative hardware that would behave similarly, the CPU alternatives listed above would all produce essentially the same results in this game, while GPU alternatives like the Radeon HD 5770 or Mobility Radeon HD 5570 would land within a couple of percentage points of the Arc B370's frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3422 out of 3716 tested combos in the database for Inside. That places this pairing in the bottom 8% of all systems tested, a position driven almost entirely by the GPU's low percentile standing. The CPU, by contrast, sits near the top of the distribution, which makes the ranking somewhat lopsided: a very capable processor paired with a very limited graphics solution.

This rank matters for context. A combo ranking below the 90th percentile of tested systems suggests that most other hardware configurations will deliver higher frame rates in this game. However, the rank alone does not tell the full story, because Inside is not a demanding title by modern standards. The game's 2016 release date and puzzle platformer genre mean that even a GPU in the 5th percentile can achieve playable performance at certain settings and resolutions. The measured data confirms this: the combo reaches 60 FPS or higher at every resolution tested, provided the right preset is selected.

The broad takeaway from the ranking is that this system is not built for high-refresh-rate or high-resolution gaming in general, but for this specific title, the combination of a strong CPU and a weak GPU still produces a playable experience in many configurations. The rank of 3422 out of 3716 is a warning sign for demanding modern games, but Inside's modest graphical requirements allow this pairing to clear the playable threshold in several scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Inside at 1080p?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080, all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) clear the 60 FPS playable threshold, with average frame rates of 141, 113, 70, and 67 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the best preset for 1440p gameplay?

A: Medium is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at 2560x1440, delivering an average of 81 FPS. High and Ultra fall to 51 and 48 FPS, respectively, while Low reaches 101 FPS.

Q: Is 4K playable on this hardware?

A: Only at Low settings. At 3840x2160, Low averages 64 FPS, while Medium drops to 51 FPS, High to 32 FPS, and Ultra to 30 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to similar processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 has an average benchmark score of 48995, placing it in the 90th percentile. Its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, scores 49228, which is only 0.5% higher.

Q: How does the GPU compare to similar graphics hardware?

A: The Intel Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it in the 5th percentile. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, just 0.5% higher, indicating similar performance.

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS is 141, recorded at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The lowest average is 30 FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings.

The Verdict

The recorded data answers the question directly: yes, this PC can run Inside, but the experience depends heavily on resolution and preset choices. The verdict by resolution is clear. At 1920x1080, every preset clears the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra averages 67 FPS, High averages 70 FPS, Medium averages 113 FPS, and Low averages 141 FPS. This makes 1080p the most versatile resolution for this combo, with the ability to max out all settings while staying above the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the playable settings narrow to Low and Medium. Medium averages 81 FPS and Low averages 101 FPS, while High drops to 51 FPS and Ultra to 48 FPS. For a 1440p display, Medium is the recommended ceiling, as it provides both quality and headroom above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, only Low is playable, averaging 64 FPS. Medium falls to 51 FPS, High to 32 FPS, and Ultra to 30 FPS. The 4K experience is therefore limited to the lowest visual quality preset, and even then, the average frame rate barely clears the 60 FPS threshold, with no recorded minimum or maximum values to confirm consistency. Given that the playable threshold is defined as 60 FPS, the system can technically run Inside at 4K, but only with minimal graphical fidelity.

The overall verdict is that this is a playable combination for Inside, with the caveat that higher resolutions force significant preset compromises. The GPU is the limiting factor throughout, while the CPU's performance headroom goes largely unused.

CPU and GPU Roles

The division of labor between the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and the Intel Arc B370 is heavily skewed toward the GPU as the performance limiter. The data shows a consistent pattern: as resolution increases, frame rates drop proportionally, which is the signature of a GPU-bound system. The CPU, with its 90th percentile standing, is never the bottleneck in this title.

At 1920x1080, the GPU has the easiest workload. The Ultra preset averages 67 FPS, and dropping to Low raises this to 141 FPS, a difference of 74 FPS. This wide spread across presets indicates that the GPU's shading units, texture mapping units, and raster operations are fully engaged. The Arc B370 has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, with a boost clock of 2400 MHz and a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s. These figures are modest by modern standards, and the 1080p results reflect that.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern continues but with lower overall numbers. Medium averages 81 FPS, while Low averages 101 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is 30 FPS (81 versus 51), showing that each step up in preset costs a significant portion of performance. The GPU's 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 96.00 GTexel/s texture rate are simply not sufficient to maintain high frame rates at this resolution with higher presets.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is severely strained. The difference between Low (64 FPS) and Medium (51 FPS) is 13 FPS, and High drops to 32 FPS. The 4K pixel count, roughly four times that of 1080p, overwhelms the Arc B370's fill rate and compute capabilities. The CPU's role at this resolution is minimal; even a much weaker processor would produce similar results, as the GPU is clearly the limiting factor.

The scaling data reinforces this interpretation. From 1080p Low (141 FPS) to 1440p Low (101 FPS), the drop is 40 FPS, and from 1440p Low to 4K Low (64 FPS), the drop is 37 FPS. These are large, consistent declines that track with pixel count increases, confirming a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU's 14 cores and 14 threads, with a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, provide ample single-threaded and multi-threaded performance for a puzzle platformer, but the game simply does not demand enough CPU resources to make the processor's strengths relevant.

Best Settings per Resolution

The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS average is the optimal choice for each resolution, balancing visual quality with smooth performance.

At 1920x1080, Ultra is the best setting, averaging 67 FPS. This is the highest preset available, and it clears the 60 FPS threshold by 7 FPS. All other presets also qualify, but Ultra offers the maximum visual fidelity while maintaining playability.

At 2560x1440, Medium is the best setting, averaging 81 FPS. This provides a 21 FPS margin above the playable threshold. High and Ultra fall short at 51 and 48 FPS, respectively, so Medium represents the highest quality option that remains playable.

At 3840x2160, Low is the only playable setting, averaging 64 FPS. This is a slim 4 FPS margin above the threshold, and no higher preset qualifies. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below 60 FPS, with averages of 51, 32, and 30 FPS respectively.

These recommendations are based solely on average frame rates. For the Medium preset at each resolution, the recorded data includes minimum and maximum values: at 1080p Medium, the range is 96 to 130 FPS; at 1440p Medium, 69 to 93 FPS; and at 4K Medium, 43 to 59 FPS. These ranges show that even where averages are playable, dips can occur, though the minimums at 1080p and 1440p Medium remain above 60 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured frame rate data for the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and Intel Arc B370 combination in Inside is as follows.

At 1920x1080, Low settings produce an average of 141 FPS. Medium settings average 113 FPS, with a minimum of 96 FPS and a maximum of 130 FPS. High settings average 70 FPS. Ultra settings average 67 FPS. Minimum and maximum values were not recorded for Low, High, or Ultra at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, Low settings average 101 FPS. Medium settings average 81 FPS, with a minimum of 69 FPS and a maximum of 93 FPS. High settings average 51 FPS. Ultra settings average 48 FPS. As with 1080p, minimum and maximum values were only recorded for Medium.

At 3840x2160, Low settings average 64 FPS. Medium settings average 51 FPS, with a minimum of 43 FPS and a maximum of 59 FPS. High settings average 32 FPS. Ultra settings average 30 FPS. Again, only Medium has recorded minimum and maximum values.

The pattern across all resolutions is consistent: Medium is the only preset with full min/max data, and the gaps between presets grow larger as resolution increases. At 1080p, the spread from Ultra (67 FPS) to Low (141 FPS) is 74 FPS. At 1440p, the spread from Ultra (48 FPS) to Low (101 FPS) is 53 FPS. At 4K, the spread from Ultra (30 FPS) to Low (64 FPS) is 34 FPS. This narrowing spread at higher resolutions indicates that even Low settings cannot fully compensate for the GPU's limited fill rate as pixel counts rise.

The Medium preset's recorded ranges are worth noting. At 1080p, the minimum of 96 FPS and maximum of 130 FPS show a 34 FPS variation. At 1440p, the range is 69 to 93 FPS, a 24 FPS variation. At 4K, the range is 43 to 59 FPS, a 16 FPS variation. These ranges suggest that frame pacing becomes more consistent at higher resolutions, likely because the GPU is more uniformly saturated, but the overall performance level drops correspondingly.