Inside

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700X paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT delivers exceptionally high frame rates in Inside, a Puzzle Platformer from 2016. The measured data shows that this combination is vastly overqualified for the game's demands, producing triple-digit average FPS at every resolution and settings preset tested. The results indicate a system where the GPU is the primary performance driver at higher resolutions, while the CPU's strong multi-threaded capabilities ensure no bottleneck occurs at lower settings.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700X is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer codename) on a 7 nm TSMC process. It operates with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and a shared 32 MB L3 cache. The processor supports DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, and its PCIe Gen 4 interface provides 20 lanes.

In the context of Inside, this CPU's specifications are far beyond the requirements of a 2D puzzle platformer. The benchmark results show the Ryzen 7 5700X achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22620 and a single-core score of 3193. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 6858 and 2-thread score of 1821 indicate strong scaling across both heavily threaded and lightly threaded workloads. The Geekbench multi-core score of 9720 and single-core score of 2148 further confirm its capability.

The data reveals that even at the lowest settings and resolution (1080p Low), the combination reaches 312 FPS average. This suggests the CPU is not a limiting factor—the frame rates are so high that the game's physics and logic threads are easily handled by the 8-core/16-thread configuration. Compared to its nearest rivals, the Ryzen 7 5700X has an average benchmark score of 26214, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i9-11900KF (26196) and 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 5500GT (26161). It trails the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850U by 0.2% (26262) and the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X by 0.2% (26272). The CPU's 83rd percentile ranking among all tested CPUs means it sits comfortably in the upper tier, though Inside does not appear to stress it meaningfully.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is a high-end graphics card built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with the Navi 48 chip, fabricated on a 4 nm TSMC process. It features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU has 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 128 render output units, along with 64 ray tracing cores. Its clock speeds are specified as a base of 1660 MHz, a boost of 2970 MHz, and a game clock of 2400 MHz, with memory running at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective).

For Inside, the GPU's massive memory capacity and bandwidth are largely irrelevant since the game's art style is minimalist. However, the raw compute power matters. The RX 9070 XT delivers 48.66 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 97.32 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1), with a pixel rate of 380.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 760.3 GTexel/s. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, it scores 7260, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 184026.

The GPU's benchmark percentile is 82nd among all tested GPUs, with an average score of 39647. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 575 (39703, -0.1%), NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile (39568, 0.2%), AMD Radeon Pro 575X (39836, -0.5%), and AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 (39879, -0.6%). Interestingly, the RX 9070 XT's average score is lower than two of these rivals, but in Inside the measured FPS is exceptional. This indicates that the game benefits more from the GPU's architectural efficiencies than from raw benchmark numbers. The 16 GB VRAM provides no practical advantage here, as Inside's textures are simple, but the high clock speeds and compute throughput ensure the frame rates stay consistently high.

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

The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern of performance scaling across resolutions. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 312. Moving to 1440p Low, it drops to 279.8, and at 4K Low, it falls to 208.9. This represents a 10.3% decrease from 1080p to 1440p and a 25.3% decrease from 1440p to 4K. The relative drops are more pronounced at higher settings.

For High settings, the progression is 226.1 FPS at 1080p, 163.8 FPS at 1440p, and 105.8 FPS at 4K. This is a 27.6% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 35.4% drop from 1440p to 4K. The Medium preset shows 287 FPS at 1080p, 256.9 FPS at 1440p, and 166 FPS at 4K—a 10.5% drop to 1440p and a 35.4% drop to 4K. Ultra settings yield 219.6 FPS at 1080p, 155.5 FPS at 1440p, and 98.1 FPS at 4K, with drops of 29.2% and 36.9% respectively.

The pattern reveals that the GPU becomes the limiting component as resolution increases. At 1080p, the frame rates are so high (over 300 FPS on Low) that the CPU's ability to feed the GPU frames is the theoretical ceiling, but the CPU's strong single-thread score of 3193 in Cinebench R23 prevents any visible bottleneck. At 4K, the frame rates drop significantly across all settings, indicating the GPU's pixel fill rate and shading throughput are the determining factors. The RX 9070 XT's 380.2 GPixel/s pixel rate is sufficient to maintain 208.9 FPS at 4K Low, but the Ultra preset at 98.1 FPS shows that the added shading complexity taxes the GPU more heavily. The data suggests that for a 60 Hz 4K display, even Ultra settings are achievable, but for high refresh rate 4K gaming, settings need to be lowered.

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

Examining the measured rows, the Medium preset provides the most balanced experience across all resolutions. At 1080p, Medium delivers 287 FPS, which is only 8% lower than Low's 312 FPS but substantially higher than High's 226.1 FPS and Ultra's 219.6 FPS. The jump from Medium to High at 1080p costs 21.2% of the frame rate (from 287 to 226.1), while the visual difference in a game like Inside is minimal given its monochromatic art style.

At 1440p, Medium achieves 256.9 FPS, which is 8.2% lower than Low (279.8) but 36.1% higher than High (163.8) and 39.5% higher than Ultra (155.5). The 4K results show Medium at 166 FPS, which is 20.5% lower than Low (208.9) but 36.1% higher than High (105.8) and 40.9% higher than Ultra (98.1). The data indicates that Medium is the sweet spot—it maintains excellent frame rates while presumably offering better visual quality than Low.

For users with high refresh rate monitors, the Ultra preset at 1080p still provides 219.6 FPS, which exceeds 144 Hz displays. However, the Medium preset's 287 FPS at 1080p is more future-proof and provides headroom for any scene complexity spikes. At 4K, the Ultra preset's 98.1 FPS is only slightly below a 100 FPS target, making it viable for 4K 60 Hz displays, but Medium's 166 FPS is better suited for 4K 120 Hz panels. The recommendation based on the data is to select Medium for the best balance of frame rate and visual fidelity, with Ultra reserved for users who prioritize graphics quality at 1080p or 1440p.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 5700X and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT ranks 451st out of 1671 tested combos for Inside. This places it in the top 27% of all tested configurations. The rank is notably lower than what the raw hardware specifications might suggest, given that the average FPS across all measured settings is extremely high. The combo's position in the 451st spot indicates that many other CPU-GPU pairings achieve similar or higher frame rates in this specific game.

The reason for this ranking likely relates to the fact that Inside is a lightweight title where even mid-range hardware can produce high frame rates. The 83rd percentile CPU and 82nd percentile GPU are overkill, but the ranking is relative to all combos—many cheaper or older components can also hit high FPS, compressing the performance curve. The data shows that the combo's weakest performance is at 4K Ultra (98.1 FPS), which is still playable, but other combos with faster GPUs may push beyond 100 FPS there. Conversely, at 1080p Low (312 FPS), the combo is likely near the top of the distribution, but the ranking aggregates all settings and resolutions.

The combo's average benchmark scores are 26214 for the CPU and 39647 for the GPU, which are both in the upper percentiles. The deltaPct values against nearest rivals are all within ±0.6%, showing that the individual components are closely matched to their peers. However, the game's low system requirements mean that the combo rank of 451 is more reflective of the CPU's single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core 3193) and the GPU's ability to maintain high clocks under load, rather than the absolute compute power.

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

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS across all settings is remarkably consistent in its high magnitude. The Low preset achieves 312 FPS, Medium reaches 287 FPS, High delivers 226.1 FPS, and Ultra produces 219.6 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 92.4 FPS, with the largest single drop occurring between Medium and High (60.9 FPS). This suggests that the High preset introduces a significant rendering cost compared to Medium, possibly related to shadow quality or post-processing effects.

For 2560x1440, the results show 279.8 FPS on Low, 256.9 FPS on Medium, 163.8 FPS on High, and 155.5 FPS on Ultra. The gap between Low and Medium narrows to 22.9 FPS, indicating that the GPU is beginning to feel the resolution increase. The drop from Medium to High is 93.1 FPS, which is proportionally larger than at 1080p. The Ultra preset is only 8.3 FPS slower than High, suggesting that at 1440p, the difference between High and Ultra is minimal in terms of performance cost.

At 3840x2160, the 4K results demonstrate the GPU's limits. Low produces 208.9 FPS, Medium drops to 166 FPS, High yields 105.8 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 98.1 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 42.9 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is 60.2 FPS. The High to Ultra difference is only 7.7 FPS, which mirrors the 1440p pattern. The data shows that at 4K, the GPU's compute resources are the primary constraint—the 48.66 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is taxed by the higher pixel count, but the 16 GB VRAM does not become a limiting factor. The 4K Ultra result of 98.1 FPS is the only measured scenario below 100 FPS, but it remains playable for most users.