Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer that scales surprisingly hard on GPU load, and the measured results for this AMD Ryzen 7 5700X + Intel Arc B370 combo show a system that can handle it well at 1080p but struggles at higher resolutions. The data indicates a clear hierarchy: the Low preset is the only setting that consistently delivers high refresh-rate play, while Ultra is effectively unplayable at 4K. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS by resolution and settings, examines the CPU and GPU roles, and provides practical settings recommendations based strictly on the provided data.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data makes one thing immediately clear: the Low preset is the only configuration that offers a consistently smooth experience across all tested resolutions. At 1920x1080, Low produces an average of 141 FPS, which is more than double the 67 FPS seen at Ultra. The gap narrows at 2560x1440, where Low hits 101 FPS versus 48 FPS on Ultra, but the relative advantage remains substantial. At 3840x2160, Low still manages 64 FPS, while Ultra drops to 30 FPS, making Low the only playable option at 4K.

The Medium preset serves as a middle ground for users with high-refresh-rate 1080p monitors. It delivers 113 FPS at 1920x1080, with a minimum of 96 FPS and a maximum of 130 FPS. These numbers suggest that Medium is viable for 144Hz displays at 1080p, though the minimum frame time dip to 96 FPS could cause occasional stutter on very fast panels. At 1440p, Medium drops to 81 FPS (min 69, max 93), which is acceptable for 60Hz monitors but not ideal for 144Hz. At 4K, Medium falls to 51 FPS, which is playable but not smooth.

High settings are a compromise that makes little sense on this hardware. At 1080p, High averages 70 FPS, which is barely above the 67 FPS of Ultra, while sacrificing visual quality for a negligible gain. At 1440p, High hits 51 FPS, identical to Medium at 4K, and at 4K it drops to 32 FPS. The data suggests that High offers no meaningful benefit over Medium for most users, and it is significantly worse than Low for competitive or fast-paced play.

Ultra is only for users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate. At 1080p, it produces 67 FPS, which is technically playable on a 60Hz display. At 1440p, it drops to 48 FPS, and at 4K, it falls to 30 FPS. Given that this is a puzzle platformer, the lower frame rates are less detrimental than in a fast-action game, but the jump from Medium to Ultra is not justified by the measured performance delta. For the best balance of visual quality and responsiveness, Medium at 1080p or 1440p is the recommended starting point, with Low as the fallback for higher refresh rates.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the primary bottleneck in this system, and its modest specifications directly explain the measured FPS pattern. The GPU features 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 render output units, with a boost clock of 2400 MHz and a base clock of 300 MHz. Its FP32 performance is rated at 6.144 TFLOPS, and it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GPU's pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s, which are the raw throughput figures that determine how quickly it can fill the screen with rendered frames.

The GPU's percentile ranking is 5th out of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Its nearest rivals include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, -0.2% delta), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, -0.5% delta), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, -0.7% delta), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, 1.4% delta). These are all older or lower-tier parts, confirming that the Arc B370 is positioned at the entry-level segment of the GPU market. The fact that it scores within 0.7% of a Radeon HD 5770, a card from 2009, highlights how limited its raw compute is.

However, the measured FPS in Inside tells a more nuanced story. At 1080p Low, the GPU pushes 141 FPS, which is respectable for its class. The issue emerges when settings are increased. The jump from Low to Medium at 1080p costs 28 FPS (141 to 113), and the jump from Medium to High costs another 43 FPS (113 to 70). This steep drop-off indicates that the GPU's shader and texture throughput are insufficient for the higher-quality effects and draw distances. The 25W TDP and system-shared memory are further constraints, as the GPU cannot rely on dedicated VRAM bandwidth and must share system memory. This is particularly problematic at higher resolutions where texture data and frame buffers grow larger.

Resolution Scaling

The measured data shows a clear and predictable pattern: FPS drops consistently as resolution increases, but the severity of the drop depends heavily on the settings preset. At Low settings, the transition from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 costs 40 FPS (141 to 101, a 28% reduction), and the transition from 1440p to 4K costs another 37 FPS (101 to 64, a 37% reduction). This indicates that even at Low settings, the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions, as the number of pixels to fill scales nearly linearly with the resolution increase.

At Medium settings, the scaling is slightly more forgiving in absolute terms but similar in relative terms. From 1080p to 1440p, the FPS drops from 113 to 81 (a 28% reduction), and from 1440p to 4K, it drops from 81 to 51 (a 37% reduction). The consistency of these percentage drops across Low and Medium suggests that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are the primary constraints, rather than any specific setting effect that scales non-linearly with resolution.

At High and Ultra settings, the resolution scaling becomes more punishing. High drops from 70 FPS at 1080p to 51 FPS at 1440p (a 27% reduction) and then to 32 FPS at 4K (a 37% reduction). Ultra drops from 67 FPS at 1080p to 48 FPS at 1440p (a 28% reduction) and then to 30 FPS at 4K (a 38% reduction). The fact that High and Ultra show nearly identical scaling percentages to Low and Medium indicates that the GPU is uniformly overwhelmed by the increased pixel count, and the higher settings do not introduce any additional resolution-dependent bottlenecks.

The takeaway from the resolution scaling data is that this combo is a 1080p-oriented system. At 1080p, even High settings produce a playable 70 FPS, and Low easily exceeds 140 FPS. At 1440p, only Low and Medium remain viable, with Medium providing 81 FPS. At 4K, only Low hits the 60 FPS threshold, and even that is marginal. Users with 1440p or 4K monitors should plan on using Low or Medium settings, or they should expect sub-60 FPS performance.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Inside at 60 FPS on a 1440p monitor?

A: Yes, but only on Low or Medium settings. The measured data shows 101 FPS on Low and 81 FPS on Medium at 2560x1440. High settings drop to 51 FPS, and Ultra drops to 48 FPS, both below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What is the best preset for a 4K display?

A: Low is the only preset that averages above 60 FPS at 3840x2160, producing 64 FPS. Medium drops to 51 FPS, High falls to 32 FPS, and Ultra is at 30 FPS. For a smoother experience at 4K, Low is the recommended setting.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU in this game?

A: The data does not indicate a CPU bottleneck. The AMD Ryzen 7 5700X has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, and it scores 6858 in 3DMark 16-thread tests and 921 in single-thread tests. The FPS scaling across resolutions and settings is consistent with GPU limitation, not CPU limitation.

Q: How does the Arc B370 compare to its closest rivals in terms of GPU benchmark scores?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Its nearest rival, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, scores 1186 (0.2% faster), while the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (1.4% slower). The differences are within 1.4%, indicating near-parity with these older parts.

Q: Is Ultra settings playable at 1080p?

A: It is playable but not ideal. The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 Ultra is 67 FPS, which is above 60 FPS but leaves no headroom for demanding scenes. Medium settings provide 113 FPS, which is a much safer choice for consistent smoothness.

Q: What does the system's overall rank in Inside suggest?

A: The combo ranks 2654 out of 2887 tested combinations, placing it in the lower 8th percentile. This indicates that most other hardware configurations deliver better performance in Inside, aligning with the GPU's low 5th percentile ranking.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700X is a strong processor that is overqualified for the GPU it is paired with in this test. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Built on the Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer) using a 7nm TSMC process, it features 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and a theoretical bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, and it has 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 5700X performs admirably. It scores 13184 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 1499 in single-core, 10779 in Geekbench multi-core and 2016 in single-core, and 6858 in 3DMark 16-thread and 921 in single-thread. Its average benchmark score is 27578, placing it in the 79th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core i5-12600K (27578, 0% delta), AMD Ryzen 5 7600X (27636, -0.2% delta), AMD Ryzen 7 5800 (27535, 0.2% delta), and Intel Core Ultra 5 125H (27507, 0.3% delta). The 5700X is effectively tied with these CPUs, all within 0.3% of each other.

For a game like Inside, which is a puzzle platformer with relatively simple physics and AI, the CPU's single-thread performance is more relevant than its multi-thread score. The 921 single-thread score in 3DMark and 1499 in Cinebench R23 single-core are more than sufficient for the game's logic. The data shows that increasing resolution from 1080p to 4K at any given setting causes a consistent FPS drop, which is a classic sign of GPU limitation. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see FPS plateau at lower resolutions, but that does not occur here.

The CPU's high multi-thread performance (13184 in Cinebench R23) also means it is not a source of frame pacing issues. The minimum FPS values recorded at Medium settings (96 FPS at 1080p, 69 FPS at 1440p, 43 FPS at 4K) are all well above the averages for the next lower resolution, indicating that the CPU can feed the GPU without stalling. In summary, the Ryzen 7 5700X provides ample headroom for this workload, and users should not expect CPU-related performance problems in Inside.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table summarizes the exact measured average FPS (with min/max where available) for each resolution and settings preset:

1920x1080

• Low: 141 FPS (avg)
• Medium: 113 FPS (min 96, max 130)
• High: 70 FPS (avg)
• Ultra: 67 FPS (avg)

2560x1440

• Low: 101 FPS (avg)
• Medium: 81 FPS (min 69, max 93)
• High: 51 FPS (avg)
• Ultra: 48 FPS (avg)

3840x2160

• Low: 64 FPS (avg)
• Medium: 51 FPS (min 43, max 59)
• High: 32 FPS (avg)
• Ultra: 30 FPS (avg)

At 1080p Low, the system delivers the highest performance of any configuration, with 141 FPS. This is the only setting combination that exceeds 140 FPS, making it ideal for high-refresh-rate gaming. Medium at 1080p is the second-best, with 113 FPS, and it is the only preset that provides both an average above 100 FPS and a minimum above 95 FPS. High and Ultra at 1080p are closely matched at 70 and 67 FPS respectively, suggesting that the High preset is not worth the visual fidelity trade-off when Ultra is nearly identical in performance.

At 1440p, Low remains the top performer at 101 FPS, which is smooth for most monitors. Medium at 81 FPS is still playable but shows a larger drop from 1080p (from 113 to 81 FPS). High at 51 FPS is a borderline experience, and Ultra at 48 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold. The data shows that 1440p users should stick to Low or Medium for a comfortable experience.

At 4K, the performance landscape is narrow. Low at 64 FPS is the only preset that meets the 60 FPS standard. Medium at 51 FPS is playable on a 60Hz screen but will show noticeable frame drops in demanding scenes, as evidenced by the 43 FPS minimum. High and Ultra at 32 and 30 FPS respectively are effectively slideshow territory for a platformer where precise timing matters. The 4K results confirm that the Arc B370 is not a 4K-capable GPU for this game, even with a powerful CPU behind it.