Inside

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti presents a stark contrast in capability within the puzzle-platformer Inside. The processor is a high-end modern part, while the graphics card is an older entry-level model, and the measured frame rates clearly reflect this imbalance. The data shows a system that can handle the game at lower settings but struggles to maintain fluid motion at higher presets and resolutions, making the choice of settings critical to the experience.

Settings Recommendations

For this specific combination, the measured FPS data indicates that the Low preset is the only reliable path to a consistently smooth experience across all common resolutions. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 106.8 FPS, which is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for most displays. The Medium preset also performs well at this resolution, hitting 85.4 FPS, but the gap between Low and Medium narrows significantly as resolution increases.

The High preset is playable only at 1920x1080, where it reaches 54.2 FPS, but this is a marginal result that will show visible stutter on standard 60 Hz monitors. At 2560x1440, the High preset drops to 36.7 FPS, making it a poor choice for anything but static scenes. The Ultra preset is essentially unusable with this hardware, as it only achieves 51 FPS at 1080p and falls to 24.9 FPS at 4K. The data suggests that players should prioritize the Low or Medium presets to maintain frame rates above 60 FPS, with Medium offering a reasonable visual upgrade over Low at 1080p and 1440p while still delivering 62.3 FPS at the latter resolution.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is the limiting factor in this pairing. The GPU’s 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s, which is modest by modern standards. Its Pascal architecture, built on a 14 nm process, operates at a base clock of 1291 MHz and a boost clock of 1392 MHz, with 768 shading units available for processing. The FP32 performance is rated at 2.138 TFLOPS, which explains the GPU’s 30th percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database.

The VRAM capacity becomes a clear bottleneck at higher resolutions. At 3840x2160, the difference between Low and High settings is stark: the Low preset averages 47.4 FPS, while High falls to 27 FPS. This indicates that the GPU’s texture units and memory bandwidth are overwhelmed by the higher detail levels, not just the resolution itself. The GTX 1050 Ti’s 48 texture mapping units and 32 ROPs are simply insufficient for high-fidelity rendering at 4K, as the benchmark scores suggest—its Passmark G3D score of 6340 places it near the GeForce 940M and Radeon R7 240 in performance, both of which are older or lower-tier parts.

How This Combo Ranks

The combined system ranks 1658 out of 1671 tested combos for Inside, placing it in the bottom 1% of all configurations in the database. This is a remarkably low position, driven almost entirely by the GPU’s limitations. The Ryzen 5 5600X, by contrast, sits in the 78th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20680. The processor’s nearest rivals—the AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT and Intel Core i7-10700—show negligible performance differences, with deltaPct values of -0.3% and -0.3% respectively, confirming the CPU is not the cause of the low ranking.

The GPU’s percentile ranking of 30% among all GPUs, combined with its average benchmark score of 5316, places it in the same performance tier as the GeForce 930A and GeForce 940M. This means that while the CPU is capable of driving much higher frame rates, the GTX 1050 Ti anchors the entire system’s performance in this title. The data implies that upgrading the GPU alone would transform this combo’s ranking, as the CPU has ample headroom for a more powerful graphics card.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full settings range is usable, but with caveats. The Low preset delivers 106.8 FPS, which is the highest measured average for this combo. Medium follows at 85.4 FPS, then High at 54.2 FPS, and Ultra at 51 FPS. The drop from Medium to High is substantial—a 31.2 FPS decrease—while the difference between High and Ultra is a mere 3.2 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns from the Ultra preset’s additional visual features.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance scales downward consistently. Low still provides a playable 79 FPS, while Medium drops to 62.3 FPS, barely above the 60 FPS mark. High and Ultra both fall into the 36 FPS range, with High at 36.7 FPS and Ultra at 36.8 FPS. Interestingly, High and Ultra are nearly identical at this resolution, differing by only 0.1 FPS, which indicates that the GPU is fully saturated and the render settings have minimal impact at this point.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles across the board. Low is the only preset that approaches playability at 47.4 FPS, but Medium falls to 36.4 FPS, High to 27 FPS, and Ultra to 24.9 FPS. The 4K results show that the GTX 1050 Ti’s 4 GB memory buffer is exhausted, as even the Low preset cannot maintain 60 FPS. The data reveals that 1080p is the only resolution where this combo can deliver a consistently smooth experience, and only at Low or Medium settings.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K highlights the GPU bottleneck. At the Low preset, the average FPS drops from 106.8 at 1080p to 79 at 1440p and 47.4 at 4K—a reduction of 27.8 FPS and 31.6 FPS respectively. This is a roughly 55.6% drop in performance from 1080p to 4K, which is typical for a GPU-limited scenario where pixel throughput is the constraining factor.

At the Medium preset, the scaling is similar: 85.4 FPS at 1080p, 62.3 at 1440p, and 36.4 at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is about 57.4%, nearly identical to Low. This consistency suggests that the GPU is the limiting component across all settings, as the CPU’s performance does not change with resolution. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect higher resolutions to show a smaller relative drop, but the data shows a linear relationship between pixel count and frame rate, confirming the GPU’s dominance in this pairing.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600X is a Zen 3 architecture processor with 6 cores and 12 threads, running at a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a 32 MB L3 cache. The CPU’s benchmark results, such as a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18578 and a single-core score of 2622, place it far above the requirements of Inside, which is a lightweight puzzle platformer.

The CPU’s 12 threads are more than sufficient for this game, and its single-thread performance is excellent, as evidenced by the Passmark single-thread score of 3364. In this pairing, the CPU is never the limiting factor. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (106.8 FPS) is likely close to the game’s engine ceiling for this CPU, but the GPU’s limitations prevent higher frame rates at more demanding settings. The data shows that the CPU has significant headroom—its nearest rival, the Intel Xeon 6325P, is 0.7% faster on average, but this difference is irrelevant given the GPU’s 30th percentile ranking.

FAQ

*Q: Can this system run Inside at 60 FPS?*

A: Yes, but only at 1080p with Low or Medium settings, which achieve 106.8 FPS and 85.4 FPS respectively. At 1440p, only the Low preset exceeds 60 FPS at 79 FPS.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo?

A: The data shows 1920x1080 is the only resolution where multiple presets achieve playable frame rates. At 2560x1440, only Low is above 60 FPS, and at 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti has an average benchmark score of 5316, which is nearly identical to the GeForce 930A (5317, 0% delta) and the GeForce 940M (5297, 0.4% delta). It is slightly faster than the Radeon R7 240 (5280, 0.7% delta).

Q: Is the CPU holding back performance?

A: No. The Ryzen 5 5600X ranks in the 78th percentile among CPUs, with an average score of 20680. Its nearest rival, the Ryzen 5 5600GT, is only 0.3% faster, indicating the CPU has ample headroom for this game.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, Low averages 47.4 FPS while Ultra averages 24.9 FPS, a difference of 22.5 FPS. This shows the Ultra preset nearly halves the already low frame rate.

Q: Why does High and Ultra perform similarly at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, High averages 36.7 FPS and Ultra averages 36.8 FPS, a difference of only 0.1 FPS. This indicates the GPU is fully saturated, and the additional settings in Ultra have no measurable impact on performance.