Inside

Inside is a puzzle platformer with a deliberately restrained visual style, yet the benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination reveal a system that is consistently pushed to its limits. The data shows a clear stratification of performance across resolutions and settings, and the interplay between this specific CPU and GPU paints a picture of a pairing where the graphics card is almost always the deciding factor. The measured frames per second (FPS) tell a story of a capable, if modest, setup that demands careful settings management to deliver a smooth experience.

Resolution Scaling

The most telling data point in this benchmark is the dramatic FPS drop as resolution increases, which strongly indicates that the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the primary bottleneck. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 134 FPS, but this plummets to 61 FPS at 3840x2160 with the same Low settings. That is a 54% reduction in average FPS from 1080p to 4K, a scaling factor that points directly at the GPU's pixel-pushing capabilities. The GTX 1650, with its 4 GB of memory and 128-bit bus, is simply overwhelmed by the four-fold increase in pixel count from 1080p to 4K.

This pattern persists across all settings. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at High settings drops the average from 67 FPS to 48 FPS, a 28% decrease. The jump from 1440p to 4K at High is even more punishing, with the average falling from 48 FPS to 30 FPS, a 37.5% reduction. The scaling is not linear; the gap widens at higher resolutions because the GPU's fillrate and memory bandwidth are exhausted. The data implies that at 1080p, the CPU is able to feed frames quickly enough, but as resolution climbs, the GPU's rendering time becomes the dominant cost, effectively masking any potential CPU limitation.

The 4K Medium result, with an average of 49 FPS and a min/max of 41/56, shows that even a single step down from High can yield a playable, though not perfectly smooth, frame rate. However, the 4K Ultra average of 29 FPS dips below the 30 FPS threshold, making it the only configuration in the measured data that falls into "unplayable" territory for most users. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 4K is a stark 52% performance penalty, from 61 FPS down to 29 FPS. This confirms that the GTX 1650 has a hard ceiling at 4K, and the only way to achieve a comfortable frame rate is to drastically reduce the graphical load.

FAQ

Q: Can this combination run Inside at 4K resolution with a playable frame rate?

A: The benchmark data shows that at 4K with High settings, the average FPS is 30, and with Ultra settings, it drops to 29. These are borderline results. To achieve a more comfortable margin, you would need to use Medium settings, which yield 49 FPS, or Low settings, which yield 61 FPS.

Q: What is the best resolution for this system to maintain a high refresh rate experience?

A: The data shows that at 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 134 FPS, and with Medium settings, it reaches 107 FPS. These are the only two configurations in the measured data that exceed 100 FPS, making 1080p the only viable resolution for high-refresh-rate displays.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 5600F perform relative to its closest rivals in general CPU benchmarks?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score is 36,945. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225, has an average score of 36,938, representing a 0% deltaPct. The AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D is 0.2% faster, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 is 0.4% faster, and the Intel Core i9-12900T is 0.5% faster. This indicates the 5600F is highly competitive, sitting within 0.5% of its closest competitors.

Q: Is the GTX 1650's 4 GB of VRAM a limiting factor in this game?

A: While the game has a minimalist art style, the resolution scaling data suggests the GPU is the limiting factor. The significant FPS drops at higher resolutions indicate the GPU's processing power and memory bandwidth are being saturated. The 4 GB VRAM is part of this equation, as higher resolutions typically require more memory for framebuffers and textures.

Q: What is the single-threaded performance of the Ryzen 5 5600F?

A: The PassMark single-thread score for the CPU is 2,872. This is a strong result, and for a game like Inside, which may rely on a single primary game thread, this level of performance is likely sufficient to avoid being a bottleneck, especially at lower resolutions.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rivals in overall GPU benchmarks?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score is 7,472. It is 1% faster than the Intel Arc A310, which has an average score of 7,550. It is also 0.3% slower than the AMD Radeon HD 8850M, 0.4% slower than the Intel UHD Graphics 750, and 0.6% slower than the AMD Radeon R7 350.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a Turing-architecture chip built on a 12 nm process, and its role in this benchmark is unequivocally the limiting factor. With a boost clock of 1665 MHz and 896 shading units, it offers a base level of compute performance, but its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth, is a significant constraint at higher resolutions. The benchmark results confirm this, as the FPS scales inversely with resolution in a way that is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck.

The data shows that at 1080p, the GTX 1650 is able to deliver playable frame rates across all settings, from 64 FPS at Ultra to 134 FPS at Low. However, the gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 70 FPS, a 52% performance difference, which highlights the GPU's sensitivity to shader and texture complexity. At 1440p, the average FPS drops to a range of 46-97 FPS, and at 4K, it falls to 29-61 FPS. The GPU's pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s are simply not high enough to maintain high frame rates at 4K.

The GPU's position in the market, with a percentile rank of 40 vs all GPUs, underscores its mid-to-low-end standing. Its benchmark scores show it is a direct competitor to integrated graphics solutions like the Intel UHD Graphics 750, with only a 0.4% difference in average score. This places the GTX 1650 in a unique position: it is a discrete GPU, but its performance envelope is not far removed from modern integrated graphics. For Inside, this means that while the game is playable, the experience is heavily dependent on the user's willingness to compromise on resolution and visual fidelity.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is ranked 2,780 out of 2,887 tested combos for this game. This places it in the bottom 4% of all tested systems, a poor ranking that is almost entirely attributable to the GPU. The CPU is a high-performing part in its own right—its average benchmark score of 36,945 is within 0.5% of its nearest rivals—but it is being held back by the GTX 1650.

This ranking is a clear indicator of a mismatch. The Ryzen 5 5600F, with its 6 cores, 12 threads, and boost clock of 4.00 GHz, has the processing headroom to handle a much more powerful graphics card. The data suggests that this combo is heavily GPU-bound, meaning the CPU is waiting on the GPU to finish rendering frames. The 2,780th rank out of 2,887 combos is a strong signal that this pairing is not optimized for maximum performance; it is a configuration that prioritizes cost savings over frame rate.

In context, this rank means that for a game like Inside, the user will experience performance that is significantly below what the CPU is capable of delivering. The bottleneck is so pronounced that upgrading the GPU would yield a substantial improvement in FPS, while upgrading the CPU would show minimal gains. The combo's rank is a warning that this is a build where the GPU is the absolute ceiling, and the potential of the Ryzen 5 5600F is largely left untapped.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive look at the system's performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system performs admirably, with the Low preset delivering an average of 134 FPS. The Medium preset follows with an average of 107 FPS, and it is the only other configuration in the entire dataset to break the 100 FPS mark, with a min/max of 91/124. High settings produce an average of 67 FPS, while Ultra settings result in an average of 64 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra at 1080p is only 3 FPS, suggesting that the Ultra preset's additional effects are not heavily taxing the GPU at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance drops significantly. The Low preset averages 97 FPS, which is still very playable. Medium settings average 77 FPS, with a min/max of 66/89. High settings drop to 48 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 46 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 1440p is only 2 FPS, indicating that the GPU is hitting a similar performance wall for both presets. At this resolution, the system is still playable on Low and Medium, but High and Ultra push it into a range that may be less than ideal for smooth gameplay.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles. The Low preset is the only playable option, with an average of 61 FPS. Medium settings average 49 FPS, with a min/max of 41/56. High settings drop to 30 FPS, and Ultra settings are the worst, with an average of 29 FPS. The data shows a clear trend: at 4K, only the Low preset provides a comfortable frame rate, and even then, it is barely above the 60 FPS threshold. The GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and limited bandwidth are the clear culprits here, as the game's visual complexity at Ultra settings is too much for the card to handle.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience for this system is at 1920x1080 with the Medium preset. This configuration delivers an average of 107 FPS, with a min/max of 91/124, providing both a high frame rate and a visual quality upgrade over Low. The 91 FPS minimum ensures that the game remains smooth even in demanding scenes, and the 124 FPS maximum allows for headroom on most 60Hz or 144Hz displays. While the Low preset at 1080p offers a higher average of 134 FPS, the jump to Medium is worthwhile for the improved visual fidelity, as the performance hit is manageable.

For users with a 1440p display, the Low preset is the best choice, offering an average of 97 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p is also viable, with an average of 77 FPS, but the minimum of 66 FPS may be noticeable in fast-moving sections. The High and Ultra presets at 1440p are not recommended, as they fall below 50 FPS. At 4K, the Low preset is the only recommendation, with an average of 61 FPS. This is a playable frame rate, but it requires a significant visual compromise. The Medium preset at 4K, which averages 49 FPS, is a borderline option for those who prioritize visual quality over a perfectly smooth frame rate, but the data suggests it is a risky choice.

The data indicates that the Ultra preset offers little benefit over High across all resolutions. At 1080p, the difference is 3 FPS, at 1440p it is 2 FPS, and at 4K it is 1 FPS. This suggests that the Ultra preset's additional settings have a negligible impact on performance for this GPU, making High the better choice if you want to avoid any potential stability issues. Overall, the sweet spot for this combo is 1080p Medium, which balances frame rate and visual quality effectively.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F, with its Zen 3 architecture and 6 cores / 12 threads, plays a supporting role in this benchmark. Its base clock of 3.00 GHz and boost clock of 4.00 GHz provide ample processing power for a game like Inside. The CPU's PassMark single-thread score of 2,872 is strong, and its multithread score of 19,236 indicates it can handle multiple background tasks without issue. However, the benchmark results show that the CPU is rarely the limiting factor.

At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 134 FPS, which is a high frame rate. If the CPU were a bottleneck, we would expect to see a plateau in FPS regardless of resolution. Instead, the FPS drops consistently as resolution increases, which is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck. For example, at Low settings, the FPS drops from 134 at 1080p to 97 at 1440p and then to 61 at 4K. This pattern is entirely attributable to the GPU's rendering workload.

The CPU's performance relative to its rivals is excellent. Its average benchmark score of 36,945 is nearly identical to the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 (36,938, 0% deltaPct) and just 0.2% behind the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D. This means that in a system with a more powerful GPU, the Ryzen 5 5600F would not hold the system back. The data implies that the CPU is more than capable for this game, and any performance issues are directly tied to the GTX 1650. In fact, the CPU's 32 MB of shared L3 cache and support for PCIe Gen 4 (though the GTX 1650 uses PCIe 3.0) ensure it is future-proof for more demanding titles, should the GPU be upgraded.