Inside

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is an overkill-class combination for Inside, a 2016 Puzzle Platformer that places no meaningful stress on modern high-end hardware. Across every tested resolution and preset, this combo delivers average frame rates that are multiple times higher than the 60 FPS playable threshold. The data shows a system that does not merely run the game but obliterates its performance demands, with the weakest recorded average still sitting at 140.8 FPS at 4K Ultra. This is a top-tier pairing by any measure, ranked 19th out of 3,716 tested combos for this specific title, placing it in the top 0.5% of all configurations. The verdict is unambiguous: this PC runs Inside flawlessly at maximum settings on any resolution, with enough headroom for future titles or extreme refresh-rate displays.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 19 out of 3,716 tested configurations places it in the 99.5th percentile for Inside performance. This is not merely a fast system; it is one of the fastest possible combinations for this game. The rank reflects the combined ceiling of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090, both of which sit near the apex of their respective benchmark hierarchies. The CPU holds a percentile rank of 94 against all tested CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 88th percentile against all GPUs. Together, they form a pairing that leaves virtually no headroom for a faster experience in Inside, as the game’s modest graphical demands are easily saturated by either component alone.

To contextualize the CPU’s contribution, its average benchmark score of 70,879 places it within 0.2% of the Intel Xeon 6511P (71,051 score) and 0.7% of the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 (71,370 score). It is also 1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-14700KF (70,163) and 1.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (69,996). These deltas are tiny, indicating that the Core Ultra 7 265K trades blows with other high-end server and desktop parts, but none of these rivals would meaningfully change Inside performance because the game is not CPU-bound at these frame rates.

The GPU’s nearest rivals paint a similar picture. The RTX 4090’s average benchmark score of 60,347 is essentially identical to the Intel Arc Pro A60 (60,326, 0% delta) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (60,140, 0.3% delta). It trails the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61,896) by 2.5% but leads the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (58,657) by 2.9%. These are professional-grade workstation GPUs, not gaming parts, which underscores that the RTX 4090’s raw compute is in a class where even specialized alternatives cannot outpace it significantly. For Inside, the GPU’s 24 GB of GDDR6X memory and 82.58 TFLOPS FP32 performance are astronomical overkill, but they guarantee that even at 4K Ultra, the average frame rate stays above 140 FPS.

The measured FPS data confirms this rank is earned. At 1920x1080, the combo averages 452.4 FPS on Low settings, 416.1 FPS on Medium, 325.9 FPS on High, and 309.3 FPS on Ultra. Moving to 2560x1440, the averages drop to 406.1 FPS (Low), 376 FPS (Medium), 233.5 FPS (High), and 225.2 FPS (Ultra). At 3840x2160, the lowest resolution tested, the averages are 291.5 FPS (Low), 232.9 FPS (Medium), 144.9 FPS (High), and 140.8 FPS (Ultra). Every single configuration clears the 60 FPS threshold by at least a factor of 2.3, and most clear it by a factor of 5 or more. This is a system that could drive a 360 Hz monitor at 1080p on Low settings, or a 144 Hz 4K display on Ultra, without ever dropping below the target frame rate.

FAQ

*Q: Can this PC run Inside at 4K Ultra settings?*

A: Yes. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the combo averages 140.8 FPS, which is more than double the 60 FPS playable threshold. The verdict by resolution lists Ultra as the best playable setting at 4K, with an average FPS of 140.8.

*Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Inside?*

A: The highest recorded average is 452.4 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is over 7.5 times the playable threshold of 60 FPS.

Q: How does the combo rank compared to other tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 19th out of 3,716 tested combinations for Inside, placing it in the top 0.5% of all systems. This rank reflects the combined high-end performance of the CPU and GPU.

Q: Is there any resolution or preset where this combo fails to reach 60 FPS?

A: No. Across all four settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) and three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160), the lowest average FPS is 140.8 at 4K Ultra. Every configuration exceeds 60 FPS by a substantial margin.

*Q: Which component is more responsible for the high frame rates in Inside?*

A: The GPU is the primary driver, given that Inside is a visually simple game with low CPU demands. However, the CPU’s 20 cores and 5.50 GHz boost clock ensure no bottleneck at even the highest frame rates. The data shows that scaling from 1080p to 4K reduces FPS by roughly 30-50%, which is typical of GPU-bound workloads.

Q: Does the combo’s performance vary significantly between presets?

A: Yes, but not in a way that threatens playability. At 4K, the difference between Low (291.5 FPS) and Ultra (140.8 FPS) is a 51.7% drop, while at 1080p the drop from Low (452.4 FPS) to Ultra (309.3 FPS) is 31.6%. The relative impact of preset scaling diminishes at lower resolutions because the GPU has more headroom.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data for Inside reveals a clear pattern: the GPU is the dominant scaling factor, while the CPU provides a stable, high-frequency foundation that never becomes a limiting factor. The evidence comes from how average FPS changes across resolutions and presets. When moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, the average FPS drops by approximately 10-20% depending on the preset. For example, at High settings, FPS falls from 325.9 at 1080p to 233.5 at 1440p, a 28.4% reduction. Moving further to 3840x2160, the same preset drops to 144.9 FPS, a 55.5% reduction from 1080p. This steep decline with resolution is the hallmark of a GPU-bound scenario, where each additional pixel demands more shading and memory bandwidth from the graphics card.

The RTX 4090’s specifications support this interpretation. With 16,384 shading units, 512 TMUs, and a 1.01 TB/s memory bandwidth, the GPU has ample resources to process Inside’s simple 2.5D environments. The 24 GB GDDR6X frame buffer is never close to being filled, as the game’s textures and geometry are modest by modern standards. The GPU’s 82.58 TFLOPS FP32 compute is also far beyond what Inside requires, which is why even at 4K Ultra, the average FPS remains above 140.

The CPU’s role is less visible but still important. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K has 20 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. Its single-thread performance, as measured by Cinebench R23, is 2,020 points, which is strong for a desktop processor. In Inside, which likely uses only a handful of threads for gameplay logic and physics, the CPU’s high boost clock ensures that frame times are consistent. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the combo reaches 452.4 FPS, which is near the practical limit for many display refresh rates. If the CPU were a bottleneck, we would expect to see frame rates plateau regardless of resolution, but instead the FPS scales down smoothly with resolution, confirming the GPU as the limiting factor.

Preset scaling also highlights the GPU’s dominance. At 4K, moving from Low (291.5 FPS) to Medium (232.9 FPS) reduces performance by 20.1%, while High (144.9 FPS) is 50.3% lower than Low. Ultra (140.8 FPS) is only 2.8% lower than High, suggesting that the Ultra preset adds minimal additional load beyond High. This non-linear scaling is consistent with a GPU that has enough headroom to absorb most settings changes without severe penalties, but the largest drops occur when resolution increases, which directly taxes the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth. In summary, for Inside, the RTX 4090 is the workhorse, while the Core Ultra 7 265K provides a high-frequency platform that never interferes with the GPU’s output.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals based on average benchmark scores are all within a narrow band of performance. The Intel Xeon 6511P (71,051 score) trails the Core Ultra 7 265K by only 0.2%, making it virtually identical in synthetic benchmarks. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 (71,370) is 0.7% ahead, while the Intel Core i7-14700KF (70,163) is 1% behind, and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (69,996) is 1.3% behind. In Inside, these differences would translate to negligible FPS changes, likely less than 1% at any resolution. For a game that already runs at hundreds of FPS, any of these CPUs would deliver the same experience, as the GPU would remain the bottleneck.

The GPU’s nearest rivals are more diverse, including workstation cards that are not typically used for gaming. The Intel Arc Pro A60 (60,326 score) is a 0% delta from the RTX 4090, meaning their average benchmark scores are nearly identical. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (60,140) is 0.3% behind, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61,896) is 2.5% ahead, and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (58,657) is 2.9% behind. For Inside, these deltas would result in FPS differences of less than 5% in most cases. For example, if the RTX 4090 averages 140.8 FPS at 4K Ultra, a GPU with a 2.9% lower score might average around 136.7 FPS, still far above the 60 FPS threshold. However, these rivals are workstation-focused and may lack the gaming-specific optimizations of the RTX 4090, so real-world performance could vary more than the synthetic scores suggest.

If a user were to swap the RTX 4090 for any of these rivals, the resulting system would still run Inside flawlessly at all resolutions and presets, because even the weakest rival (AMD Radeon PRO V710 with a 2.9% deficit) would maintain average FPS above 130 at 4K Ultra. Similarly, swapping the CPU for any of its rivals would have no measurable impact on Inside performance, as the game is not CPU-bound. The practical takeaway is that this combo’s performance is so far above the game’s requirements that nearby hardware alternatives are effectively interchangeable for Inside, though the RTX 4090’s 24 GB of VRAM and 1.01 TB/s bandwidth provide more headroom for other, more demanding titles.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). The data includes average FPS only, with no min or max values recorded, so the analysis focuses on average performance.

At 1920x1080, the combo achieves its highest frame rates. On Low settings, the average is 452.4 FPS. Medium settings reduce this to 416.1 FPS, a 8.0% drop. High settings produce 325.9 FPS, a 28.0% drop from Low, while Ultra settings yield 309.3 FPS, a 31.6% drop from Low. The gap between High and Ultra is only 16.6 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset adds minimal additional load over High at 1080p.

At 2560x1440, performance scales down as expected. Low settings average 406.1 FPS, which is 10.2% lower than 1080p Low. Medium settings average 376 FPS, a 7.4% drop from Low at the same resolution. High settings drop to 233.5 FPS, a 42.5% reduction from Low, while Ultra averages 225.2 FPS, a 44.5% reduction from Low. Compared to 1080p, the 1440p results show a 10-20% reduction across presets, with the largest absolute drop occurring at High (from 325.9 to 233.5 FPS, a 92.4 FPS difference).

At 3840x2160, the highest resolution, the frame rates remain exceptionally high but show the largest relative drops. Low settings average 291.5 FPS, which is 28.2% lower than 1080p Low. Medium settings average 232.9 FPS, a 20.1% drop from Low at 4K. High settings produce 144.9 FPS, a 50.3% drop from Low, while Ultra averages 140.8 FPS, a 51.7% drop from Low. The difference between High and Ultra at 4K is only 4.1 FPS, again suggesting that Ultra is not significantly more demanding than High.

The scaling pattern across resolutions shows that the GPU’s performance degrades roughly linearly with pixel count, but the absolute frame rates remain so high that even the worst case (4K Ultra, 140.8 FPS) is more than double the playable threshold. The data also shows that the preset scaling is more pronounced at higher resolutions: at 1080p, Ultra is 31.6% slower than Low, but at 4K, Ultra is 51.7% slower than Low. This is typical of GPU-bound workloads, where higher resolutions amplify the cost of additional visual effects.

The Verdict

The verdict is unequivocal: this PC runs Inside at maximum playable settings on every resolution tested. The playable threshold is 60 FPS, and the combo exceeds it by a wide margin in all scenarios. At 3840x2160, the verdict by resolution lists High, Low, Medium, and Ultra as all playable, with Ultra being the best setting at an average of 140.8 FPS. At 2560x1440, the same four settings are playable, with Ultra averaging 225.2 FPS. At 1920x1080, Ultra averages 309.3 FPS, and all settings are playable.

The data confirms that this system is overkill for Inside. Even the most demanding configuration tested—4K Ultra—delivers an average frame rate that is 2.35 times the playable threshold. The lowest average FPS across all data points is 140.8 FPS, which means there is no scenario where the game would drop below 60 FPS, even in moments of intense action or complex scenes. The combo’s rank of 19 out of 3,716 tested combinations further reinforces that this is a top-tier system for this game, and its performance is limited only by the game’s own engine or display refresh rates, not by hardware.

For a user with a 60 Hz or 144 Hz display, this combo will deliver a perfectly smooth experience at any resolution and preset. For a user with a high-refresh-rate monitor (e.g., 240 Hz or 360 Hz), the combo can also saturate those displays at 1080p or 1440p on lower presets. The only caveat is that min and max FPS data are not available, so the analysis relies on averages, but the huge margin above 60 FPS suggests that even rare dips would not approach the playability threshold. In summary, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 are not just capable of running Inside—they are among the fastest combinations ever tested for this title, with performance that is effectively unconstrained by the game’s modest demands.