Inside

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti pairing delivers a surprisingly capable experience in Inside, a game that leans more on GPU throughput than multi-core CPU muscle. The data shows this combo ranks 2482nd out of 2887 tested combinations, placing it in the lower-middle tier of the database. The Ryzen 5 7400F, a 6-core/12-thread Zen 4 part on the AM5 socket, brings a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost of 4.70 GHz, which is more than enough headroom for a puzzle platformer. The GTX 1660 Ti, with 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, becomes the primary bottleneck in this setup, particularly at higher resolutions and settings. The measured FPS figures confirm this: the game remains fluid at 1080p, but the frame rate drops significantly as pixel count increases, indicating a clear GPU-bound scenario.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Ryzen 5 7400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor built on TSMC's 5 nm process, with a 65 W TDP. Its architecture, Zen 4 (Raphael), provides strong single-thread performance, as evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3072. In Inside, which is a 2D side-scrolling puzzle platformer from 2016, the CPU rarely becomes a limiting factor. The game's physics and logic are not heavily multithreaded, so the 7400F's cores are more than sufficient. The processor's multi-core Cinebench R23 score of 21765 further underscores its capability, but the benchmark results in Inside show that the CPU is not the constraint here. Instead, the GPU handles the rendering load, and the CPU sits idle waiting for frames to be drawn.

The 7400F's single-thread performance is particularly relevant for this genre. The game's update loop and input handling favor high IPC and fast clock speeds, which the 7400F delivers. Its boost clock of 4.70 GHz ensures that any single-threaded tasks are processed without stutter. Compared to its nearest rivals, the 7400F is essentially tied with the Intel Core i5-14600T (deltaPct 0.1) and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (deltaPct -0.2), meaning its overall benchmark average is virtually identical. This CPU’s role in Inside is to stay out of the way, and the data confirms it does, allowing the GPU to be the sole determinant of frame rate. The 32 MB of shared L3 cache also helps with quick data access, but again, the game's demands are modest enough that even a less powerful CPU would likely keep up.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

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

A: Based on the measured FPS, 1920x1080 is the sweet spot. At Low settings, it hits 216 FPS average, and even at Ultra, it maintains 103 FPS average. The 2560x1440 and 3840x2160 resolutions see significant drops, with Ultra at 4K falling to 46 FPS average.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 Ti compare to its closest rivals in raw GPU compute?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti's average benchmark score is 7723, which is 0.7% higher than the AMD Radeon 540 (7673) and 1.9% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7580). It also leads the Intel Arc A310 (7550) by 2.3%.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 7400F a bottleneck for the GTX 1660 Ti?

A: No. The data indicates the CPU is not the limiting factor. The 7400F's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21765 and single-core score of 3072 are far beyond what Inside requires. The FPS drops at higher resolutions are consistent with GPU limitations, not CPU stalls.

Q: What is the difference in FPS between Medium and High settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Medium settings yield an average of 124 FPS (with a min of 106 and max of 143), while High settings drop to an average of 78 FPS. This is a 46 FPS difference, showing a significant performance hit when moving from Medium to High.

Q: Can this combo hit 60 FPS at 4K?

A: Yes, but only at specific settings. At 3840x2160, Low settings produce an average of 98 FPS, and Medium settings yield 78 FPS. High settings drop to 49 FPS, and Ultra falls to 46 FPS, so staying at Medium or below is required for a stable 60 FPS experience.

Q: How does the combo rank overall among tested systems?

A: This specific CPU and GPU pairing ranks 2482nd out of 2887 tested combinations in Inside. This places it in the lower 15% of all tested combos, reflecting the GPU's age rather than any CPU shortfall.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data shows a clear and consistent scaling pattern that identifies the GTX 1660 Ti as the primary bottleneck. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 216 FPS average. Moving to 1440p drops that to 155 FPS, and at 4K it falls to 98 FPS. This is a reduction of 28% from 1080p to 1440p, and another 37% from 1440p to 4K. The pattern holds across all settings, but the absolute numbers reveal the GPU's limits more starkly at higher detail levels.

Consider the Medium settings across resolutions. At 1080p, the average is 173 FPS. At 1440p, it drops to 124 FPS (a 28% decrease), and at 4K, it falls to 78 FPS (a 37% decrease from 1440p). This non-linear drop is characteristic of a GPU that is running out of fillrate and memory bandwidth. The GTX 1660 Ti's 288.0 GB/s bandwidth and 84.96 GPixel/s pixel rate are simply insufficient to maintain frame rates as the pixel count quadruples from 1080p to 4K. The CPU's performance, meanwhile, remains constant; the Ryzen 5 7400F does not change its output based on resolution, so the FPS deltas are entirely attributable to the GPU.

The Ultra settings tell the same story. At 1080p, the combo manages 103 FPS average. At 1440p, that drops to 74 FPS, and at 4K, it plummets to 46 FPS. The fact that the 4K Ultra result is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, while 1080p Ultra is comfortably above it, confirms that the GPU is the limiting component. A more powerful GPU would show a smaller FPS drop between resolutions, but the GTX 1660 Ti’s 6 GB of VRAM and older Turing architecture cannot keep pace with the increased pixel workload. The data suggests that for a locked 60 FPS experience, users should stick to 1080p or 1440p with lower settings, as the 4K results are only playable on Low or Medium presets.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti ranks 2482nd out of 2887 tested combinations in Inside. This percentile places it in the bottom 14% of all systems tested, which is a direct reflection of the GPU's age and performance tier. The CPU, by contrast, is a modern part that sits in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs tested, with an average benchmark score of 32750. The discrepancy between the CPU's strong relative standing and the combo's low ranking highlights that the GPU is dragging down the overall result.

Looking at the GPU's nearest rivals, the GTX 1660 Ti's average score of 7723 puts it just ahead of the AMD Radeon 540 (7673) and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7580), but the performance difference is marginal—less than 2%. This means that in Inside, swapping the GTX 1660 Ti for one of these similarly-scored GPUs would yield nearly identical frame rates. The combo's rank is therefore more indicative of the GPU tier than the specific model. The Ryzen 5 7400F, with rivals like the Intel Core i5-14600T (deltaPct 0.1) and AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (deltaPct 0.3), is effectively a peer of those CPUs, but the GPU's 41st percentile ranking among all GPUs ensures the combo stays in the lower echelons of the database.

For context, a combo ranking in the 2000s out of nearly 2900 means that most other tested systems deliver higher frame rates in Inside. This is not a criticism of the CPU, which is more than capable, but rather a statement about the GTX 1660 Ti's position in the current hardware landscape. The data shows that the combo is suitable for 1080p gaming at high settings, but it is not competitive with modern mid-range or high-end systems. The 2482nd rank is a fair assessment of its overall performance in this specific title, and it is unlikely to improve with different CPU pairings unless the GPU is also upgraded.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce an average of 216 FPS, which is exceptionally smooth. Medium settings yield 173 FPS average, with a minimum of 147 FPS and a maximum of 199 FPS, ensuring no noticeable dips. High settings drop to 108 FPS average, and Ultra settings maintain a solid 103 FPS average. All 1080p results are well above the 60 FPS threshold for fluid gameplay, making this resolution the clear choice for this hardware.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance degrades noticeably. Low settings still deliver a high 155 FPS average, which is excellent for a 1440p panel. Medium settings average 124 FPS, with a minimum of 106 FPS and a maximum of 143 FPS, which is still very playable. High settings fall to 78 FPS average, which is acceptable but shows a significant drop from Medium. Ultra settings average 74 FPS, which is borderline for a smooth experience on a high-refresh-rate monitor. The 1440p results indicate that the GTX 1660 Ti is starting to struggle with the increased pixel count, but it remains viable for Medium settings and below.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly overmatched. Low settings average 98 FPS, which is surprisingly playable, but Medium settings drop to 78 FPS average, with a minimum of 66 FPS and a maximum of 90 FPS. High settings fall to 49 FPS average, and Ultra settings bottom out at 46 FPS average. These 4K numbers indicate that the combo cannot maintain 60 FPS at higher detail levels, and even Medium settings have a minimum FPS of 66, which is close to the edge. The data shows that 4K gaming is only viable on Low settings, and even then, the 98 FPS average is not a guarantee of consistency. The user should consider 1080p or 1440p for a more stable experience.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For a 1080p display, the High preset at 108 FPS average offers the best balance of visual quality and performance. The jump from Medium (173 FPS) to High (108 FPS) is a 65 FPS drop, but the visual improvements are often worth it in a game like Inside, which has a distinctive art style. Ultra at 103 FPS is nearly identical to High, so the extra graphical fidelity is not worth the negligible FPS difference. Therefore, High settings at 1080p are recommended for the best overall experience.

For 1440p users, the Medium preset is the clear winner. At 124 FPS average, with a minimum of 106 FPS, it provides a smooth and consistent frame rate that is well above the 60 FPS threshold. High settings at 78 FPS are playable but represent a 37% drop from Medium, and the quality difference may not justify the performance hit. Ultra at 74 FPS is similar to High, so there is no advantage to pushing beyond Medium. The data shows that Medium at 1440p is the sweet spot for this GPU, offering a high frame rate without compromising too much on visual detail.

At 4K, the options are limited. Low settings at 98 FPS average are the only way to achieve a consistently smooth experience. Medium settings at 78 FPS average are still playable, but the minimum FPS of 66 suggests potential for stutter in demanding scenes. High and Ultra settings at 49 and 46 FPS, respectively, are not recommended for a comfortable experience, as they fall below the 60 FPS threshold. Given that Inside is a slower-paced puzzle platformer, 4K at Low settings is a viable option, but most users will likely prefer 1080p or 1440p with higher detail. The measured rows clearly indicate that Medium settings at 1440p or High settings at 1080p provide the best frame rate-to-fidelity ratio for this hardware combination.