Inside

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 delivers an extraordinary performance envelope for Inside, a Puzzle Platformer from 2016. The measured data shows this combination obliterates the 60 FPS playability threshold at every resolution and preset tested, with frame rates that range from nearly double to over seven times that baseline. This is a system that does not merely run the game; it transforms it into an exercise in excess headroom, where even the most demanding settings at 4K leave the GPU with substantial untapped capacity. The analysis below breaks down the exact measured performance, identifies the optimal settings, and contextualizes how this hardware duo behaves relative to its closest competitors.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data reveals a consistent and dramatic scaling pattern across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the combo produces staggering numbers. With Low settings, the average frame rate hits 442 FPS. Moving to Medium settings, the average drops to 367 FPS, with a minimum of 312 FPS and a maximum of 423 FPS. High settings yield an average of 230 FPS, while Ultra settings still produce an average of 219 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 223 FPS, indicating that the settings menu has a significant impact, but even the heaviest preset leaves the hardware far from its limits.

At 2560x1440, the performance remains exceptionally high but begins to show the expected scaling. The Low preset averages 330 FPS, while Medium averages 264 FPS with a minimum of 225 FPS and a maximum of 304 FPS. High settings produce 165 FPS on average, and Ultra settings deliver 157 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra here is 173 FPS, a slightly smaller absolute delta than at 1080p, but the relative pattern holds. The minimum recorded frame rate at 1440p Medium, 225 FPS, is still nearly four times the playable threshold.

The 3840x2160 results demonstrate that even at 4K, this hardware is not challenged. Low settings average 208 FPS, Medium averages 166 FPS with a minimum of 141 FPS and a maximum of 191 FPS, High averages 104 FPS, and Ultra averages 99 FPS. The step from High to Ultra at 4K is a modest 5 FPS difference, suggesting diminishing returns from the highest preset. The minimum frame rate recorded at 4K Medium, 141 FPS, is still more than double the 60 FPS playability threshold, underscoring the immense headroom available.

Best Settings per Resolution

Data from the verdictByResolution field establishes the most demanding preset that maintains an average at or above 60 FPS for each resolution. In every case, that preset is Ultra, and the average FPS far exceeds the requirement. At 1920x1080, Ultra settings run at an average of 219 FPS. At 2560x1440, Ultra settings run at an average of 157 FPS. At 3840x2160, Ultra settings run at an average of 99 FPS.

The implication is straightforward: there is no resolution in this test suite where the user must compromise on visual fidelity to achieve playable performance. The Ultra preset, which represents the highest graphical workload measured, remains comfortably above 60 FPS even at 4K. The closest margin is at 3840x2160 Ultra, with an average of 99 FPS, which is still 39 FPS above the threshold. For a game like Inside, with its atmospheric 2.5D presentation, this means the user can enable every visual feature and still have frame rate headroom to spare. The data suggests that the limiting factor for this title is not the hardware but the game's own engine caps or display refresh rate.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions and presets in the measured data provides insight into which component dominates performance for Inside. The game is a Puzzle Platformer, a genre that typically does not stress modern hardware heavily, and the numbers confirm this. The most telling observation is the minimal performance difference between High and Ultra settings at each resolution. At 1080p, High averages 230 FPS while Ultra averages 219 FPS, a delta of only 11 FPS. At 1440p, the delta is 8 FPS (165 vs 157). At 4K, the delta is 5 FPS (104 vs 99). This narrow gap suggests that the Ultra preset adds visual features that are largely GPU-bound, but the GPU is so far from saturation that the impact is minimal.

The resolution scaling tells a clearer story. Moving from 1080p Low (442 FPS) to 1440p Low (330 FPS) is a 25% reduction, while moving from 1440p Low to 4K Low (208 FPS) is a 37% reduction. This pattern is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario, where pixel count directly influences frame rate. However, the absolute numbers are so high that the CPU, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, is never the bottleneck. The CPU's benchmarks, including a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 51731 and a Passmark single-thread score of 4823, place it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. For a game released in 2016, the CPU's 24 cores and 24 threads are vastly overprovisioned.

The data indicates that the GPU, the RTX 4070, is the primary driver of performance differences between resolutions, but even it is underutilized. The RTX 4070's Passmark G3D score of 26927 and its 81st percentile ranking among all GPUs show it is a capable mid-range card, yet Inside does not challenge it. At 4K Ultra, the average of 99 FPS suggests the GPU is finally doing some work, but the fact that 1080p Ultra hits 219 FPS implies that the card has enormous reserve capacity. The CPU's role is essentially to stay out of the way, which it does effortlessly, given its single-thread performance and the game's age.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearestRivals data for the CPU and GPU provides context for what other hardware would behave similarly. For the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, the closest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, with an average benchmark score of 83807 compared to the 290K Plus's 84003, a delta of just 0.2%. In practical terms, a system with the 285K would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Inside, as the CPU is not a limiting factor. The AMD EPYC 4584PX (score 83090, delta 1.1%) and AMD EPYC 9135 (score 82980, delta 1.2%) are also within 1.2% of the 290K Plus's average score, though these are server-class chips. The AMD EPYC 7F72 is slightly faster, with a score of 85072, a delta of -1.3%, meaning it outperforms the 290K Plus by a small margin. For gaming, any of these CPUs would produce indistinguishable results in Inside.

For the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070, the nearest rivals are all within a 1.3% performance delta. The NVIDIA Tesla P4 (score 37628, delta 0.1%) is essentially identical in average benchmark score, though it is a professional card. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (score 37507, delta 0.4%) is also nearly identical, meaning a system with that GPU would produce similar FPS in Inside. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (score 38135, delta -1.3%) is the fastest of the group, outperforming the RTX 4070 by 1.3%, while the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 (score 37157, delta 1.3%) is the slowest, trailing by 1.3%. None of these differences would be perceptible in Inside, where the frame rates are already in the triple digits at 4K. The data implies that swapping the RTX 4070 for any of these rivals would maintain the same classification of "excessively playable" performance.

How This Combo Ranks

The comboRankInGame field places this specific pairing at rank 515 out of 3716 tested combinations. This means the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 outperform approximately 86% of all other hardware combinations tested for Inside. The rank is impressive but not top-tier, which makes sense given that the RTX 4070 is a mid-range GPU and the game is not particularly demanding. The top 514 combinations likely feature higher-end GPUs like the RTX 4090 or flagship AMD cards, which would push frame rates even higher, though the measured data already shows that this combo exceeds 200 FPS at 1080p Ultra.

The rank of 515 also reflects the CPU's contribution. The 290K Plus is in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, so it is not holding the combo back. The combination's position in the rankings is therefore driven almost entirely by the GPU's absolute performance. For a game like Inside, the difference between rank 515 and rank 1 is likely a matter of a few dozen FPS at most, all of which are far beyond the display's capability. The percentile data supports the conclusion that this combo is in the upper echelon of tested systems, even if it does not hold the top spot.

The Verdict

The verdictByResolution data is unambiguous: this PC can run Inside with every setting maxed out at every resolution tested. At 3840x2160, all four settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable, with Ultra averaging 99 FPS. At 2560x1440, all settings are playable, with Ultra averaging 157 FPS. At 1920x1080, all settings are playable, with Ultra averaging 219 FPS. The playable threshold of 60 FPS is exceeded by a wide margin in every scenario.

The practical conclusion is that the user should simply select Ultra settings and play at whatever resolution their display supports. The data shows no scenario where dropping to High, Medium, or Low is necessary for playability. The only reason to lower settings would be to chase higher frame rates for a high-refresh-rate display, and the numbers suggest that even a 240 Hz monitor could be fed at 1080p Low (442 FPS) or 1440p Low (330 FPS). At 4K, a 144 Hz display would be satisfied by the Ultra preset's 99 FPS average, and a 120 Hz display would be fully utilized. The hardware is overkill for Inside, but that is not a criticism; it means the game will run flawlessly with zero compromises.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at 3840x2160?

A: Ultra settings at 3840x2160 average 99 FPS, which is the highest preset tested and remains well above the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How much faster is the 1920x1080 Low preset compared to the 3840x2160 Ultra preset?

A: The 1080p Low preset averages 442 FPS, while the 4K Ultra preset averages 99 FPS, making the former 343 FPS faster.

Q: What is the minimum frame rate recorded at 2560x1440 Medium settings?

A: The minimum frame rate at 1440p Medium is 225 FPS, with an average of 264 FPS and a maximum of 304 FPS.

Q: Which component is the bottleneck for this game at 3840x2160?

A: The data shows the GPU is the primary driver of resolution scaling, as frame rates drop from 208 FPS at 4K Low to 99 FPS at 4K Ultra, while the CPU's performance is far beyond what the game requires.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus compare to its closest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K?

A: The 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84003, which is 0.2% higher than the 285K's score of 83807, making the performance difference negligible.

Q: What rank does this specific CPU-GPU combination hold among all tested combos for Inside?

A: The combination is ranked 515 out of 3716 tested combos, placing it in the top 14% of all systems tested for this game.