Inside

Inside is a puzzle platformer that places minimal stress on modern hardware, and the measured data for this Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 combination confirms that the game is thoroughly dominated at every setting and resolution tested. The benchmark results show a system that never dips below 95 FPS on average, even at the most demanding preset, making this pairing an exercise in overkill for the 2016 title.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU in this combo each sit near a cluster of comparable hardware according to average benchmark scores. For the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, which holds a 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs, the nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, with a delta of just 0.2% — meaning the two processors are practically interchangeable in synthetic workloads. The AMD EPYC 4584PX trails by 1.1%, while the AMD EPYC 9135 is 1.2% behind. Interestingly, the AMD EPYC 7F72 actually scores 1.3% higher, placing it slightly ahead of the 290K Plus in aggregate benchmarks. These deltas are all within a narrow band, so users upgrading or downgrading among these options would see negligible differences in a game like Inside, which is far more dependent on the GPU for frame rendering.

On the graphics side, the RTX 3080 holds a 68th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score that places it remarkably close to several unlikely competitors. The NVIDIA P106-100 is only 0.3% slower, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 and AMD Radeon RX 6600M are each 0.3% behind as well. The AMD Radeon R9 M290X trails by 0.4%. These deltaPct values are staggeringly small, suggesting that in the specific benchmark suite used, the RTX 3080's performance profile is nearly identical to these other cards — though the architectural differences (Ampere vs. older designs, 10 GB GDDR6X vs. more modest memory configurations) would manifest in other workloads. For Inside specifically, any of these GPUs would likely produce playable frame rates, but the RTX 3080's measured scores here show it delivering far beyond what the game requires.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear pattern: this game scales almost entirely with GPU load, while the CPU remains largely unbothered. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces 440 FPS average. Moving to Medium drops that to 352 FPS, a 20% reduction, and High brings 220 FPS, which is 50% lower than Low. Ultra sits at 210 FPS, only marginally below High. These step-downs are consistent with the GPU being the bottleneck — as settings increase, the render workload grows, and frame rates fall proportionally.

At 2560x1440, the same hierarchy emerges with lower absolute numbers: Low delivers 317 FPS, Medium 253 FPS, High 158 FPS, and Ultra 151 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra shrinks to just 4.4%, while Low-to-Medium is a 20.2% drop. At 3840x2160, the spread widens further: Low reaches 199 FPS, Medium 159 FPS, High 99 FPS, and Ultra 95 FPS. The Low-to-Medium drop is 20.1%, Medium-to-High is 37.7%, and High-to-Ultra is only 4.0%. This suggests that Ultra adds little beyond High at every resolution, while Medium represents a significant step from Low.

The CPU's role here is minimal. With a 24-core, 24-thread configuration that scores 51,731 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 7,303 in single-core, the 290K Plus has ample headroom. Even at 1080p Low, where the GPU is producing 440 FPS, the CPU is not the limiting factor — the game's simple geometry and physics simply don't challenge a processor of this caliber. The scaling between resolutions (1080p to 1440p to 4K) shows frame rates dropping by roughly 28% and 55% respectively at Low settings, which aligns with pixel-count increases rather than CPU limitations. In short, for Inside, the GPU dictates performance at all settings, while the CPU sits idle relative to its capacity.

How This Combo Ranks

Among 3,716 tested combinations for Inside, this pairing ranks 683rd, placing it in the top 18.4% of all configs tested. That rank is respectable but not elite, which makes sense given the RTX 3080's mid-tier percentile among GPUs. The CPU's 96th percentile standing is offset by the GPU's 68th percentile, pulling the combo down from what a top-tier graphics card might achieve. Still, a rank of 683 out of 3,716 means the vast majority of systems tested produce lower frame rates.

The ranking becomes clearer when contextualized with the measured FPS. At 4K Ultra, the combo averages 95 FPS, which is 58% above the 60 FPS playable threshold. At 1440p Ultra, 151 FPS is 152% above threshold, and at 1080p Ultra, 210 FPS is 250% above. These figures suggest that many of the 683 combos ranked ahead likely feature newer or higher-tier GPUs that push even higher frame rates, but for practical purposes, this system is firmly in "excessive performance" territory for Inside. The rank reflects raw capability relative to all tested hardware, not playability — and by that measure, this combo is comfortably ahead of the curve.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC runs Inside with overwhelming success at every resolution and preset tested. The verdict data lists all four settings — Low, Medium, High, and Ultra — as playable at every resolution from 1920x1080 through 3840x2160. The playable threshold is 60 FPS, and the lowest average frame rate recorded is 95 FPS at 4K Ultra. That means even the most demanding configuration clears the threshold by 58%.

At 2560x1440, the worst-case scenario is Ultra at 151 FPS, which is 152% above the threshold. At 1920x1080, Ultra delivers 210 FPS, more than triple the minimum requirement. The data indicates there is no scenario where this combo fails to maintain playable performance — no resolution or setting combination produces an average below 95 FPS. The only entries with min FPS recorded are Medium presets: 135 FPS at 4K, 215 FPS at 1440p, and 299 FPS at 1080p, all far above 60 FPS. For a game from 2016 with modest graphics demands, this system is effectively future-proof for Inside.

FAQ

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

A: The highest recorded average is 440 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: Can this system handle 4K Ultra settings?

A: Yes, 4K Ultra produces an average of 95 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: How does the RTX 3080 compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The RTX 3080 scores 23,172 on average, with the NVIDIA P106-100, AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16, and AMD Radeon RX 6600M all within 0.4% of that figure.

Q: What is the largest FPS drop between settings at any resolution?

A: At 3840x2160, moving from Medium (159 FPS) to High (99 FPS) results in a 37.7% reduction, the steepest single-step decline in the data.

Q: Which CPU is the closest rival to the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has an average score of 83,807, just 0.2% lower than the 290K Plus's 84,003.

Q: Does the Ultra preset offer a significant improvement over High?

A: No — at every resolution, Ultra is within 4.4% of High's average FPS, with 4K showing 95 vs. 99, 1440p showing 151 vs. 158, and 1080p showing 210 vs. 220.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which averages 210 FPS. This is the maximum quality option, and it still delivers more than triple the playable threshold. At 2560x1440, Ultra again is the best choice, with an average of 151 FPS — well above 60 FPS and representing the highest fidelity available. At 3840x2160, Ultra remains the optimal setting, yielding 95 FPS average. In all three resolutions, the Ultra preset is not only playable but provides such a high frame rate that users could enable additional features or cap the FPS for consistency without concern.

The data shows no resolution where a lower preset is needed to maintain playability. Even the most demanding combination — 4K Ultra — stays 58% above the 60 FPS floor. For players seeking maximum visual quality, Ultra is the clear recommendation at every resolution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the frame rates are exceptionally high across all settings. Low averages 440 FPS, Medium averages 352 FPS with a minimum of 299 and a maximum of 405, High averages 220 FPS, and Ultra averages 210 FPS. The min/max data for Medium shows a 106 FPS spread, indicating some variance but nothing close to dropping below playable levels.

Moving to 2560x1440, Low delivers 317 FPS average, Medium provides 253 FPS (min 215, max 291), High reaches 158 FPS, and Ultra hits 151 FPS. The Medium preset's min of 215 FPS is still 258% above the 60 FPS threshold, showing no risk of stutter. At 3840x2160, Low averages 199 FPS, Medium averages 159 FPS (min 135, max 183), High averages 99 FPS, and Ultra averages 95 FPS. The 4K Medium minimum of 135 FPS is the lowest single frame measurement recorded in the entire dataset, yet it remains more than double the playable threshold. The pattern across all resolutions is consistent: even the weakest measured frame rate is far beyond what Inside requires for smooth gameplay.