Inside

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F paired with the Intel Arc B370 produces an average of 32 FPS at 4K High settings in Inside, placing this configuration at rank 2654 out of 2887 tested combos. This position, in the bottom 8% of all tested pairings, immediately signals that the combination is not optimized for this title at higher resolutions. The rank is driven primarily by the GPU’s performance ceiling, as the data shows a dramatic swing in frame rates based solely on graphical settings. At 1080p Low, the combo delivers 141 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, it drops to 30 FPS. This wide gulf indicates that while the CPU has ample headroom for this puzzle platformer, the integrated graphics solution struggles to maintain fluid motion when pixel count and visual fidelity increase. The percentile ranking, which places the CPU at 83rd overall but the GPU at just 5th, underscores the imbalance; the processor is a high-tier component, while the graphics unit is entry-level.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 2654 out of 2887 places it in the lowest percentile of tested configurations for Inside. This is a poor showing, but the context is crucial. The benchmark data reveals that the bottleneck is almost exclusively the Intel Arc B370, which holds a percentile rank of 5 among all GPUs. This means that 95% of graphics cards tested are faster. The CPU, in contrast, sits at the 83rd percentile, a solid mid-to-high tier result. The delta between these two components explains why the combo performs so poorly in a game that is not particularly demanding on modern hardware. For comparison, the GPU’s nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks—the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, ATI Radeon HD 5770, and AMD Radeon HD 7650M—are all legacy parts, with the Arc B370 trailing the HD 5770 by 0.5% and the HD 7650M by 0.7% in 3DMark Steel Nomad. This confirms the Arc B370 is operating at a performance tier that predates current-generation gaming expectations.

The rank itself is not a measure of absolute failure but of relative position. Among the 2887 combos, the 7400F + B370 is in the bottom 9.2% (calculated from 2654/2887). The data shows that for Inside, a game from 2016, this combo is only viable at lower resolutions and settings. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (141 FPS) is excellent, but the experience degrades rapidly. The implications are clear: if a user is targeting 4K or even 1440p with high visual quality, this pairing will not deliver a smooth experience. The ranking is a direct consequence of the GPU’s limited fill rate and pixel throughput, which are constrained by its 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 performance. These numbers, while present in the spec sheet, translate to a hard ceiling in practice.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the limiting factor in this configuration. Its specifications—1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs—are modest, and its memory is "System Shared," meaning it relies on the CPU’s DDR5 memory rather than dedicated VRAM. This shared memory architecture is a significant constraint. The base clock of 300 MHz and boost clock of 2400 MHz are not the issue; rather, the bandwidth is "System Dependent," which in this case is the Ryzen 5 7400F’s dual-channel DDR5 at 83.2 GB/s. This bandwidth is shared with the CPU, and for a game like Inside with its atmospheric lighting and physics-based puzzles, the constant data movement between CPU and GPU can starve the system.

The GPU’s measured 3DMark Steel Nomad score is 1184, which is nearly identical to the ATI Radeon HD 5770’s 1190 (a 0.5% deficit). This is a stark indicator of its performance class. The HD 5770 was a mid-range card from 2009, and the Arc B370 is effectively matching it in a modern API test. In Inside, this translates to the observed FPS drops. At 4K Medium, the GPU maintains 51 FPS average, but the minimum FPS is 43, showing that it is working at its limit. At 4K High, the average falls to 32 FPS, which is borderline playable but not comfortable. The GPU’s 20 ROPs are a bottleneck for pixel fill at high resolutions; the 48.00 GPixel/s rate is simply insufficient for 4K output with complex shading.

The data suggests that the GPU’s 10 RT cores and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate are irrelevant for this title, as Inside does not utilize ray tracing. The 25 W TDP and IGP slot width further indicate that this is not a discrete gaming solution but an integrated part of a mobile or low-power platform. The lack of a launch MSRP for the GPU, combined with the "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs, confirms its role as a built-in component rather than a standalone card. For Inside, the GPU’s role is to process the game’s 2D side-scrolling visuals with moderate lighting effects; the data shows it can do so at 1080p, but higher resolutions overwhelm its limited resources.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear hierarchy for settings at each resolution. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 141 FPS average, which is excellent for a smooth experience. The High preset (70 FPS) and Medium preset (113 FPS) are also playable, but Ultra (67 FPS) is only marginally worse than High. Given that the game is a puzzle platformer where timing is not critical, a 60 FPS target is sufficient. The data shows that at 1080p, High settings are the sweet spot, offering 70 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold while providing better visual quality than Low. Ultra at 67 FPS is nearly identical in performance to High, so if a user wants maximum fidelity, it is a viable choice without a significant penalty.

At 2560x1440, the situation changes. Low (101 FPS) is the only setting that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS. Medium (81 FPS) is also playable, but High (51 FPS) and Ultra (48 FPS) fall below the 60 FPS mark. For a consistent experience, Medium at 1440p is recommended, as the 81 FPS average with a 69 FPS minimum ensures no noticeable stutter. Pushing to High or Ultra introduces frame drops that could be jarring in a game with precise physics puzzles. At 3840x2160, the options are limited. Low (64 FPS) is the only setting that maintains a 60 FPS average. Medium (51 FPS) is playable but with a 43 FPS minimum, which could dip into noticeable lag. High (32 FPS) and Ultra (30 FPS) are not recommended for a fluid experience.

The data implies that the best experience is at 1080p with High or Ultra settings, balancing visual fidelity with a stable frame rate. For users with a 1440p monitor, Medium is the optimal choice. The 4K resolution is only viable with Low settings, which defeats the purpose of high-resolution gaming. The recommendation is to prioritize resolution over settings: 1080p Ultra (67 FPS) is preferable to 1440p High (51 FPS) because the frame rate is more stable. The measured minimum FPS values, only provided for Medium settings, show a consistent drop of about 15% from the average (e.g., 113 average to 96 minimum at 1080p), suggesting that other presets likely have similar variance, making the average a reliable indicator.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all settings presets achieve at least 67 FPS. At 1440p, the High preset drops to 51 FPS, and at 4K, only the Low preset (64 FPS) is above 60 FPS. Therefore, 1080p is the recommended resolution for a consistent experience.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: In the 3DMark Steel Nomad benchmark, the Arc B370 scores 1184, which is 0.2% lower than the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186), 0.5% lower than the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190), and 0.7% lower than the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192). It is only 1.4% faster than the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck for this game?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The CPU has a percentile rank of 83, while the GPU is at the 5th percentile. The FPS scales dramatically with resolution and settings, indicating that the graphics processor is the limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 141 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, it drops to 30 FPS, a direct result of GPU load.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 101 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 48 FPS. This is a 53 FPS difference, or a 52.5% reduction in performance when moving from the lowest to the highest visual quality.

Q: Does the game support high refresh rates with this hardware?

A: At 1080p with Low settings, the 141 FPS average can support a 144Hz monitor. However, at 1080p High (70 FPS) or 1440p Medium (81 FPS), the frame rate is insufficient for 144Hz and is better suited for a 60Hz or 75Hz display.

Q: Is there a significant difference between High and Ultra settings at 4K?

A: The data shows the High preset averages 32 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 30 FPS. The 2 FPS difference is negligible, suggesting that Ultra does not impose a meaningful additional load on the GPU at this resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data reveals a steep decline as resolution increases, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario. At 1080p High, the combo delivers 70 FPS. Moving to 1440p High, the average drops to 51 FPS, a 27.1% decrease. At 4K High, the average falls to 32 FPS, a 54.3% decrease from 1080p. This scaling is consistent with the GPU’s limited pixel throughput. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s means that at 4K resolution (8.3 million pixels), the theoretical maximum fill rate is only about 5.8 frames per second if every pixel required a full pass, but in practice, the game’s simple visuals allow for higher performance. The data shows that the GPU is not just bandwidth-limited but also fill-rate-limited.

The difference between 1080p and 1440p is notable, but the jump from 1440p to 4K is harsher. The 51 FPS at 1440p High drops to 32 FPS at 4K High, a 37.3% reduction. This disproportionate drop indicates that the GPU’s 20 ROPs are overwhelmed by the 4K pixel count. The Medium settings at each resolution provide a clearer picture: 113 FPS at 1080p, 81 FPS at 1440p, and 51 FPS at 4K. The scaling factor from 1080p to 1440p is 0.72 (81/113), and from 1440p to 4K is 0.63 (51/81). This progressive decline suggests that the GPU’s efficiency decreases as resolution increases, consistent with a fill-rate bottleneck. The CPU’s role is minimal here, as the Ryzen 5 7400F’s 6 cores and 12 threads are more than sufficient for a puzzle platformer. The data implies that if a discrete GPU with higher ROPs were used, the FPS would scale much more linearly with resolution.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F plays a supporting role in this configuration, and the data shows it is not a limiting factor for Inside. With 6 cores and 12 threads based on the Zen 4 architecture, the CPU has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. Its Cinebench R23 scores—21765 multi-core and 3072 single-core—place it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, which is a strong result. In the game, the CPU’s performance is evident from the high frame rates at low settings: 141 FPS at 1080p Low. This indicates that the CPU can feed the GPU with data faster than the GPU can render, confirming the GPU bottleneck.

The CPU’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-14600T (0.1% faster) and the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H (0.2% faster), while it is 0.2% slower than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H. These differences are negligible in real-world gaming. The CPU’s 32 MB of shared L3 cache is ample for the game’s code, and its DDR5 memory support with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth is more than adequate. The PassMark single-thread score of 3689 is high, which is important for a game that may rely on a single primary thread for logic. However, Inside is not CPU-intensive; the data shows that even at 4K Low (64 FPS), the CPU is not the constraint, as the GPU is still the limiting factor.

The CPU’s role is to provide a stable platform for the GPU. The 65 W TDP and unlocked multiplier suggest it is a power-efficient, overclockable part, but overclocking would not improve FPS in this scenario because the GPU is saturated. The benchmark results indicate that the CPU has headroom to spare. For instance, the PassMark multithread score of 25645 places it well above average, but this power is unused in Inside. The data implies that pairing this CPU with a more capable GPU would yield significantly higher frame rates, as the 7400F would not bottleneck even a mid-range discrete card.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete FPS data for the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F + Intel Arc B370 in Inside is as follows:

• 1920x1080: Low settings average 141 FPS. Medium settings average 113 FPS, with a minimum of 96 FPS and a maximum of 130 FPS. High settings average 70 FPS. Ultra settings average 67 FPS.
• 2560x1440: Low settings average 101 FPS. Medium settings average 81 FPS, with a minimum of 69 FPS and a maximum of 93 FPS. High settings average 51 FPS. Ultra settings average 48 FPS.
• 3840x2160: Low settings average 64 FPS. Medium settings average 51 FPS, with a minimum of 43 FPS and a maximum of 59 FPS. High settings average 32 FPS. Ultra settings average 30 FPS.

The Medium settings are the only ones with min/max values, providing insight into frame pacing. At 1080p, the 113 FPS average with a 96 FPS minimum shows a 17 FPS variance, which is a 15% drop. At 1440p, the 81 FPS average with a 69 FPS minimum shows a 12 FPS variance, also a 15% drop. At 4K, the 51 FPS average with a 43 FPS minimum shows an 8 FPS variance, a 15.7% drop. This consistent variance pattern suggests that the GPU’s frame delivery is stable relative to its average, but the absolute numbers at 4K are too low for a smooth experience.

The data shows that the Low preset at 1080p (141 FPS) is more than double the High preset at 4K (32 FPS). This 4.4x difference highlights the GPU’s severe scaling limitations. The Ultra preset at 1080p (67 FPS) is only 3 FPS lower than the High preset (70 FPS), indicating that Ultra is a free upgrade at that resolution. However, at 4K, the difference between High (32 FPS) and Ultra (30 FPS) is just 2 FPS, showing that the GPU is so saturated that visual settings have minimal impact. The measured FPS at 1440p Medium (81 FPS) is the last configuration that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS, and it does so with a minimum of 69 FPS, ensuring no significant stutter. All other 1440p and 4K configurations fall below 60 FPS average, making them less desirable for a game that benefits from smooth motion.