Inside

# Inside — AMD Ryzen 5 5500 + AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT

The pairing of AMD's Ryzen 5 5500 with the Radeon RX 9070 XT delivers a striking performance envelope in Inside, a 2016 puzzle platformer whose modest visual demands allow this combination to stretch far beyond typical refresh-rate targets. Measured data across three resolutions and four settings presets reveals that the GPU is seldom the bottleneck; instead, the Zen 3-based six-core processor's single-thread capabilities become increasingly relevant as frame rates climb. The combo ranks 554th out of 1,671 tested combinations in this title, placing it in the upper third of all pairings, with the data indicating that this system excels at high-refresh 1080p and 1440p gaming while remaining comfortably playable at 4K.

Resolution Scaling

Frame rate degradation from 1080p to 4K is substantial but uneven across settings, revealing where the GPU begins to assert its role. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 278.7 at 1920x1080 to 205.0 at 3840x2160 – a reduction of approximately 26.4%, which is modest given the fourfold increase in pixel count. This relatively shallow decline suggests that at Low presets, the CPU is heavily involved in limiting performance; the RX 9070 XT has ample headroom even at 4K when pixel shading demands are minimal.

Moving to Medium settings, the scaling steepens: 261.5 FPS at 1080p falls to 167.4 FPS at 4K, a 36% drop. At High settings, the trend continues with 215.1 FPS at 1080p versus 102.4 FPS at 4K, representing a 52.4% decline. The Ultra preset shows the sharpest scaling curve, dropping from 209.9 FPS at 1080p to 98.5 FPS at 4K – a 53.1% reduction. This pattern indicates that as settings increase, the GPU's shading workload grows proportionally, and the RX 9070 XT's 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth become the primary determinants of performance at higher resolutions. At 4K Ultra, the system still clears 98.5 FPS, which is well above playable thresholds, but the scaling confirms that the GPU is the limiting component only when both resolution and settings are maximized.

The gap between Low and Ultra at each resolution further illustrates this dynamic. At 1080p, the spread is 68.8 FPS (278.7 vs. 209.9), while at 4K the spread widens to 106.5 FPS (205.0 vs. 98.5). The larger absolute difference at 4K indicates that the GPU's fill-rate and texture-processing capabilities – 380.2 GPixel/s pixel rate and 760.3 GTexel/s texture rate – are being taxed more heavily as resolution scales, whereas at 1080p the CPU's 4.20 GHz boost clock and 16 MB L3 cache are sufficient to keep frame rates near their ceiling.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of 1,671 tested processor-plus-GPU combinations for Inside, this pairing holds the 554th position. That places it in the 66.9th percentile of all combos, meaning roughly two-thirds of tested systems deliver lower average frame rates in this title. The ranking is notable because the Ryzen 5 5500 is not a flagship processor – its average benchmark score of 20,875 places it in the 79th percentile of all CPUs tested – yet when paired with the RX 9070 XT, the combination outperforms its component-level percentiles would suggest.

The nearest CPU rivals in synthetic benchmarks provide context for the processor's role. The Intel Core i5-12500 scores 20,897 (0.1% higher), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4655GE scores 20,900 (0.1% higher), and the AMD EPYC 7J13 scores 20,845 (0.1% lower). These near-identical scores indicate that the Ryzen 5 5500's compute capabilities are well-matched to its peers, but in Inside, the game's engine likely favors the combination's overall balance rather than raw CPU throughput alone.

On the GPU side, the RX 9070 XT's average benchmark score of 39,647 places it in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 575 (39,703, 0.1% higher), NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile (39,568, 0.2% lower), and AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 (39,879, 0.6% higher). These comparisons underscore that the RX 9070 XT is a high-end part by synthetic measures, and its 82nd percentile GPU ranking aligns more closely with the combo's 66.9th percentile in-game ranking than the CPU's 79th percentile does. The discrepancy suggests that Inside's engine does not fully utilize the GPU's capabilities at lower settings, where CPU-bound behavior limits the combo's overall standing.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 9070 XT, built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with a Navi 48 chip, provides 16 GB of GDDR6 memory across a 256-bit bus. Memory bandwidth is rated at 644.6 GB/s, with memory clocks running at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective). The GPU's base clock is 1660 MHz, with a game clock of 2400 MHz and a boost clock of 2970 MHz. These specifications translate to 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 128 raster operation units, yielding a pixel rate of 380.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 760.3 GTexel/s.

In Inside, the GPU's role is most pronounced at higher settings and resolutions. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS of 98.5 indicates that the GPU is nearing its practical limit for this title, though it still maintains a smooth experience. The 16 GB VRAM is far more than Inside requires – the game's 2016 release predates high-VRAM demands – but the ample memory ensures no capacity-related stutters or texture thrashing at any tested configuration. The GDDR6 memory's 644.6 GB/s bandwidth is similarly overprovisioned; even at 4K Ultra, the game's relatively simple geometry and textures do not tax memory throughput heavily.

The GPU's FP32 compute of 48.66 TFLOPS and FP16 of 97.32 TFLOPS (2:1) are substantial, but Inside's 2D-style platforming visuals rely more on fill-rate and pixel throughput than on compute shaders. The measured data shows that the GPU becomes the limiting factor primarily when both resolution and settings are at their maximum, as indicated by the 53.1% FPS drop from 1080p Ultra to 4K Ultra. At lower settings, the GPU idles relative to the CPU, with the 1080p Low result of 278.7 FPS approaching the engine's likely CPU-imposed ceiling.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates across all settings. Low settings produce 278.7 FPS average, Medium reaches 261.5 FPS, High achieves 215.1 FPS, and Ultra yields 209.9 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 24.7% reduction in performance, with the largest single drop occurring between Medium and High (46.4 FPS). This suggests that the High preset introduces significant additional GPU work – likely higher-resolution textures or more complex lighting – that reduces frame rates disproportionately.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 251.6 FPS (Low), 233.7 FPS (Medium), 162.7 FPS (High), and 153.4 FPS (Ultra). The drop from Medium to High is 71.0 FPS, a 30.4% reduction, which is steeper than at 1080p. This indicates that at 1440p, the GPU's shading resources are becoming more constrained as settings increase. The Ultra preset's 153.4 FPS remains well above 144Hz refresh rates, making this resolution the sweet spot for high-refresh displays.

At 3840x2160, the system still impresses: 205.0 FPS on Low, 167.4 FPS on Medium, 102.4 FPS on High, and 98.5 FPS on Ultra. The Low-to-Ultra spread of 106.5 FPS is the largest across all resolutions, confirming that 4K amplifies the GPU's workload differences between presets. The 4K Low result of 205.0 FPS is particularly notable – it demonstrates that even at 4K, the CPU can drive frame rates above 200 FPS when GPU load is minimal, underscoring the Ryzen 5 5500's capability in this engine.

Across all configurations, the minimum and maximum FPS values were not recorded, so the analysis relies solely on averages. The consistency of the scaling patterns – with Ultra always being the slowest and Low always the fastest – indicates stable performance without anomalous behavior.

Settings Recommendations

For 1080p displays with high refresh rates, the Ultra preset at 209.9 FPS is the clear choice; it delivers the maximum visual quality while still exceeding 200 FPS, which is sufficient for even the fastest gaming panels. If a user prefers maximum frame rates, Low at 278.7 FPS offers a 32.8% improvement over Ultra, but the visual compromise is likely unnecessary given how far above 144Hz the Ultra result sits.

At 1440p, the Ultra preset's 153.4 FPS is still above 144Hz, making it the recommended setting for high-refresh monitors. The High preset at 162.7 FPS provides a marginal 6.1% improvement over Ultra, which is unlikely to be perceptible in a puzzle platformer where frame pacing matters less than in competitive shooters. Medium at 233.7 FPS would suit users with 240Hz displays, but the visual downgrade from Ultra is substantial for only a 52.3% frame rate gain.

For 4K displays, the High preset at 102.4 FPS offers the best balance of visual fidelity and smoothness; it is comfortably above 60 FPS and nearly double the 60Hz baseline. The Ultra preset at 98.5 FPS is only 3.8% slower and provides the maximum quality, making it equally viable for users who prioritize image fidelity over the small frame rate difference. Medium at 167.4 FPS would support 144Hz 4K monitors, but such displays are rare, and the Medium preset's visual compromises may not be worth the frame rate headroom. Low at 205.0 FPS is overkill for 4K gaming, as few 4K panels exceed 120Hz, and the visual degradation is severe.

The data indicates that this combination is overqualified for Inside at any resolution, with even the most demanding configuration (4K Ultra) maintaining nearly 100 FPS. Users should select settings based on their display's refresh rate and personal preference for visual quality, with the knowledge that no tested configuration drops below 98.5 FPS average.