Inside

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT delivers exceptional performance in Inside, a puzzle platformer from 2016-07-06. This combination ranks 478th out of 2887 tested combos for this specific game, placing it in the top 16.6% of all systems benchmarked. The data shows a system capable of extreme frame rates at every resolution tested, with the GPU and CPU both contributing to a remarkably fluid experience in this title.

How This Combo Ranks

The comboRankInGame of 478 out of 2887 combos indicates that this pairing sits comfortably above the median, but it is not at the very top of the leaderboard. That position makes sense given the game's age and relatively modest graphical demands. The ranking reflects that many higher-tier combinations, likely with more powerful GPUs or newer CPUs, achieve even higher frames per second, but the 478th position still represents a very strong result. Being in the top 16.6% of all tested combinations means the Ryzen 5 7400F and RX 7900 XT together handle this title with substantial headroom.

The CPU itself, the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F, holds an 83rd percentile ranking among all CPUs in the database, based on its average benchmark score of 32750. Its nearest rivals in the overall CPU benchmarks include the Intel Core i5-14600T with an average score of 32707 and a deltaPct of 0.1, meaning the Ryzen 5 7400F is just 0.1% ahead. The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H scores 32697, a 0.2% difference, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H scores 32812, putting it 0.2% ahead of the 7400F. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 trails at 32662, a 0.3% gap. These are extremely tight margins, indicating that the 7400F is positioned squarely in a competitive cluster of mid-range to upper-mid-range processors.

For the GPU, the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT has a 55th percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 13745. Its nearest rivals tell a curious story: the AMD Radeon 660M scores 13812, which is 0.5% higher, the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile scores 13821, also 0.5% higher, and the AMD Radeon RX 570X scores 13871, a 0.9% higher deltaPct. On the other side, the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT scores 13543, making the 7900 XT 1.5% faster than that card. These rival comparisons are based on average benchmark scores across many tests, not specifically on Inside performance, so they offer a general picture of the GPU’s standing rather than a game-specific one.

Within Inside specifically, the measured data shows that this combo never drops below 107 frames per second at any tested setting or resolution, and it reaches as high as 337 FPS at 1080p Low. That kind of performance is far beyond what the game needs for smooth play, given that it is a puzzle platformer with relatively simple visuals.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 31 chip, codenamed Plum Bonito. It uses a 5 nm process from TSMC and contains 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die. The GPU has a base clock of 1387 MHz, a boost clock of 2394 MHz, and a game clock of 2025 MHz. Memory runs at 2500 MHz, which translates to 20 Gbps effective, across a 320-bit bus. The card has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory with a bandwidth of 800.0 GB/s.

For Inside, the GPU’s raw specifications are far more than necessary. The game was released in 2016-07-06 and features a minimalist, side-scrolling art style with limited geometry and simple lighting. Even at 4K Ultra, the RX 7900 XT produces 107 FPS on average, which is more than sufficient for a puzzle platformer where reaction times are not as critical as in competitive shooters. The GPU’s shading units number 5376, with 336 texture mapping units and 192 render output units. It has 84 ray tracing cores, though Inside does not use ray tracing, so those cores remain idle for this workload.

The pixel rate is 459.6 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 804.4 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance at 51.48 TFLOPS. Those figures are enormous for a 2D side-scroller, indicating that the GPU is essentially never the bottleneck in this game. The memory subsystem, with 20 GB of VRAM and 800.0 GB/s bandwidth, will not be stressed by Inside’s textures, which are modest by modern standards. The game’s art direction is atmospheric but not texture-heavy, so the 20 GB allocation is overkill, though it does ensure that no resolution or settings combination will exceed the VRAM buffer.

The GPU’s production status is end-of-life, and it was released on 2022-11-02, with a predecessor in Navi II and a successor in Navi IV. The launch MSRP for the GPU is 899 USD, but that figure is separate from its performance characteristics. The card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which are all more than sufficient for Inside’s requirements.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows how the system scales across three resolutions: 1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160. At the High settings preset, the average FPS at 1080p is 248. Moving to 1440p, the average drops to 178, which is a 28.2% reduction. Going from 1440p to 4K at High, the average falls to 112, a 37.1% reduction from 1440p. Across the full range from 1080p to 4K at High, the frame rate drops by 54.8%, from 248 to 112 FPS.

At Low settings, the scaling is more aggressive in absolute terms but similar in percentage. At 1080p Low, the system produces 337 FPS. At 1440p Low, it drops to 302, a 10.4% reduction. At 4K Low, the average is 224, which is 25.8% lower than 1440p and 33.5% lower than 1080p. The 4K Low result of 224 FPS is still extremely high, showing that even at the most demanding resolution, the GPU has plenty of headroom.

Medium settings show a similar pattern. At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 311, with a minimum of 264 and a maximum of 357. At 1440p Medium, the average is 278, a 10.6% drop, with a minimum of 237 and a maximum of 320. At 4K Medium, the average drops to 179, a 35.6% reduction from 1440p, with a minimum of 152 and a maximum of 206. The minimum frame rates at Medium settings are worth noting: even the 4K minimum of 152 FPS is well above the refresh rate of most monitors.

Ultra settings produce the lowest frame rates, as expected. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 236 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, it is 170 FPS, a 28.0% reduction. At 4K Ultra, the average is 107 FPS, which is 37.1% lower than 1440p and 54.7% lower than 1080p. The fact that Ultra at 4K still sustains over 100 FPS indicates that the limiting component is not the CPU or GPU in any meaningful sense, but rather the game’s own frame rate cap, if one exists, or the overhead of the settings preset itself.

The scaling pattern reveals that the frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is significant, but the absolute values remain high. The reduction from 1080p to 4K at every settings preset is between 33.5% and 54.8%, which suggests that the GPU is doing more work at higher resolutions, but it has enough raw performance to handle the increased pixel count. The CPU, with 6 cores and 12 threads based on Zen 4 architecture, is not a limiting factor at any resolution, since the frame rates are consistently high even at 1080p where CPU overhead would be most apparent.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the Medium settings preset offers the best balance between visual quality and frame rate stability. At 1440p Medium, the system produces 278 FPS on average, with a minimum of 237 and a maximum of 320. That minimum is well above the 144 Hz refresh rate common on gaming monitors, ensuring that there are no perceptible stutters. At 1080p Medium, the average is 311 FPS with a minimum of 264, which is even smoother. The Medium preset provides a clear improvement over Low settings in visual terms, while the frame rate penalty from Low to Medium is modest: at 1080p, it drops from 337 to 311 FPS, a 7.7% reduction, and at 1440p, it drops from 302 to 278, a 7.9% reduction.

High settings are also viable, but the gains over Medium are not substantial for a game like Inside where the visual differences between Medium and High may be subtle given the art style. At 1080p High, the average is 248 FPS, which is 20.3% lower than Medium. At 1440p High, the average is 178, a 36.0% reduction from Medium. At 4K High, the average is 112, which is 37.4% lower than Medium’s 179 FPS. The High preset does introduce more graphical effects, but the frame rate cost is significant, especially at higher resolutions.

Ultra settings are the most demanding, and while the system still achieves over 100 FPS at 4K Ultra, the gains over High are marginal for this title. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 236 FPS, only 4.8% lower than High. At 1440p Ultra, the average is 170, which is 4.5% lower than High. At 4K Ultra, the average is 107, which is 4.5% lower than High. The Ultra preset typically adds effects like ambient occlusion, higher shadow quality, and more detailed particle effects, but in Inside’s dark, minimalist environments, these may not be noticeable. The data suggests that Medium is the sweet spot, offering high frame rates with a comfortable margin, while High and Ultra provide diminishing returns.

For players with high-refresh-rate monitors, the Medium preset at 1440p provides 278 FPS on average, which is more than enough to saturate a 240 Hz display. Even at 4K Medium, the average of 179 FPS exceeds the 144 Hz threshold, making it a viable option for those with 4K high-refresh displays. Low settings are only worth considering if the user wants to maximize frame rates for competitive play, but Inside is not a competitive title, so the visual trade-off is not necessary.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates. With Low settings, the average FPS is 337, with no minimum or maximum recorded. Medium settings produce an average of 311 FPS, with a minimum of 264 and a maximum of 357. High settings result in an average of 248 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to 236 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 101 FPS, showing that the settings preset has a meaningful impact on performance, but even the lowest Ultra result of 236 FPS is far above playable thresholds.

At 2560x1440, the numbers remain strong. Low settings yield an average of 302 FPS. Medium settings average 278 FPS, with a minimum of 237 and a maximum of 320. High settings produce 178 FPS on average, and Ultra settings result in 170 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 132 FPS, which is a larger absolute difference than at 1080p, but the percentage difference is similar. The minimum frame rate at 1440p Medium is 237 FPS, which is still exceptionally smooth.

At 3840x2160, the system begins to show more strain, but the results are still impressive. Low settings average 224 FPS. Medium settings average 179 FPS, with a minimum of 152 and a maximum of 206. High settings drop to 112 FPS on average, and Ultra settings produce 107 FPS. The minimum frame rate at 4K Medium is 152 FPS, which is above the refresh rate of most 4K monitors, so the experience remains fluid. At 4K High and Ultra, the averages are 112 and 107 FPS respectively, which are still above 100 FPS and thus perfectly playable.

The data shows a consistent pattern: as resolution increases, frame rates decrease, but the system never dips below 107 FPS in any measured configuration. The Medium settings preset at each resolution provides the most complete data, with minimum and maximum values recorded, allowing for a fuller picture of frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the range from minimum to maximum is 93 FPS, at 1440p Medium it is 83 FPS, and at 4K Medium it is 54 FPS. The narrower range at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU is more consistently utilized, reducing frame time spikes.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Raphael. It belongs to the 7000 series and uses the AMD Socket AM5. The base clock is 3.70 GHz, and the boost clock is 4.70 GHz. The CPU has a TDP of 65 watts, making it a power-efficient choice for a desktop processor. It is manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC, with 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache.

For Inside, the CPU’s role is minimal because the game is not computationally demanding. The 6 cores and 12 threads are more than sufficient to handle the game’s logic, physics, and any background processes. The CPU’s benchmark scores confirm its capability: in Cinebench R23, it scores 21765 in multi-core and 3072 in single-core. In PassMark, it scores 25645 in multithread, 3689 in single-thread, and 1660 in physics. These are solid numbers for a mid-range desktop CPU, and they indicate that the 7400F will not bottleneck the RX 7900 XT in most games, let alone a puzzle platformer.

The CPU’s memory support includes DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus and a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. It supports ECC memory and has PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU. The integrated graphics are N/A, meaning the system relies entirely on the discrete GPU. The CPU was released on 2025-01-08, with a launch MSRP of $229, and it has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking.

In Inside, the frame rates at 1080p Low reach 337 FPS, which is near the practical limit for many display connections. The fact that the CPU can feed the GPU at these rates suggests that the 7400F’s single-thread performance, as evidenced by its 3072 Cinebench R23 single-core score and 3689 PassMark single-thread score, is more than adequate. The CPU’s 83rd percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32750, places it in the upper tier of processors, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.3% in average score, indicating a tightly contested market segment.

The CPU’s boost clock of 4.70 GHz is high for a 65-watt part, and it allows for quick response times in games. The 32 MB of L3 cache helps with game data locality, though Inside’s data footprint is small enough that this is not a critical factor. The combination of 6 cores and 12 threads is also future-proof for a while, though more demanding games may use additional cores. For Inside, the CPU is effectively a non-factor, as the measured FPS at all settings and resolutions are limited by the GPU’s output, not by CPU processing power.

The PassMark data compression score of 289999 and data encryption score of 16712 show that the CPU handles general workloads well, but these are not relevant to gaming performance. The floating point math score of 45799 and integer math score of 74745 are more indicative of gaming performance, and they are strong for the processor’s class. The extended instructions score of 21747 suggests good support for modern instruction sets, which can benefit newer games, though Inside predates many of those optimizations.

Overall, the CPU’s contribution to Inside’s performance is to provide a stable platform with high single-thread performance and enough multi-thread capability to avoid any bottlenecks. The measured FPS, which never falls below 107 FPS even at 4K Ultra, reflects the balance between this CPU and the RX 7900 XT. The system is overkill for Inside, but that overkill ensures a flawless experience at any resolution and settings combination a user might choose.