Inside

Inside is a lightweight puzzle platformer from 2016, and with the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090, the data shows a system that utterly demolishes this title’s requirements. The measured frame rates are exceptionally high across all settings and resolutions, indicating that the game is never a bottleneck for this hardware. The primary takeaway from the benchmark results is that this configuration delivers a flawless, high-refresh-rate experience at any resolution, with the only meaningful trade-offs appearing between the highest visual presets and the pursuit of maximum frame rates.

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 (Raphael) architecture, built on a 5 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, which is more than sufficient for a title like Inside. The game’s side-scrolling perspective and limited on-screen physics interactions mean it rarely stresses multiple threads, but the processor’s strong single-core performance is still a key asset. In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 3,072 points in the single-core test and 21,765 points in the multi-core test, showing a robust capability that ensures no frame pacing issues arise from CPU limitations.

The data confirms that the CPU is not the limiting component in this benchmark scenario. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 337 FPS, a figure that is heavily dependent on the CPU’s ability to feed the GPU with draw calls. The Ryzen 5 7400F’s 32 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support (with 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth) provide ample headroom for the game’s data streaming needs. The processor’s PassMark single-thread score of 3,689 further underscores its capability to handle the game's logic without becoming a bottleneck, even when the frame rate is pushed to such extreme levels.

Benchmark comparisons place the Ryzen 5 7400F in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32,750. Its nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i5-14600T and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H, show delta percentages of 0.1% and -0.2% respectively, indicating that this chip is performance-neutral in a head-to-head comparison. For Inside, this means the processor’s precise core architecture is irrelevant to the final frame rates; instead, it provides a stable foundation that allows the GPU to operate at its full potential. The 65 W TDP and active production status of the chip also suggest it runs cool and consistently, avoiding any thermal throttling that could subtly affect long play sessions.

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

The measured data provides clear guidance on the optimal settings for this hardware, and the verdict is that Ultra is the best choice for the vast majority of users. At 4K, the Ultra preset delivers an average of 143 FPS, which is well above the threshold for a smooth experience on high-refresh-rate displays. The High preset at 4K offers a slight improvement at 150 FPS, but the difference is marginal, making Ultra the superior choice for visual fidelity without sacrificing playability. The gap between presets narrows further at lower resolutions, with Ultra at 1440p achieving 228 FPS and High at 255 FPS at 1080p, reinforcing that the GPU has ample headroom to handle the most demanding settings.

For those seeking the absolute maximum frame rates, the Low preset at 1080p reaches 337 FPS, which is a performance gain of about 32% over the Ultra preset at the same resolution. However, given the game’s artistic style and atmospheric lighting, the visual downgrade is significant. The Medium preset at 1080p offers a balanced middle ground at 311 FPS, but it still falls short of the crispness and detail provided by High or Ultra. The data shows that the performance cost of moving from Medium to High at 1080p is only 52 FPS (from 311 to 259), while the visual improvement is substantial, making High a more sensible compromise than Medium.

At 4K, the recommendation is unequivocal: use the Ultra preset. The 143 FPS average is still exceptionally high, and the game’s slower pace means that even the occasional frame drop would be imperceptible. The High preset at 4K only adds 7 FPS over Ultra, which is not worth the loss of graphical effects. The only reason to drop to Medium or Low would be for competitive play on a 360 Hz monitor, where the 258 FPS at Low and 239 FPS at Medium offer a tangible advantage. Otherwise, the measured rows indicate that Ultra provides the best experience, with no meaningful downside in terms of frame rate.

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

The frame rate scaling across resolutions reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario, but one where the GPU is so powerful that even 4K remains trivial. From 1080p to 1440p, the average FPS at High settings drops from 259 to 232, a reduction of 10.4%. Moving from 1440p to 4K, the same preset falls from 232 to 150 FPS, a more significant drop of 35.3%. This pattern indicates that as pixel count increases, the workload shifts heavily onto the RTX 5090’s rendering pipeline, but the GPU is capable of handling it with ease. The 4K result at High settings is still nearly 2.5 times higher than the 60 FPS target, proving that the limiting component is not the hardware but the display’s refresh rate.

The data also shows that the CPU’s role diminishes as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 82 FPS (337 vs. 255), which reflects the CPU’s ability to push frames when the GPU is underutilized. At 4K, the same difference is only 115 FPS (258 vs. 143), but the absolute numbers are still high enough that the CPU is never the primary constraint. The scaling from 1080p Low to 4K Low shows a drop from 337 to 258 FPS, a 23.4% reduction, which is smaller than the 41.2% reduction seen when moving from 1080p High to 4K High. This suggests that at lower settings, the CPU begins to play a more significant role, but it is still not a bottleneck given the processor’s strong single-core benchmark scores.

The takeaway from the resolution scaling analysis is that this system is designed for 4K gaming. The RTX 5090’s 32 GB of GDDR7 memory and 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth ensure that texture streaming and memory access are never a concern, even at 4K Ultra. The fact that the 4K Ultra average of 143 FPS is only slightly lower than the 1440p Ultra average of 228 FPS indicates that the GPU’s raw compute power is the primary driver, and the CPU’s 6 cores and 12 threads are more than enough to keep up. For a game like Inside, which has minimal demanding effects, the scaling is exceptionally smooth, and users can expect a consistent experience regardless of their display’s native resolution.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achievable with this hardware in Inside?

A: The highest measured average frame rate is 337 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset.

Q: Is the 4K Ultra preset playable with the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F and RTX 5090?

A: Yes, the 4K Ultra preset achieves an average of 143 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS standard for smooth gameplay, making it fully playable.

Q: How much performance is gained by dropping from High to Low settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 302 FPS, which is 70 FPS higher than the High preset’s 232 FPS average, representing a 30.2% performance increase.

Q: Does the RTX 5090’s 32 GB VRAM provide any advantage in this game?

A: The 32 GB of GDDR7 memory is far more than Inside requires, but it ensures that there is no memory-related stuttering or texture pop-in, even at 4K Ultra.

Q: What is the minimum frame rate recorded for the Medium preset at 1080p?

A: The minimum FPS for the Medium preset at 1920x1080 is 264 FPS, with a maximum of 357 FPS and an average of 311 FPS.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 7400F compare to its nearest rival in terms of average benchmark score?

A: The Ryzen 5 7400F has an average benchmark score of 32,750, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i5-14600T and 0.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is the dominant component in this configuration, and its specifications make it overkill for Inside. The GPU is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with a 5 nm process, featuring 21,760 shading units and 680 texture mapping units. Its boost clock of 2407 MHz allows it to deliver a staggering 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is the primary reason for the exceptionally high frame rates observed in the measured data. The GPU’s 176 ROPs and 423.6 GPixel/s pixel rate ensure that even at 4K, the pixel fill rate is never a limiting factor.

The RTX 5090’s memory subsystem is equally impressive, with 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, providing 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth. While Inside is a game from 2016 that likely uses less than 2 GB of VRAM, the sheer bandwidth ensures that the GPU can quickly access textures and shaders, eliminating any potential for memory-related performance dips. The GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 39,650 and its 92nd percentile ranking among all GPUs confirm its top-tier status. Its nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB and the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT, show delta percentages of 0.3% and 1.1%, which are negligible in real-world gaming.

In the context of Inside, the RTX 5090’s role is to render the game’s simple 2.5D environments with maximum quality and minimal effort. The data shows that the GPU is so powerful that the frame rate is often limited by the CPU’s ability to issue draw calls, particularly at lower resolutions. The GPU’s support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 ensures compatibility with modern rendering APIs, but the game’s age means it likely runs on older APIs, which the GPU handles with ease. The 575 W TDP and dual-slot design are irrelevant to performance here, but they indicate that the GPU is a high-end part that will not break a sweat in this title.

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

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across all combinations of resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 337 FPS, the Medium preset averages 311 FPS with a minimum of 264 and maximum of 357, the High preset averages 259 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 255 FPS. This shows a clear progression where each step up in settings costs roughly 20-50 FPS, but even the most demanding preset at 1080p remains above 250 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves 302 FPS, the Medium preset averages 278 FPS with a minimum of 237 and maximum of 320, the High preset averages 232 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 228 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across presets, with the Low preset losing 35 FPS and the Ultra preset losing 27 FPS. At 3840x2160, the Low preset still manages 258 FPS, the Medium preset averages 239 FPS with a minimum of 203 and maximum of 274, the High preset averages 150 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 143 FPS. The 4K results show the most significant scaling, with the High preset dropping 82 FPS from 1440p, but the absolute numbers remain exceptionally high.

The data reveals that the Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values, providing insight into frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the frame range is 264-357 FPS, a variance of 93 FPS, which indicates that the system can experience some fluctuation but remains well above any playability threshold. At 1440p Medium, the range is 237-320 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it is 203-274 FPS, showing that the variance scales with resolution but is still within acceptable bounds. The overall pattern is that this hardware configuration is capable of running Inside at maximum settings with frame rates that far exceed the refresh rate of most monitors, making it an ideal setup for this title.