Inside

# Inside — AMD Ryzen 5 5600X + AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT

The measured frame rates for Inside with this combination reveal a game that is remarkably forgiving on modern hardware, yet the scaling patterns expose distinct bottlenecks depending on resolution and settings. At 1080p Low, the combo pushes 306.1 FPS average, while at 4K Ultra it settles at 90.6 FPS — a massive spread that tells a story about where the workload shifts between CPU and GPU. This puzzle platformer, released in 2016, clearly benefits from the high single-thread performance of the Ryzen 5 5600X and the substantial rasterization power of the Radeon RX 7800 XT, but the data suggests that not all settings are created equal.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is dramatic but uneven across settings. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 306.1 FPS at 1080p to 188.3 FPS at 4K — a reduction of roughly 38%. At Medium, the drop is from 286.2 FPS to 152 FPS, about 47%. High settings see a steeper decline, from 209 FPS at 1080p to 90.9 FPS at 4K, a 56% loss. Ultra follows a similar trajectory: 193.9 FPS down to 90.6 FPS, a 53% decrease.

These percentages reveal that the GPU becomes the limiting factor more aggressively as resolution rises, particularly at higher quality presets. At 1080p Low, the system is likely CPU-bound or engine-limited, given that 306 FPS is far beyond what most displays can show. The 4K Low result of 188.3 FPS still indicates headroom, but the gap between Low and Ultra at 4K — 188.3 FPS versus 90.6 FPS — shows that pixel count and shading complexity interact strongly. The 1440p mid-point confirms this: High settings deliver 150.2 FPS, while Ultra drops to 141.2 FPS, a smaller relative gap than at 1080p. This suggests that between 1440p and 4K, the GPU's 16 GB memory buffer and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth are being exercised more heavily, but the core clock scaling is what ultimately governs the frame rate ceiling.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 7800 XT's specifications directly explain its behavior in Inside. With 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, the card never approaches memory capacity limits in this game — even at 4K Ultra, the modest texture and geometry demands of a side-scrolling puzzle platformer are trivial for such a buffer. What matters more is the GPU's raw compute throughput: 37.32 TFLOPS FP32, driven by 3840 shading units at a boost clock of 2430 MHz. The measured results align with this — at 1080p Ultra, 193.9 FPS indicates the card is operating well within its capabilities, but the drop to 90.6 FPS at 4K Ultra shows that fill-rate-bound effects (pixel rate of 233.3 GPixel/s) begin to matter.

The gap between High and Ultra at the same resolution is informative. At 1080p, High yields 209 FPS versus Ultra's 193.9 FPS — only a 7% difference. At 4K, High gives 90.9 FPS and Ultra gives 90.6 FPS — nearly identical. This implies that Ultra settings add minimal additional GPU load in Inside, possibly due to effects like ambient occlusion or shadow quality that scale poorly with resolution. The GPU's 96 ROPs and 583.2 GTexel/s texture rate are sufficient to handle these effects without a major penalty, but the data suggests that the game's Ultra preset is not significantly more demanding than High at higher resolutions. The card's percentile ranking of 76 versus all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32619, places it just 0.2% ahead of the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 and 0.4% behind the NVIDIA P104-100 — a narrow competitive band that reflects its mid-high tier positioning.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 5 5600X's six cores and twelve threads, based on Zen 3 architecture, are more than sufficient for Inside. With a boost clock of 4.60 GHz and a single-thread score of 2622 in Cinebench R23, the CPU can feed the GPU at very high frame rates. The 1080p Low result of 306.1 FPS is likely near the engine's physics or draw-call ceiling rather than a true CPU limit, but the 5600X's 32 MB L3 cache and 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth help maintain consistent frame pacing. The CPU's 78th percentile ranking versus all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20680, places it within 0.3% of the Intel Core i7-10700 — a meaningful comparison because both have similar multi-threaded capabilities.

At 4K, the CPU's role diminishes as the GPU becomes the primary constraint. The fact that 4K Low (188.3 FPS) is still much higher than 4K Ultra (90.6 FPS) shows that the CPU is not the bottleneck at higher resolutions — the GPU's shading load is. However, the 1080p to 1440p scaling at Low settings (306.1 to 277 FPS, a 10% drop) suggests that even at lower resolutions, the GPU is starting to catch up to the CPU's output. The 5600X's 12 threads are never fully utilized in this game, as Inside is not heavily multithreaded, but the high single-core throughput (917 in 3DMark single-thread) ensures that frame times remain low. The CPU's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT, scores 20740 average — a delta of -0.3% — indicating that this processor is well-matched to its peers for this workload.

FAQ

*Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X a bottleneck for the RX 7800 XT in Inside?*

A: No. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 306.1 FPS, which is likely engine-limited rather than CPU-limited. The 5600X's single-thread score of 2622 in Cinebench R23 and boost clock of 4.60 GHz are sufficient to keep up with the GPU's output across all tested resolutions.

Q: Why does Ultra perform so close to High at 4K?

A: At 4K, High averages 90.9 FPS and Ultra averages 90.6 FPS — a difference of only 0.3%. This indicates that the Ultra preset adds negligible GPU load in Inside at higher resolutions, possibly because the extra settings are not pixel-bound.

Q: Can this combo achieve 144Hz at 1440p?

A: Yes, at Medium settings the average is 237.9 FPS and at High it is 150.2 FPS. Even Ultra at 141.2 FPS exceeds 144Hz, though it is closer to the threshold. Low settings reach 277 FPS, so there is ample headroom for high-refresh displays.

Q: How does the RX 7800 XT compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 32619 is 0.2% higher than the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 (32540) and 0.4% lower than the NVIDIA P104-100 (32747). Its percentile ranking of 76 places it above most GPUs but not at the top tier.

*Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Inside?*

A: The data shows that all resolutions are playable — even 4K Ultra at 90.6 FPS is smooth. For 60Hz displays, 4K High (90.9 FPS) is ideal; for 144Hz displays, 1440p High (150.2 FPS) or 1080p Ultra (193.9 FPS) are better options.

*Q: Does the 16 GB VRAM matter for Inside?*

A: Not in a meaningful way. The game's visuals are simple enough that even at 4K Ultra, memory usage is unlikely to exceed 8 GB. The 16 GB buffer provides future-proofing but is not a limiting factor in this specific title.

How This Combo Ranks

Among 1671 tested combinations, this pairing of the Ryzen 5 5600X and RX 7800 XT ranks 572nd in Inside. This places it in the 66th percentile overall — solidly above average but not exceptional. The ranking reflects that Inside is not a demanding title, so even mid-range hardware can achieve high frame rates, and the delta between top-tier and mid-tier combos is small. For context, the CPU's average benchmark score of 20680 ranks it in the 78th percentile, while the GPU's 32619 average ranks it in the 76th percentile. The combo's 572nd position suggests that other factors — such as memory configuration or driver overhead — may slightly penalize this pairing relative to its component-level rankings.

The 1671 total combos include many with newer or higher-end CPUs and GPUs, so a 572nd rank is respectable. However, the results show that in Inside, the 5600X's six cores are not the limiting factor — the GPU handles the graphical load efficiently, and the CPU's 12 threads are barely taxed. This is a case where component quality matters less than in more demanding titles, and the combo's rank is more a function of the game's low requirements than any deficiency in the hardware.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are: Low 306.1 FPS, Medium 286.2 FPS, High 209 FPS, and Ultra 193.9 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 19.9 FPS (7%), while the drop from Medium to High is 77.2 FPS (27%) — indicating a steep increase in GPU load between Medium and High. High to Ultra is a smaller 15.1 FPS (7%) decline.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 277 FPS, Medium 237.9 FPS, High 150.2 FPS, and Ultra 141.2 FPS. The Medium to High gap widens to 87.7 FPS (37%), showing that High settings at 1440p significantly increase shading complexity. Ultra is only 9 FPS lower than High, continuing the pattern of diminishing returns.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 188.3 FPS, Medium 152 FPS, High 90.9 FPS, and Ultra 90.6 FPS. The Medium to High drop is 61.1 FPS (40%), the largest relative decline across all resolutions. The Low to Medium gap is 36.3 FPS (19%), and High to Ultra is nearly zero at 0.3 FPS.

Across all resolutions, Low settings always deliver more than double the frame rate of Ultra at 4K — 188.3 FPS versus 90.6 FPS — while at 1080p the ratio is 306.1 to 193.9, or about 1.6x. This indicates that resolution scaling affects Ultra settings more severely than Low, which is typical for GPU-bound effects.

Settings Recommendations

For a 60Hz display, 4K High at 90.9 FPS is the optimal choice — it provides a smooth experience with minimal compromise. Ultra adds nothing measurable (90.6 FPS) and can be skipped. For a 144Hz display, 1440p High at 150.2 FPS is the best balance, as Ultra at 141.2 FPS is still above 144Hz but with a smaller margin. At 1080p, even Ultra at 193.9 FPS exceeds 144Hz, so players with 144Hz monitors can choose any preset without issue.

The data suggests that High is the sweet spot for this combo: at 1080p it delivers 209 FPS (only 7% less than Ultra), at 1440p it delivers 150.2 FPS (6% more than Ultra), and at 4K it delivers 90.9 FPS (essentially identical to Ultra). Medium settings are viable for very high refresh rates (237.9 FPS at 1440p), but the visual quality trade-off is likely not worth the extra frames given that High already exceeds most display refresh rates. Low settings are only recommended for competitive play or extreme refresh rate displays, as the 306.1 FPS at 1080p is far beyond what most monitors can show.