Inside

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Arc B390 combination delivers a playable but firmly entry-level experience in Inside, a 2016 puzzle platformer that proves more demanding on the GPU than its minimalist aesthetic suggests. The data shows a system that can hit high refresh rates at 1080p with reduced settings, but struggles to maintain smooth frame pacing at 4K Ultra, placing this pair in the bottom percentile of all tested hardware combinations.

Resolution Scaling

The measured frames per second reveal a steep performance cliff as resolution increases, a classic indicator of a GPU-bound workload. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces 156 FPS average, which drops to 112 FPS at 2560x1440 and further to 70 FPS at 3840x2160. That represents a 55% reduction in frame rate from 1080p to 4K at Low settings, a substantial loss that points squarely at the graphics processor struggling with pixel throughput.

The scaling pattern becomes even more telling at higher quality presets. With High settings, the average FPS falls from 78 at 1080p to 56 at 1440p and then to 35 at 4K — a 55% loss from the lowest to highest resolution, mirroring the Low preset's behavior. At Ultra settings, the numbers compress dramatically: 74 FPS at 1080p, 53 FPS at 1440p, and just 34 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1080p and 4K at Ultra is 54%, consistent with the other presets, suggesting the rendering pipeline is uniformly limited by the GPU's fill rate and shading capacity rather than any specific setting.

What the scaling data indicates is that the CPU is not the bottleneck at any resolution. The Ryzen 5 8400F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, has ample headroom to feed frames even at 1080p Low where the GPU is producing 156 FPS. If the processor were the limiting factor, we would expect to see diminishing returns as resolution drops, but the linear decline in FPS with increasing pixel count confirms the Intel Arc B390 is the constraining component across all tested configurations.

The most dramatic single-step drop occurs moving from 1440p Medium at 90 FPS to 4K Medium at 56 FPS, a 38% reduction. This steep cliff at 4K Medium suggests the GPU's memory subsystem — System Shared, with bandwidth dependent on the host system — becomes a critical liability at higher resolutions where texture and buffer demands exceed available bandwidth. The 4K Ultra result of 34 FPS sits just above the threshold of perceived smoothness, and the 4K High result of 35 FPS is virtually identical, indicating that beyond Medium, the GPU has hit a hard architectural wall.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the decisive factor in this pairing, and the benchmark data shows why. This integrated graphics solution, based on the Xe3-LPG architecture and Panther Lake chip, operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. Its 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units produce a pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 7.680 TFLOPS. These specifications, while modest by discrete GPU standards, are consistent with the measured frame rates in Inside.

The GPU's memory configuration is System Shared, meaning it draws from the host's DDR5 memory pool over a dual-channel bus. The 83.2 GB/s memory bandwidth of the Ryzen 5 8400F's memory controller becomes the effective ceiling for graphics data transfers. This explains why the 4K results collapse so precipitously: at 3840x2160, the frame buffer demands far exceed what a shared memory architecture can efficiently deliver, especially when combined with the CPU's own memory traffic.

In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark, the Arc B390 scores 1482, placing it at the 9th percentile of all GPUs. This is a very low standing, and the nearest rivals in the database underscore the point. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463 (1.3% lower), the GeForce 800M scores 1460 (1.5% lower), the GT 625 OEM scores 1446 (2.5% lower), and the GT 710 scores 1443 (2.7% lower). All of these are legacy entry-level parts, confirming that the Arc B390 sits at the very bottom of the performance hierarchy.

The measured FPS in Inside align with this low standing. At 1080p Medium, the combo achieves 125 FPS average with a minimum of 106 FPS and maximum of 144 FPS. The minimum frame rate is particularly informative — it shows that even at a moderate preset, the GPU occasionally drops below the 120 FPS mark, likely during scenes with complex lighting or particle effects. At 1440p Medium, the average falls to 90 FPS with a minimum of 76 FPS, and at 4K Medium, the average is 56 FPS with a minimum of 48 FPS. These minimums are the real story: they represent the worst-case rendering scenarios, and at 4K Medium, the 48 FPS minimum is barely above console-level smoothness.

The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility are relevant for Inside, which was released in 2016 and uses DirectX 11 as its primary API. The Arc B390's driver overhead on older APIs could partially explain why the 4K results are so poor, as the hardware must translate legacy draw calls through a modern architecture without native support optimization.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F provides the computational foundation for this combo, and its role in Inside is largely supportive rather than performance-defining. This 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 8000 series uses the Zen 4 architecture on the Phoenix codename, built on TSMC's 4 nm process with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. It operates at a base clock of 4.20 GHz and boost clock of 4.70 GHz, with a 65 W TDP — a power-efficient design that leaves thermal headroom for sustained operation.

The CPU's cache hierarchy consists of 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3 cache. For a game like Inside, which primarily involves physics calculations, collision detection, and game logic rather than massive data streaming, this cache configuration is more than sufficient. The 16 MB L3 cache can hold the working set of the game's simulation state, minimizing memory fetches that would otherwise introduce latency.

In synthetic benchmarks, the Ryzen 5 8400F demonstrates solid multi-threaded capability. Cinebench R23 multicore scores 20851, while single-core scores 2943. The 3DMark tests show a scaling pattern from 951 in single-thread to 6165 in max-threads, indicating good thread utilization efficiency. PassMark scores reinforce this: multithread at 24389, single-thread at 3685, and physics at 1332. The processor's 77th percentile standing among all CPUs confirms it is a capable mid-range part, though not a high-end performer.

The nearest rivals in the database show how closely matched this CPU is to its immediate competitors. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F scores 24964 on average, just 0.2% higher than the 8400F's 25005. The Intel Core i7-11850H scores 24935 (0.3% higher), the i7-13620H scores 24911 (0.4% higher), and the AMD EPYC 9474F scores 25103 (0.4% lower). These minuscule deltas indicate that the 8400F performs almost identically to a range of other processors, and none of them would meaningfully change the Inside results given the GPU's dominance as the bottleneck.

In Inside, the CPU's role is to maintain a consistent frame delivery rate, particularly at lower resolutions where the GPU can produce high FPS. At 1080p Low, the 156 FPS average requires the CPU to issue draw calls and update game state at a rate exceeding 150 times per second. The Ryzen 5 8400F's single-thread performance, evidenced by the 951 3DMark single-thread score and 2943 Cinebench R23 single-core score, is sufficient for this task. The 4.70 GHz boost clock ensures that the primary game thread can execute quickly, while the additional cores handle background tasks like audio and streaming.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Arc B390 ranks 3296 out of 3716 tested combos in Inside, placing it in the 11th percentile of all configurations. This is a very low ranking, consistent with the GPU's 9th percentile standing and the CPU's 77th percentile standing. The ranking suggests that while the CPU is a competent mid-range part, the GPU drags the overall experience down to near the bottom of the database.

This rank of 3296 out of 3716 means that only 420 tested combinations perform worse, and the vast majority of systems — including those with older discrete GPUs or even some integrated graphics — deliver better frame rates in Inside. The 4K Ultra result of 34 FPS and 4K High result of 35 FPS are both below the 60 FPS target that most gamers consider the minimum for a smooth experience, and even 4K Medium at 56 FPS falls short.

The ranking also reflects the GPU's position relative to its nearest rivals. The Arc B390's 1482 Steel Nomad score is only 1.3% higher than the GT 520MX, a GPU released over a decade ago. This means the combo's performance in Inside is comparable to what a budget laptop from 2011 might achieve, despite the modern CPU. The CPU's high percentile ranking does not compensate for the GPU's limitations — in a GPU-bound title like Inside, the processor's strength is largely irrelevant to the final frame rate.

When compared to other combos in the database, the 8400F + Arc B390 pairing exhibits a characteristic profile: strong CPU-bound benchmarks that suggest potential, but GPU-bound gaming results that fail to materialize that potential. The 3296 rank is a clear signal that this configuration is suited for basic computing tasks, not for gaming at acceptable quality levels.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy of playable configurations, and the optimal choice depends heavily on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 125 FPS average with a 106 FPS minimum, which is excellent for a puzzle platformer that benefits from smooth animation. The Low preset at 156 FPS is even smoother but offers diminishing visual returns, while High at 78 FPS and Ultra at 74 FPS are acceptable but represent a significant frame rate penalty for marginal visual improvements.

For 2560x1440 users, the Medium preset is the clear sweet spot. The 90 FPS average with a 76 FPS minimum provides a responsive experience that remains above the 60 FPS threshold throughout. Low at 112 FPS is viable for competitive play, but High at 56 FPS and Ultra at 53 FPS both dip below 60 FPS, which can introduce perceptible stutter in a game that relies on precise timing for its puzzle mechanics.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more constrained. The Medium preset at 56 FPS average with a 48 FPS minimum is technically playable but marginal, as the minimum frame rate may cause noticeable hitches during complex scenes. Low at 70 FPS is the only preset that maintains a comfortable margin above 60 FPS, though it sacrifices visual fidelity. High at 35 FPS and Ultra at 34 FPS are not recommended, as they fall well below the threshold for smooth gameplay.

The best overall experience, balancing visual quality and performance, is the Medium preset at 1920x1080. This configuration achieves 125 FPS average and 106 FPS minimum, which is more than sufficient for a 60 Hz or 120 Hz display, and the Medium settings in Inside retain most of the game's atmospheric lighting and shadow effects that are central to its moody presentation. For 1440p users, Medium at 90 FPS is the recommended compromise, while 4K users should accept Low at 70 FPS if native resolution is a priority.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full range of settings produces a wide spread of results. Low settings yield 156 FPS average, the highest measured in the entire dataset. Medium settings produce 125 FPS average with a 106 FPS minimum and 144 FPS maximum, showing a tight distribution that indicates consistent frame delivery. High settings drop to 78 FPS average, a 38% reduction from Medium, suggesting that the High preset enables effects that disproportionately tax the GPU. Ultra settings yield 74 FPS average, only 5% lower than High, indicating diminishing returns from the highest preset.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts. Low settings produce 112 FPS average, a 28% reduction from 1080p Low. Medium settings yield 90 FPS average with a 76 FPS minimum and 103 FPS maximum, maintaining a playable experience with occasional dips below the 90 FPS average. High settings drop to 56 FPS average, a 38% reduction from Medium, and Ultra settings yield 53 FPS average, again showing a small gap between High and Ultra.

At 3840x2160, the results are compressed and uniformly low. Low settings produce 70 FPS average, which is the only 4K preset that remains above the 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings yield 56 FPS average with a 48 FPS minimum and 65 FPS maximum, showing significant frame pacing issues with a 17 FPS gap between minimum and maximum. High settings drop to 35 FPS average, and Ultra settings produce 34 FPS average, with both presets falling below the 40 FPS mark that is generally considered the minimum for interactive gameplay.

The 4K Medium result, with its 48 FPS minimum, is particularly notable because it demonstrates the GPU's inability to maintain consistent performance under load. The 65 FPS maximum suggests that simple scenes can run at acceptable rates, but complex scenes with multiple light sources or physics interactions cause the frame rate to collapse. This variance is more disruptive to the gameplay experience than a uniformly low frame rate, as it creates unpredictable timing that undermines the precision required by Inside's puzzle mechanics.