Inside

The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 produces a highly variable experience in Inside, a 2016 puzzle platformer. The benchmark data reveals a system where the GPU is the clear performance ceiling, particularly at higher resolutions and quality presets. This analysis breaks down the measured frame rates, the scaling behavior, and how this specific combination of a modern 6-core processor and an older 12 nm graphics card performs in this title.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and directly attributable to the graphics card. At the Low preset, the measured average frame rate falls from 133.6 FPS at 1920x1080 to 95 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 28.9%. Moving to 3840x2160, the average drops further to 58.5 FPS, which is 56.2% lower than the 1080p result. This scaling pattern indicates that even at the lowest settings, the GTX 1650 is the limiting component; the CPU is not able to offset the GPU's workload at higher pixel counts.

The scaling becomes even more pronounced when the quality preset is increased. At the High setting, the average frame rate goes from 69.2 FPS at 1080p to 45.9 FPS at 1440p, a 33.7% drop. At 4K High, the average falls to 29.4 FPS, which is 57.5% below the 1080p figure. This consistent ~55-57% performance loss from 1080p to 4K across presets confirms that the GTX 1650's rendering throughput, not the Ryzen 5 9600X's processing power, dictates the experience. The data suggests that the CPU has ample headroom, as the frame rate collapses in lockstep with the GPU's fill-rate and shading responsibilities.

Settings Recommendations

For a smooth experience at 1920x1080, the Medium preset is the optimal choice. The data shows an average of 109 FPS at this setting, which is a substantial improvement over the High preset's 69.2 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium is also significant, going from 133.6 FPS to 109 FPS, a 22.6% reduction in speed for what is likely a noticeable improvement in visual fidelity. The Ultra preset at 1080p yields 63.7 FPS, which is playable but sacrifices 41.6% of the frame rate compared to Medium for diminishing returns in quality.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset remains the only viable option for high refresh rates, delivering 95 FPS. The Medium preset at 77.9 FPS is still smooth for most displays, but the High preset at 45.9 FPS and Ultra at 45 FPS fall below the 60 FPS threshold. For 4K, the data is clear: the Low preset is the only setting that achieves a playable average of 58.5 FPS. The Medium preset at 50.7 FPS is marginal, while High (29.4 FPS) and Ultra (31 FPS) are not suitable for a fluid experience. The best experience per the measured rows is a balance between the 109 FPS Medium preset at 1080p and the 95 FPS Low preset at 1440p, depending on the user's resolution target.

How This Combo Ranks

The data places this combination at rank 1610 out of 1671 tested combos in Inside. This rank, in the bottom 4% of all tested systems, is a direct consequence of the GPU's position in the market. The GTX 1650 has a percentile rank of 43 against all GPUs, meaning it performs better than 43% of the database's graphics cards. This is a low-end result, and it drags the overall combo rank down despite the CPU's strength.

The CPU itself is not the bottleneck. The Ryzen 5 9600X has a percentile rank of 85 against all CPUs, indicating top-tier performance. This is a stark contrast to the GPU's rank. The benchmark results show a system with a high-end processor and a low-end graphics card, leading to a severe imbalance. While the CPU can feed frames rapidly, the GTX 1650 cannot render them fast enough, especially at higher resolutions. This combo's rank reflects how a weak GPU can neutralize a powerful CPU in a graphics-intensive task, even in a game as modest as Inside.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete set of measured average frame rates is as follows:

• 1920x1080: Low 133.6 FPS, Medium 109 FPS, High 69.2 FPS, Ultra 63.7 FPS
• 2560x1440: Low 95 FPS, Medium 77.9 FPS, High 45.9 FPS, Ultra 45 FPS
• 3840x2160: Low 58.5 FPS, Medium 50.7 FPS, High 29.4 FPS, Ultra 31 FPS

The data shows a clear and consistent progression: as resolution increases, the frame rate drops for every preset. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 69.9 FPS, a 52.3% reduction. At 1440p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 50 FPS, a 52.6% reduction. At 4K, the difference is 27.5 FPS, a 47% reduction. This consistency suggests that the performance scaling is linear with the pixel count, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario.

The most significant performance cliff is between Medium and High at all resolutions. At 1080p, the drop is 39.8 FPS; at 1440p, it is 32 FPS; and at 4K, it is 21.3 FPS. This indicates that the High preset introduces a significant rendering cost on the GTX 1650, likely related to specific shader effects or texture filtering that disproportionately impacts the 12 nm Turing chip. The Ultra preset, while visually distinct, does not incur a similar penalty, as the drop from High to Ultra is only 5.5 FPS at 1080p and 1.6 FPS at 4K.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the defining component in this pairing. Its benchmark data shows an average score of 8713, with a percentile rank of 43. It sits within 0.5% of rivals like the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100, but it is also 0.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile. This indicates that the GTX 1650 is at the bottom of a performance tier, and its results in Inside reflect that.

The GPU's 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with a 128.1 GB/s bandwidth is a critical constraint. In a 2016 title, this memory capacity is sufficient for the game's assets, but the bandwidth is not. The boost clock of 1665 MHz and a base clock of 1485 MHz are relatively low for the Turing architecture, and the 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is modest. The data shows that the GPU can handle low resolutions and settings, but it hits a wall when the pixel count and shader complexity increase. The 75 W TDP and the lack of power connectors suggest a card designed for low power consumption, not high performance. The measured frame rates in Inside are a direct reflection of this hardware's capabilities, with the GPU acting as the primary limiter in 100% of the tested configurations.