Inside

Inside is a side-scrolling puzzle platformer with a deliberately muted, atmospheric presentation, but its benchmark data reveals a surprisingly demanding engine that scales in distinct patterns with both resolution and graphics presets. Tested with the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070, this combination produces a wide range of frame rates—from over 200 FPS at 1080p Low to barely playable 50 FPS at 4K Ultra. The measured results indicate a system where the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU proves more than capable of feeding frames at lower settings.

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

The data shows a dramatic reduction in frame rate as resolution increases, which is the classic signature of GPU-bound performance. At the High preset, the average FPS drops from 115 at 1920x1080 to 83 at 2560x1440, a 28% reduction, and then falls to 52 at 3840x2160, a further 37% drop from the 1440p figure. This steep decline—losing over half the frame rate from 1080p to 4K—indicates that the GTX 1070’s pixel processing capabilities are being saturated, while the Ryzen 5 5600F has ample headroom to compute the game’s physics and logic.

The scaling becomes even more pronounced when examining the Low preset, where the 1080p average of 231 FPS is likely hitting a CPU or engine-level ceiling, yet the 4K average plummets to 104 FPS. This 55% reduction in performance from 1080p to 4K at Low settings suggests that even with minimal graphical load, the GPU’s memory bandwidth and fill rate become limiting factors at higher pixel counts. The GTX 1070’s 256.3 GB/s bandwidth and 64 ROPs are simply insufficient to maintain the same throughput when pixel count quadruples.

Interestingly, the scaling between Medium and Ultra presets shows a consistent pattern across all resolutions. At 1080p, Medium achieves 184 FPS while Ultra drops to 110 FPS—a 40% penalty for the highest quality settings. At 4K, the difference is similar in percentage terms: Medium averages 83 FPS versus Ultra’s 50 FPS, a 40% reduction. This consistency implies that the graphical features toggled by the Ultra preset (likely shadow quality, ambient occlusion, and post-processing effects) impose a relatively fixed workload increase on the GPU regardless of resolution, reinforcing that the GPU is the constraining component.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the broader context of all tested hardware combinations for Inside, this pairing of the Ryzen 5 5600F and GTX 1070 ranks 2370 out of 2887 combinations. This places it in the lower 18th percentile of all combos, indicating that while the system is functional, it is far from delivering top-tier performance for this title. The ranking suggests that the GTX 1070, despite being a capable card in its era, is now outclassed by more modern GPUs that can handle Inside’s engine with higher average frame rates at equivalent settings.

The CPU’s individual standing is much stronger, with the Ryzen 5 5600F holding an 85th percentile ranking among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 with a negligible 0% delta, the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D at -0.2%, and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 at -0.4%. This places the 5600F in elite company for processing power, with multi-threaded performance (PassMark score of 19,236) and single-thread performance (2,872) that are more than sufficient for Inside’s demands. The bottleneck is clearly not the CPU.

The GPU’s standing is far weaker, ranking at the 47th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro W5000 (-0.2%), NVIDIA Quadro M2000M (-0.5%), NVIDIA Tesla M10 (+0.6%), and NVIDIA Tesla C2070 (+0.7%). These competitors are largely workstation or older enterprise parts, highlighting that the GTX 1070’s gaming performance is now comparable to professional-grade hardware from a different era. This combination’s low overall rank of 2370 reflects the GPU’s inability to keep pace with modern titles at high resolutions, even though the CPU is more than capable.

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

For players targeting a smooth 60 FPS experience, the data clearly points to the Medium preset as the optimal choice across all tested resolutions. At 1920x1080, Medium delivers an average of 184 FPS with a minimum of 157 FPS, ensuring no noticeable stutter even in the most demanding scenes. At 2560x1440, Medium maintains 133 FPS with a minimum of 113 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold for most displays. Even at 3840x2160, Medium achieves 83 FPS with a minimum of 71 FPS, making it the only preset at 4K that consistently stays above 60 FPS.

The High preset is a viable alternative for those with standard 60Hz monitors, offering 115 FPS at 1080p and 83 FPS at 1440p, but it falls to just 52 FPS at 4K, which would require adaptive sync to be playable. The Ultra preset is not recommended for any resolution above 1080p, as it drops to 79 FPS at 1440p and a mere 50 FPS at 4K, which is below the playable threshold for many users. For the best balance of visual quality and performance, Medium at 1440p or High at 1080p represent the sweet spots, both maintaining averages above 115 FPS with no reported minimum dips below 113 FPS.

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

The measured data provides a complete matrix of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 231 FPS, Medium reaches 184 FPS with a minimum of 157 and maximum of 212, High hits 115 FPS, and Ultra settles at 110 FPS. The 1080p results show that the CPU is capable of very high frame rates, with the gap between Medium and High being 69 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is not yet fully saturated at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 166 FPS, Medium averages 133 FPS with a minimum of 113 and maximum of 153, High averages 83 FPS, and Ultra drops to 79 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p at Medium settings shows a 28% reduction in average FPS (from 184 to 133), which is less severe than the 37% drop seen when moving from 1440p to 4K at the same preset. This indicates that the GPU’s memory bandwidth becomes a more significant constraint as pixel count increases.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 104 FPS, Medium averages 83 FPS with a minimum of 71 and maximum of 96, High averages 52 FPS, and Ultra averages 50 FPS. The 4K results are notable for the minimal difference between High and Ultra (only 2 FPS), suggesting that the engine’s Ultra preset adds effects that are nearly free in terms of performance cost at this resolution, or that the GPU is so heavily loaded that additional settings have diminishing returns. The minimum FPS of 71 at 4K Medium indicates that even the most demanding scenes remain playable, but the 52 FPS average at High would be problematic for smooth gameplay.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 is built on the Pascal architecture with a GP104 chip, featuring 1,920 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Its base clock of 1,506 MHz boosts to 1,683 MHz, and the 8 GB of GDDR5 memory operates at an effective 8 Gbps across a 256-bit bus, yielding 256.3 GB/s of bandwidth. These specifications produce a pixel rate of 107.7 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 202.0 GTexel/s, which are the key metrics that determine performance at high resolutions.

In Inside, the GTX 1070’s 8 GB VRAM is more than sufficient, as the game’s art style—characterized by dark, minimalist environments—does not require large texture datasets. The measured frame rates at 4K suggest that the GPU is not VRAM-limited but rather fill-rate and bandwidth-limited. The 50 FPS at 4K Ultra indicates that the 1070’s 64 ROPs are the bottleneck, as the pixel output requirement of 3840x2160 (8.3 million pixels per frame) stresses this pipeline.

The GPU’s benchmark scores reflect its mid-tier status: a PassMark G3D score of 13,498 and a PassMark GPU Compute score of 6,102. Its nearest rivals in the benchmark database are all workstation cards, with the AMD FirePro W5000 at -0.2% and NVIDIA Quadro M2000M at -0.5%. This suggests that the GTX 1070, while originally a gaming card, now competes with professional hardware in synthetic tests, yet its real-world gaming performance in Inside is hampered by its age, particularly at higher resolutions where the 256.3 GB/s bandwidth becomes a limiting factor.

FAQ

Q: Can this combination run Inside at 60 FPS at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, but only at the Medium preset, which achieves an average of 83 FPS with a minimum of 71 FPS. The High and Ultra presets fall to 52 and 50 FPS respectively, which are below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What is the best preset to use for a 144Hz monitor at 1080p?

A: The Medium preset is the safest choice, delivering 184 FPS average with a 157 FPS minimum. The Low preset achieves 231 FPS average but sacrifices visual quality, while the High preset at 115 FPS may not consistently hold 144 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU affect performance in this game?

A: The Ryzen 5 5600F’s performance is largely irrelevant to the bottleneck, as it ranks in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. At 1080p Low, the 231 FPS average is likely near the engine’s CPU limit, but at higher resolutions the GPU becomes the clear limiting factor.

Q: Is 8 GB of VRAM enough for Inside?

A: Yes, the 8 GB GDDR5 memory is not a constraint. The game’s minimalist art style and the measured FPS patterns indicate that memory capacity is sufficient, with performance limited by bandwidth and pixel fill rate instead.

Q: How does this combo compare to other systems in the database?

A: It ranks 2370 out of 2887 combos, placing it in the bottom 18% of tested systems. This low rank is primarily due to the GPU’s 47th percentile standing, while the CPU’s 85th percentile shows it is not the weak link.

Q: What is the difference between the High and Ultra presets at 1440p?

A: The High preset averages 83 FPS, while Ultra averages 79 FPS—a mere 4 FPS difference. This suggests that the Ultra preset’s additional graphical effects have a negligible performance cost at this resolution, making Ultra a viable choice for those with adaptive sync displays.

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture (codenamed Vermeer), manufactured on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It features a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz, with 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 32 MB L3 cache. This configuration yields a PassMark multi-thread score of 19,236 and a single-thread score of 2,872, which places it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs.

For Inside, a puzzle platformer that does not heavily utilize multi-threading, the 5600F’s strong single-thread performance (a PassMark single-thread score of 2,872) is the most relevant metric. The game’s physics and logic are likely offloaded to a few threads, and the 5600F’s 4.00 GHz boost clock ensures that these tasks are handled without becoming a bottleneck. The data confirms this: at 1080p Low, the system achieves 231 FPS, which is likely near the engine’s frame rate cap or the CPU’s ability to issue draw calls, rather than a GPU limitation.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score are the Intel Core Ultra 5 225, AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D, AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450, and Intel Core i9-12900T, all within 0.5% of the 5600F’s score of 36,945. This indicates that any of these CPUs would perform nearly identically in Inside, as the game’s workload does not stress the processor beyond its capabilities. The 65 W TDP of the 5600F also suggests efficient operation, allowing the GPU to be the sole focus of thermal and power delivery in most systems. The benchmark results clearly show that upgrading the CPU would yield no tangible benefit for this title; the GTX 1070 is the component that determines the playable resolution and settings.