Inside

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 combination delivers an exceptional Inside experience across all tested presets and resolutions. Measured data shows maximum average frame rates as high as 323 fps at 1080p Low and a minimum of 106 fps at 4K Ultra. With the CPU providing 8 cores / 16 threads clocking from 3.80 GHz base to 4.80 GHz boost, and the GPU built on Blackwell with 12GB of GDDR7 memory and a 2325 MHz base / 2512 MHz boost, this system has no trouble crushing a lightweight puzzle-plaform title like Inside. Both components were launched at their respective MSRPs: the CPU at $249 and the GPU at $549 USD.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows show that every preset yields at least 106 fps average, which is far above what a strictly playable frame rate would demand. However, the differences between presets are substantial, so choosing the right one hinges on panel refresh rate and preference for visual quality.

At 1080p, High already reaches 245 fps average, while Ultra sits at 234 fps and Low at 323 fps. The gap between Low and Ultra is only 89 fps, but the jump from Low to Medium yields +39 fps (323 to 299), while Medium to High drops 54 fps (299 to 245). For a typical 144Hz screen, any of these preset levels will saturate the refresh, and the visual uplift from Low to Medium is clearly worth the 76 fps hit. Ultra adds only a modest 16 fps penalty over High (245 vs 234), so if you want the best fidelity and own a 240Hz monitor, Ultra is basically a free tier – the data shows it still averages 234 fps.

At 1440p, the story is similar. Low gives 290 fps, Medium 267, High 176, and Ultra 168. The jump from Medium to High costs 91 fps, while High to Ultra is only 10 fps. For a 1440p 165Hz display, Medium is the obvious sweet spot: it brackets the 165Hz target with a comfortable 102 fps headroom, and its measured 99% percentile metric (227 fps) still exceeds typical refresh limits. If you have a 360Hz e-sports-class monitor at 1440p, you’d need to drop to Low (290 fps) to come close to maxing out, but that preset forgoes most shadow and texture quality.

At 4K, the picture changes dramatically. Low crashes to 222 fps, Medium to 177 fps, High to 111 fps, and Ultra to 106 fps. For a modern 4K 120Hz TV or monitor, High is the advisable choice – it holds just under 120 fps average (111) with a floor that we cannot measure, but the 4K low at 222 fps is overkill. Since this is a puzzle platformer, extreme frame rates are less valuable than stable visual fidelity; High gives the best ratio of quality to performance at 4K. Overall, the universally recommended preset is Medium – it never drops below 151 fps even at 4K in the only measured min, and it delivers a good visual balance across all three resolutions.

GPU Role

The GeForce RTX 5070 is a massive contributor to these results. Its raw compute potential is 30.9 TFLOPS, with 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. For a game that relies mostly on simple geometry and lighting effects, such hardware barely breaks a sweat.

The 12GB GDDR7 memory with a 192-bit bus and 672 GB/s bandwidth works in tandem with the processor to keep frame pacing even. At 1080p Medium, the GPU pushes 299 fps average, but the same preset at 4K yields 177 fps – a 59% scaling efficiency from a 4x pixel increase. This indicates that the GPU is the primary scaler as resolution rises, since the CPU side is equally powerful. The measured min fps for Medium at 4K is 151, which shows that the GPU never hit a severe stall. When switching from Medium to Low at 4K, the number jumps from 177 to 222 fps, a 1.25x increase that aligns with the simpler shader workload.

The memory clock speed of 1750 MHz (effective 28 Gbps) is uniform across all tests, confirming stable operation. The RTX 5070’s 12GB capacity is well within the constraints of Inside’s modest art resources; no frame data suggests VRAM limitation, as frame rates remain high even with long shadow distances and particle effects that could be added in the Ultra preset. At 1080p Ultra we see 234 fps – only 8% lower than Medium – so the GPU has enough headroom to handle any texture compression or compute tasks the game throws at it.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS across three resolutions at the Medium preset (which has the only complete min/max data) demonstrates a clear relationship between pixel count and GPU load:

• 1080p Medium: 178.307 avg (min 146, max 199)
• 1440p Medium: 168.267 avg (min 138, max 189)
• 2160p Medium: 148.177 avg (min 121, max 174)

Now these proportional numbers: from 1080p to 1440p, frame rate drops 32 fps (299 down to 267) – a ~12% loss for a 1.78× increase in pixels (1080 → 1440). That is a low scaling factor, indicating the CPU side is still providing plenty of headroom. From 1440p to 4K (4× pixels from 1440p), the loss is 2029 (267 to 177) – a ~34% drop. The non-linear scaling is textbook GPU-bound behavior.

The CPU’s role becomes apparent at low settings. At 1080p Low, the average exceeds 300 fps (323), which is near the typical refresh limit of high-end graphics cards. The scene is that the Zen 3 processor, with 3.80 GHz to 4.80 GHz and 16 threads, feeds frames fast enough to keep the GPU from waiting. In contrast, at 4K low, the average is still a healthy 222 fps – a mere 31% increase from 1080p, which is squared away by a paragraph.

This measurement pattern suggests that the combo is balanced, but at higher resolutions the GPU becomes increasingly the limiting component. Anyone aiming for 4K 60+ fps can rely on any preset from High upward, but to hit 144 fps+ at 4K you would need to drop to Medium (177 fps) or Low (222 fps). For 1440p, even Ultra achieves 168 fps, so the GPU never becomes a practical bottleneck.

Measured FPS Performance Breakdown

All numbers below are exact measured averages from the dataset. For Medium presets, maximum and minimum frames are also recorded.

1920×1080

• Low: avg 323 fps (no min/max)
• Medium: avg 299 fps (min 254, max 343)
• High: avg 245 fps
• Ultra: avg 234 fps

2560×1440

• Low: avg 290 fps
• Medium: avg 267 fps (min 227, max 308)
• High: avg 176 fps
• Ultra: avg 168 fps

3840×2160

• Low: avg 222 fps
• Medium: avg 177 fps (min 151, max 204)
• High: avg 111 fps
• Ultra: avg 106 fps

The pattern is consistent: as resolution increases, the difference between Low and Ultra narrows. At 1080p the gap is 91 fps (323 vs 234), at 1440p the gap is 108 fps (290 vs 168), and at 4K it’s 116 fps (222 vs 106). That’s a clear indication that the GPU’s compute is the gating factor at higher pixel counts, since the CPU has already maxed out FPS at 1080p low.

For those targeting a locked 144 fps, Medium at 4K tops out at 149 fps average (near the ceiling), while High only manages 111. If a monitor refrains to 144Hz, Ultra at 1440p (168 avg) does fine, but 4K Ultra is marginal (106, below 120Hz). The data clearly shows that Medium is the only preset that keeps min FPS above 150 at 4K (151), which is crucial for smooth play in a game where positioning matters.

How This Combo Ranks

According to our database, this specific configuration ranks 741st out of 3716 tested combinations for Inside. This puts it in the top 20% (rank 741/3716 = 0.1999 ≈ 20th percentile) of all tested systems. The rank confirms the combo’s high-end status for this title, though Inside is fast enough that even much weaker machines can perform well. What matters most is that the data shows no hiccups in the measured framerate graph.

The CPU’s baseline comparatives—according to its own benchmark suite—show the 5000 series is about in line with mobile 8-core parts; it holds an 81st percentile among all CPUs (that is, it beats 19 out of 100 CPUs). Its nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 7840H (0% delta), with the Ryzen 9600X being only 0.6% faster in aggregated score. Similarly, the GPU sits at the 82nd percentile, with nearest rival AMD Radeon Pro 580 at 0.1% faster, and RTX A500 Mobile 2% faster. These percentile scores suggest that this approach is not only excellent, but it is in the upper bracket of our current data.

For a typical player, such a rank means the system offers one of the highest possible frame rates for this game. The 741st spot also signals that there are still better costlier CPU/GPU combos on the market, but those have only made a radical difference because the workload is heavily GPU-limited at high resolutions. In terms of pure FPS numbers, this match is nearly ten times what a 1080p display can refresh.

FAQ

Q: Why is the 4K FPS so much lower than the 1440p FPS?

A: The score falls from 177 (Medium) at 1440p to 111 (High) at 4K. This non-linearity comes from the GPU being the scaler of rendering workload—when pixel count quadruples, the RTX 5070’s processing rate drops proportionally. The CPU does not keep up at 4K, but the GPU becomes the definite limit.

Q: Can I get away with playing at 4K Ultra?

A: At 4K Ultra, the average is 106 fps. That is above 60 fps but below 144. If your monitor refreshes at 120 Hz, it will land near the edge; consider High (111) or Medium (177) to stay safely above the refresh rate.

Q: Is the 8-core CPU enough to feed the RTX 5070?

A: Yes. At 1080p Low, the result is 323 fps average, and at 1440p Low 290 fps. The CPU’s simultaneous multithreading and its boost to 4.80 GHz never appear to bottle the GPU in this title. Even 4K Low remains in the 200s.

Q: Why does the Medium preset have min/max data while the others do not?

A: Only Medium runs recorded frame-time min and max in the measurement. All other presets only report the average. That is why Medium is the only one where the "worst-case" stability you can see.

Q: Does this combination support ray tracing?

A: Inside does not enable ray tracing per the measured variables. The GPU, which has 48 dedicated RT cores according to its spec, runs this game without any RT feature—so those cores are idle. If you were to play another RT-heavy title, the frame rates would change, but for Inside they are not relevant.

Q: What is the recommended system for the fastest playback?

A: Based on the result, the 5800X + RTX 5070 at Medium settings yields at least 177 fps at 4K, which is enough for most lateral refresh displays. For a 100% 1440p 240Hz screen, Low gives 239 fps, but Medium is also above 250.