Inside

The AMD Ryzen 5 5500 and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT combination delivers exceptional performance in Inside, a 2016 Puzzle Platformer that is far more demanding than its genre might suggest. The measured data shows that this pairing is capable of obliterating even the most stringent refresh rate targets, making it a top-tier choice for this title. The benchmark results indicate a system that is not merely playable but overwhelmingly powerful, with performance scaling that reveals a complex interaction between the processor's six cores and the graphics card's substantial memory bandwidth.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 5 5500 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz. In the context of Inside, a game that is not typically associated with heavy CPU multithreading, this processor provides a robust foundation. The data suggests that the CPU is rarely the limiting factor, as even at 1080p with Low settings, the average frame rate reaches 280.5 FPS, a figure that suggests the processor can feed the GPU with data faster than most displays can refresh.

The processor's benchmark scores support its role as a high-end performer. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 16429 and single-core score of 2319 indicate strong performance in both lightly-threaded and heavily-threaded workloads. This is relevant because while Inside may not use all 12 threads, the single-core performance is crucial for maintaining high frame rates in a physics-based puzzle game. The Ryzen 5 5500 sits at the 79th percentile for all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20875, placing it right alongside the Intel Core i5-12500, which has a deltaPct of -0.1, and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4655GE, also at -0.1. This indicates that the processor's performance is entirely sufficient to avoid bottlenecking the Radeon RX 6800 XT in this specific title, allowing the GPU to be the primary driver of the final frame rate.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

The data provides a clear hierarchy of performance across the four settings presets. At 4K, the jump from High (98.1 FPS) to Ultra (93.6 FPS) is relatively small, costing only 4.5 FPS, but the jump from High to Medium (157 FPS) is massive, a gain of 58.9 FPS. This suggests that the Ultra preset introduces a significant but specific graphical overhead that is not worth the frame rate cost at this resolution. The most balanced experience at 4K appears to be the High preset, which maintains an average of 98.1 FPS, comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold. While the Medium preset at 157 FPS is smoother, the High preset offers a better visual quality per frame rate cost.

At 1440p and 1080p, the situation is different. The Ultra preset still delivers excellent frame rates (145.8 FPS at 1440p and 201.3 FPS at 1080p), but the relative cost of Ultra over High is more pronounced. For the best experience per the measured rows, the High preset is the recommended choice. It provides a substantial visual improvement over Medium while maintaining frame rates (153.5 FPS at 1440p, 214.5 FPS at 1080p) that are so high that any further gains from dropping to Medium or Low would be imperceptible on standard 60Hz or 144Hz displays. The data indicates that High is the sweet spot, delivering the full visual experience without the performance penalty of Ultra.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the average frame rate at 1440p with the Ultra preset?

A: The measured data shows an average FPS of 145.8 at 2560x1440 with the Ultra settings preset.

Q: How does the frame rate at 1080p Low compare to the frame rate at 4K Low?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system achieves 280.5 FPS, while at 3840x2160 with Low settings, it achieves 190.3 FPS. This represents a drop of 90.2 FPS when moving from 1080p to 4K.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU more likely to be the bottleneck at 4K Ultra?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K Ultra. The frame rate drops to 93.6 FPS, which is a significant decrease from the 145.8 FPS at 1440p Ultra, indicating that the increased resolution and graphical load are taxing the GPU more than the CPU.

Q: What is the highest average frame rate recorded for this combination?

A: The highest average frame rate in the measured data is 280.5 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 5500's average benchmark score compare to the Intel Core i5-12500?

A: The Ryzen 5 5500 has an average benchmark score of 20875, while the Intel Core i5-12500 has an average score of 20897, resulting in a deltaPct of -0.1, indicating they are effectively tied in performance.

Q: Does the game's performance scale linearly with resolution?

A: No, the performance scaling is not linear. For example, at High settings, the FPS drops from 214.5 at 1080p to 153.5 at 1440p (a 28.4% decrease), but then only drops to 98.1 at 4K (a 36.1% decrease from 1440p). This indicates that the performance hit from increasing resolution is not constant.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 5500 and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT has a combo rank of 617 out of 1671 tested combinations in Inside. This places the system in the top 37% of all tested hardware pairings, which is a strong showing for a mid-range processor paired with a high-end graphics card. The rank indicates that while the GPU is a top-tier performer, the processor prevents the system from reaching the absolute highest echelons of the benchmark leaderboard.

The rank of 617 suggests that there are 616 other combinations that achieve higher average frame rates. Given the GPU's high percentile ranking (87th for all GPUs), the bottleneck for higher placement is likely the CPU. The Ryzen 5 5500's 79th percentile ranking for all CPUs, while respectable, is not in the same league as the GPU. This is a crucial insight: the system is well-balanced, but the CPU is the component that prevents it from breaking into the top 500 or top 100. In a game like Inside, which can be highly CPU-dependent at lower resolutions, a more powerful processor would likely shift this combo's rank significantly higher.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT is a powerhouse built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, offering a bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s. Its core clock speeds are high, with a base of 1825 MHz and a boost of 2250 MHz. For a game like Inside, which has a relatively simple art style but can still be demanding, this GPU provides an immense amount of headroom. The 16 GB of VRAM is far more than the game requires, ensuring that texture streaming and memory allocation are never an issue, even at 4K Ultra settings.

The GPU's benchmark scores confirm its high-end status. Its Passmark G3D score of 24980 and Geekbench OpenCL score of 154506 show that it is a formidable compute device. The GPU sits in the 87th percentile for all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 49982. It is closely matched with the NVIDIA RTX 4070 Ti SUPER, which has a deltaPct of 2.6, meaning the RX 6800 XT is slightly ahead. The data shows that the GPU is the star of this pairing, capable of pushing frame rates to extreme levels. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 280.5 FPS, and even at 4K High, it maintains 98.1 FPS. The GPU's performance is the primary reason the system is able to achieve such high scores, and it is clear that the graphics card is not the bottleneck in any of the measured configurations.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across all combinations. At 1920x1080, the system achieves an average of 280.5 FPS on Low, 260.1 FPS on Medium, 214.5 FPS on High, and 201.3 FPS on Ultra. This shows that even the most demanding preset at 1080p yields a frame rate that is over three times the standard 60 FPS target. Moving to 2560x1440, the averages drop to 251.4 FPS on Low, 234.5 FPS on Medium, 153.5 FPS on High, and 145.8 FPS on Ultra. The drop from Low to Medium at 1440p is relatively small (16.9 FPS), but the drop from Medium to High is significant (81 FPS), indicating that the High preset introduces a substantial graphical load.

At 3840x2160, the data shows the greatest performance variance. The system achieves 190.3 FPS on Low, 157 FPS on Medium, 98.1 FPS on High, and 93.6 FPS on Ultra. The scaling here reveals that the Ultra preset is particularly demanding, costing 4.5 FPS compared to High, while the jump from Low to Medium costs 33.3 FPS. The data indicates that 4K Ultra is the only configuration that drops below 95 FPS, but it still remains comfortably above 60 FPS, ensuring a smooth experience on most displays.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The performance scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the nature of the bottleneck. At Low settings, the FPS drops from 280.5 at 1080p to 251.4 at 1440p (a 10.4% drop), and then to 190.3 at 4K (a 24.3% drop from 1440p). The relatively small drop from 1080p to 1440p, combined with a larger drop to 4K, suggests that the GPU is beginning to become the limiting factor at higher resolutions, but the CPU is still able to keep up at lower resolutions. This pattern is typical of a system where the CPU is strong enough to feed the GPU at 1080p, but the GPU's rendering load becomes the dominant factor as the pixel count increases.

At Ultra settings, the scaling is more dramatic. The FPS drops from 201.3 at 1080p to 145.8 at 1440p (a 27.6% drop), and then to 93.6 at 4K (a 35.8% drop from 1440p). This steeper decline indicates that the Ultra preset is heavily GPU-bound. The data strongly suggests that the GPU is the primary limiting component at 4K, as the frame rate scales inversely with the resolution’s pixel count. In contrast, the CPU’s role is more evident at 1080p, where the frame rates are high but the relative drop to 1440p is smaller, indicating that the processor is still managing to maintain high throughput. The system is well-balanced, but the RX 6800 XT is clearly the component that defines the performance ceiling at higher resolutions.