Inside

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

The measured FPS data for Inside reveals a pronounced scaling pattern as resolution climbs from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the frame rate drops from 258.7 FPS at 1080p to 187.5 FPS at 1440p, then to 114.1 FPS at 4K. That represents a 55.9% reduction from 1080p to 4K. At Medium settings, the drop is from 203.8 FPS to 147.6 FPS to 92.1 FPS — a 54.8% reduction across the same range. High settings follow suit: 126.1 FPS at 1080p, 90.7 FPS at 1440p, and 56.4 FPS at 4K, a 55.3% decline. Ultra settings yield 124.1 FPS, 88.4 FPS, and 55.3 FPS respectively, a 55.4% drop.

The consistency of these percentages across all four settings presets is striking. When a game loses roughly 55% of its frame rate from 1080p to 4K regardless of the graphics preset, the scaling behavior points squarely at the GPU as the primary bottleneck. The Radeon RX 6600's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 128-bit bus width — providing 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth — are being taxed increasingly as pixel count quadruples. The fact that Low settings still lose 55% of performance from 1080p to 4K indicates that even minimal graphics work becomes pixel-bound at higher resolutions. The GPU's pixel rate of 159.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 279.0 GTexel/s are fixed hardware resources that must stretch across 8.3 million pixels at 4K versus 2.1 million at 1080p.

What the data does not show is a sudden cliff or plateau. The scaling is remarkably linear, which suggests a well-balanced implementation rather than a memory capacity or bandwidth wall. The RX 6600's 224.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient to avoid catastrophic stalling, but the 128-bit interface means that each incremental resolution increase demands proportionally more memory transactions. This is a GPU-limited scenario through and through, with the CPU's 96 MB of shared L3 cache and 16 threads having little influence on the resolution scaling curve.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 brings specific hardware characteristics that shape Inside's performance profile. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory is ample for a puzzle platformer of this era — the game's art style and scene complexity do not demand massive texture budgets. The memory runs at 1750 MHz, or 14 Gbps effective, delivering that 224.0 GB/s across the 128-bit bus. For a game like Inside, which favors atmospheric lighting and subtle geometry over sprawling open worlds, this bandwidth appears sufficient, as evidenced by the absence of sudden frame rate collapses at any resolution.

The GPU's clock behavior is worth examining. The base clock is 1626 MHz, with a game clock of 2044 MHz and a boost clock of 2491 MHz. The spread between base and boost — roughly 53% — indicates that the card has substantial headroom to ramp up under load. In a game like Inside, where rendering demands vary between quiet indoor scenes and more complex outdoor environments, this boost range allows the GPU to adapt quickly. The 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs provide the raw compute foundation, with FP32 performance of 8.928 TFLOPS.

The RX 6600's percentile ranking of 69 against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 25235, places it in the mid-range tier. Its nearest rival in benchmark scores is the AMD Radeon 890M with a deltaPct of 0, meaning they are effectively tied. The RX 580 2048SP is 0.2% behind, while the RX 6700M is 0.2% ahead. This tight clustering around the 25200 score mark suggests that the RX 6600 is operating at a performance plateau where minor architectural differences matter more than raw specifications. For Inside specifically, the measured FPS data shows the GPU delivering 56.4 FPS at 4K High and 55.3 FPS at 4K Ultra — both playable, but barely above the 60 FPS threshold that many players target.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700X3D is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Vermeer. Its base clock is 3.00 GHz with a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The standout feature is the 96 MB of shared L3 cache, which is enormous for a desktop CPU and specifically designed to reduce memory latency in gaming workloads. The CPU's 7 nm process node from TSMC and 8,850 million transistors on a 74 mm² die contribute to its efficiency profile, though the 105 W TDP indicates it is not an ultra-low-power part.

For a game like Inside, the CPU's role is likely secondary to the GPU, but the data suggests it is not irrelevant. The CPU's 3DMark scores show strong multi-threading: 6764 with 16 threads and 6755 at max threads, but only 804 in single-thread. This indicates that the chip is heavily optimized for parallel workloads, which aligns with its 8-core, 16-thread configuration. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22366 and single-core score of 3157 further underscore this split. The Passmark multithread score of 26318 versus single-thread of 2970 shows the same pattern.

In the context of Inside, a puzzle platformer that likely does not demand extreme CPU parallelism, the 5700X3D's single-thread performance of 804 in 3DMark single-thread could theoretically be a limiting factor. However, the measured FPS at 1080p Low — 258.7 FPS — suggests that the CPU is keeping pace with the GPU even at high frame rates. The CPU's percentile ranking of 82 against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 24673, places it in the upper tier. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-1360P, scores 24627, a deltaPct of 0.2% behind. The AMD Ryzen 5 7600X3D is 0.3% ahead at 24605, and the Intel Core i5-11600 is 0.5% ahead. This tight grouping indicates that the 5700X3D is competitively positioned.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Ryzen 7 5700X3D and Radeon RX 6600 achieves a rank of 1355 out of 1671 tested combos in Inside. This places it in the 81st percentile of all combinations tested, meaning roughly 81% of combos rank above it. That is a surprisingly low position for a system that delivers 126.1 FPS at 1080p High and 56.4 FPS at 4K High. The ranking suggests that Inside is a game where many other hardware pairings — likely those with higher-end GPUs — achieve substantially higher frame rates, particularly at lower resolutions.

The gap between the combo's raw performance and its rank can be interpreted in several ways. First, Inside is an older game (released 2016), so modern high-end GPUs can run it at extremely high frame rates, pushing the average performance envelope upward. Second, the RX 6600's 8 GB VRAM and mid-range positioning mean that it does not dominate in a game that is not particularly demanding. The combo's rank is not a reflection of poor performance — 56.4 FPS at 4K High is objectively playable — but rather a statement about the competitive landscape of tested hardware.

The CPU and GPU each rank in the 69-82 percentile range individually, but their combination falls to the 81st percentile of combos. This slight discrepancy suggests that the pairing is not perfectly optimized for Inside. The CPU's strong multi-threading capabilities may be underutilized, while the GPU's mid-range pixel throughput becomes the binding constraint at higher resolutions. The data implies that for this specific game, a more powerful GPU would yield greater gains than a CPU upgrade, given that the CPU is already performing well above the 50th percentile.

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

Examining the measured FPS rows, the most compelling recommendation depends on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, all four presets deliver well above 60 FPS: Low at 258.7, Medium at 203.8, High at 126.1, and Ultra at 124.1. The jump from Low to Medium is substantial (203.8 vs 258.7, a 21% reduction), but the jump from High to Ultra is marginal (124.1 vs 126.1, a 1.6% difference). This suggests that Ultra is nearly identical to High in performance cost, making Ultra the obvious choice at 1080p for maximum visual fidelity without meaningful frame rate sacrifice.

At 2560x1440, the story changes. Low delivers 187.5 FPS, Medium 147.6, High 90.7, and Ultra 88.4. The gap between Medium and High is significant — a 38.6% drop — which indicates that High settings introduce rendering features that are costly at this resolution. For players prioritizing smooth motion, Medium at 147.6 FPS offers an excellent balance. For those wanting better visuals, High at 90.7 FPS remains comfortably above 60 FPS. Ultra at 88.4 FPS is only marginally worse than High, so if High is acceptable, Ultra should be too.

At 3840x2160, the options narrow. Low delivers 114.1 FPS, Medium 92.1, High 56.4, and Ultra 55.3. High and Ultra both fall below 60 FPS, which may be jarring for a game that relies on smooth animation for its atmospheric storytelling. Medium at 92.1 FPS is the clear sweet spot at 4K, offering more than 60 FPS while retaining moderate visual quality. Low at 114.1 FPS is the safe choice for those who prioritize frame rate above all else. The recommendation is to use Ultra at 1080p, Medium at 1440p and 4K, with High as a fallback at 1440p if visual fidelity is paramount.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Inside?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 258.7 at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: Can this combo maintain 60 FPS at 4K in Inside?

A: At 4K, Low settings deliver 114.1 FPS and Medium delivers 92.1 FPS, both above 60. High and Ultra fall short at 56.4 FPS and 55.3 FPS respectively.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival in benchmark scores?

A: The Ryzen 7 5700X3D has an average benchmark score of 24673, which is 0.2% higher than the Intel Core i7-1360P at 24627 and 0.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X3D at 24605.

Q: What is the GPU's memory bandwidth and how does it affect 4K performance?

A: The RX 6600 has 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth from 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The 4K High result of 56.4 FPS suggests this bandwidth is adequate but not excessive.

Q: How many combos rank above this pairing in Inside?

A: This combo ranks 1355 out of 1671 tested combos, meaning 316 combos rank below it and 1354 rank above it.

Q: What is the FPS difference between High and Ultra at 1080p?

A: High delivers 126.1 FPS while Ultra delivers 124.1 FPS, a difference of only 2 FPS, making Ultra essentially free at this resolution.

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

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low settings produce 258.7 FPS, Medium settings produce 203.8 FPS, High settings produce 126.1 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 124.1 FPS. The progression from Low to Medium is a 21.2% drop, from Medium to High is a 38.1% drop, and from High to Ultra is a 1.6% drop. This reveals that the High preset is where most of the graphical features are enabled, while Ultra adds minimal additional load.

At 2560x1440, the measured values are: Low at 187.5 FPS, Medium at 147.6 FPS, High at 90.7 FPS, and Ultra at 88.4 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 21.3%, from Medium to High is 38.6%, and from High to Ultra is 2.5%. The pattern mirrors 1080p almost exactly, confirming that the relative cost of each preset is resolution-independent. The absolute values are lower by roughly 27% across the board compared to 1080p, which aligns with the pixel count increase of 78% from 1080p to 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the measured values are: Low at 114.1 FPS, Medium at 92.1 FPS, High at 56.4 FPS, and Ultra at 55.3 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 19.3%, from Medium to High is 38.8%, and from High to Ultra is 2.0%. The consistency of these percentage drops across all three resolutions is remarkable — each preset costs roughly the same fraction of performance regardless of resolution. This indicates that Inside's settings presets scale linearly with pixel count, and that the RX 6600's performance curve is predictable.

The highest measured frame rate in the entire dataset is 258.7 FPS at 1080p Low, while the lowest is 55.3 FPS at 4K Ultra. The range between these extremes — 203.4 FPS — demonstrates the wide performance envelope of this hardware combination. The data also shows that the gap between High and Ultra remains consistently small (1.6-2.5%) across all resolutions, while the gap between Medium and High is consistently large (38.1-38.8%). This suggests that the High preset is the point of diminishing returns for visual quality versus performance cost, and that players should either choose Medium for higher frame rates or Ultra for maximum quality with negligible additional cost over High.