Inside

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D presents an extreme generational mismatch in Inside, a 2016 puzzle platformer. The benchmark data shows this combination delivers very high frame rates across all resolutions, but the scaling pattern reveals a system that is heavily constrained by the aging six-core processor rather than the flagship Blackwell GPU. This analysis breaks down the measured results, contextualizes them against the combo’s overall ranking, and provides practical settings guidance based on the raw data.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and consistent pattern: performance drops are relatively modest when moving from 1080p to 4K, which strongly indicates a CPU-bound scenario. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 158 FPS at 1920x1080 to 141 FPS at 2560x1440 (a 10.8% drop), then to 121 FPS at 3840x2160 (a further 14.2% drop). The total decline from 1080p to 4K at High settings is 23.4%, which is far less than the 300% increase in pixel count would suggest if the GPU were the limiting factor.

This pattern repeats across all quality presets. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 205 at 1080p to 183 at 1440p (10.7% drop) and then to 157 at 4K (14.2% drop), for a total reduction of 23.4%. At Medium settings, the numbers are 189, 169, and 145 FPS respectively, representing a 23.3% total decline. Ultra settings show 155 FPS at 1080p, 139 FPS at 1440p, and 119 FPS at 4K, a 23.2% total drop. The consistency of these percentages—all hovering around 23%—is the key finding. If the RTX 5090 D were the bottleneck, the 4K results would be dramatically lower relative to 1080p, often showing 50% or more performance loss in GPU-heavy titles.

Instead, the data suggests that the Ryzen 5 2600’s single-thread performance, which is modest by modern standards, is capping the frame rate. The GPU is so powerful that even at 4K Ultra, it can still push 119 FPS, meaning the processor is likely the component determining the ceiling. The relatively small FPS gap between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution reinforces this: at 1080p, the difference between Low (205 FPS) and Ultra (155 FPS) is only 24.4%, whereas a GPU-bound game would show a much wider spread. The limiting component is clearly the CPU, as the GPU has ample headroom to render even the heaviest preset without significantly reducing the framerate.

FAQ

*Q: Is the RTX 5090 D being fully utilized by the Ryzen 5 2600 in Inside?*

A: No. The benchmark results indicate a CPU bottleneck. The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K is only a 23% drop, which is far too small for a game where the GPU should struggle with the 4K pixel count. The GPU is so fast that it is waiting on the processor.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the average FPS goes from 157 FPS on Low to 119 FPS on Ultra. This 38 FPS gap (or 24.2% reduction) shows that while settings have an impact, the game remains very playable even at maximum quality due to the immense GPU power.

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 2600 hold back the frame rate at 1080p?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080, the average FPS across all settings ranges from 155 FPS (Ultra) to 205 FPS (Low). These are high numbers, but the small difference between resolutions strongly suggests the CPU is the limiting factor, preventing the system from reaching the much higher frame rates the RTX 5090 D could theoretically deliver.

Q: How does the combo’s performance compare to other tested systems?

A: The combo ranks 1569th out of 2887 tested combinations. This places it in the middle of the pack, which is surprising given the flagship GPU, but it accurately reflects the constraint imposed by the older six-core processor.

Q: Is the frame rate stable or are there significant dips?

A: The only benchmark row with min and max FPS data is at Medium settings. At 1080p, the frame rate fluctuates between 161 and 217 FPS, with an average of 189 FPS. At 1440p, it ranges from 144 to 195 FPS, and at 4K from 123 to 167 FPS. This indicates some variance, but the minimums remain well above 120 FPS.

Q: What is the best resolution to play at for maximum smoothness?

A: Based on the data, 1920x1080 with Low settings offers the highest average frame rate at 205 FPS. However, even at 4K Ultra, the average FPS of 119 is suitable for high-refresh-rate monitors, showing the system’s capability across the board.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 2000 series, based on the Zen architecture and codenamed Zen+ (Pinnacle Ridge). It has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. In the context of Inside, a game that is not heavily multithreaded, the processor’s single-thread performance is the primary determinant of the frame rate ceiling. The CPU’s benchmark scores reflect its age: a single-core Geekbench score of 1154 and a Cinebench R15 single-core score of 157.3 are modest figures that explain why the GPU cannot reach its full potential.

The CPU’s role is also evident in the nearest rivals list. The Ryzen 5 2600 has an average benchmark score of 21484, which is only 0.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V (21440) and 0.5% higher than the Intel Core i9-11900H (21367). This places it in a performance tier that, while competitive with those older mobile and low-power chips, is far behind modern desktop processors. The 12 nm process node and 65 W TDP further underscore its age. The processor’s L3 cache is 16 MB (shared), which is adequate but not large by current standards.

In Inside, the data shows that this CPU is the bottleneck. The fact that increasing the resolution from 1080p to 4K only reduces the frame rate by roughly 23% across all settings confirms that the GPU is not the limiting factor. Instead, the CPU’s single-core speed is capping the maximum FPS. The game’s genre as a puzzle platformer suggests it relies more on consistent frame pacing than massive multi-core workloads, making the single-thread performance of the Ryzen 5 2600 the critical factor. The processor’s multi-threaded capabilities (Cinebench R15 multicore score of 1248, Geekbench multicore of 5648) are irrelevant here; the bottleneck is purely in how fast each individual core can process the game’s logic.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D ranks 1569th out of 2887 tested combinations in Inside. This percentile placement is remarkably low for a system with such a powerful GPU. To contextualize, the RTX 5090 D alone sits in the 92nd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 77712. In contrast, the Ryzen 5 2600 is in the 75th percentile among all CPUs, with an average score of 21484. The disparity between these two components’ individual standings is what drags the combo down.

The ranking suggests that while the GPU is in the top 8% of all graphics cards, the CPU is only in the top 25% of processors. When combined in a game like Inside, where the CPU is the limiting factor, the overall system performance is determined by the weaker link. The combo’s rank of 1569 out of 2887 puts it in the 54th percentile of all tested combos, meaning that over half of the systems tested perform better in this specific game. This is a direct consequence of pairing a 2018 mid-range CPU with a 2025 flagship GPU.

It is useful to compare the GPU’s rivals to understand the situation. The RTX 5090 D’s nearest rivals in benchmark scores are the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT (1.1% slower), the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (1.6% faster), and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 variants (2.1% and 2.4% faster). These are all powerful cards, but the pairing with the Ryzen 5 2600 fails to leverage their potential. The combo’s rank is not a reflection of the GPU’s capability, but rather a clear indicator of the CPU-induced bottleneck. In a more GPU-intensive game, this combo would likely rank much higher, but in Inside, the processor’s limits are fully exposed.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system’s performance across all settings and resolutions. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are as follows: Low 205 FPS, Medium 189 FPS, High 158 FPS, and Ultra 155 FPS. The Medium preset is the only one with min/max data, showing a range of 161 to 217 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is minimal (3 FPS), suggesting that the Ultra preset’s additional effects are not heavily taxing the GPU, but rather the CPU is already at its limit.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average frame rates decrease slightly: Low 183 FPS, Medium 169 FPS, High 141 FPS, and Ultra 139 FPS. The Medium preset’s min/max range is 144 to 195 FPS. The drop from 1080p is consistent at around 10-11% for each setting, which is a smaller percentage than the pixel count increase, confirming the CPU bottleneck. The High and Ultra settings are nearly identical, with only a 2 FPS difference, again pointing to a CPU-imposed ceiling.

At 3840x2160, the average frame rates are: Low 157 FPS, Medium 145 FPS, High 121 FPS, and Ultra 119 FPS. The Medium preset shows a min/max of 123 to 167 FPS. The pattern continues: the drop from 1440p to 4K is another 14-15%, which is still modest. The most notable observation is that even at 4K Ultra, the system maintains an average of 119 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS standard and suitable for 120Hz displays. However, the data also shows that the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens with resolution: at 1080p, the gap is 50 FPS, but at 4K, it narrows to 38 FPS, suggesting that the GPU’s load is increasing, but the CPU remains the primary constraint.

Settings Recommendations

Given the CPU-bound nature of this system in Inside, the optimal settings recommendations focus on maximizing visual quality without sacrificing frame rate, since the CPU limit is the same across most presets. The data shows that at 1080p, the difference between High (158 FPS) and Ultra (155 FPS) is negligible, so choosing Ultra is a no-brainer for maximum visual fidelity at no meaningful performance cost. Similarly, at 1440p, High (141 FPS) and Ultra (139 FPS) are nearly identical, making Ultra the recommended choice.

At 4K, the situation is slightly different. High (121 FPS) and Ultra (119 FPS) are still close, but the gap between Medium (145 FPS) and Ultra (119 FPS) is 26 FPS. For players with a 4K 120Hz display, the Ultra preset’s 119 FPS average is right at the threshold, but the Medium preset’s 145 FPS provides more headroom and a higher minimum frame rate (123 FPS vs. no data for Ultra). If frame pacing is a concern, Medium at 4K offers a better safety margin, but for pure visual quality, Ultra is still viable as the average FPS remains above 60.

For the best balance of visual quality and performance, the Medium preset appears to be the sweet spot across all resolutions. At 1080p, it offers 189 FPS, which is only 16 FPS less than Low but likely provides a significant visual upgrade. At 1440p, it delivers 169 FPS, and at 4K, it maintains 145 FPS. The Medium preset also has the only documented min/max data, showing that even in the worst-case dips, the frame rate does not fall below 123 FPS at 4K or 144 FPS at 1440p. This consistency makes Medium the most reliable choice. The Low preset offers the highest frame rates (205 FPS at 1080p), but the visual compromise is unnecessary given the system’s capability. Ultimately, the data suggests that players should prioritize the Medium preset for a stable, high-refresh-rate experience, or choose Ultra if they prefer maximum visual detail and have a display that supports the frame rates.