Inside

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT delivers a top-tier experience in Inside, a game that demands both high frame rates and consistent frame pacing. The data places this combination at rank 310 out of 1671 tested combos, placing it in the top 18.5% of all systems benchmarked for this title. This is a strong showing, but the rank also reveals that the game is not particularly demanding on modern high-end hardware, allowing this combo to significantly outperform the average system while still leaving headroom above it.

The percentile positions of the individual components reinforce this assessment. The CPU ranks in the 91st percentile against all processors, while the GPU sits in the 82nd percentile against all graphics cards. The combined result is a system that is well-balanced, but the game’s older architecture means the bottleneck is almost exclusively the graphics card, even at lower resolutions. This is a system that will not be challenged by Inside’s visual complexity, and the measured frame rates confirm that it is capable of pushing far beyond standard display refresh rates.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 310 out of 1671 tested combinations is a strong indicator of high-end performance, but it is not a top-tier result. The data suggests that the ranking is heavily influenced by the GPU, as the RX 9070 XT’s performance in this title is the primary driver of the final frame rate. The CPU’s contribution, while solid, is secondary.

The CPU’s average benchmark score of 40468 places it in close competition with the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H (40431, deltaPct 0.1) and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (40262, deltaPct 0.5). It is also nearly tied with the Intel Core i9-13905H (40712, deltaPct -0.6), showing that the Ryzen 7 7700 is within a very tight performance band of its direct rivals. This means that swapping the 7700 for any of these CPUs would result in negligible changes in Inside’s frame rates, as the game is not CPU-bound.

The GPU, on the other hand, shows a more interesting comparison. Its average benchmark score of 39647 is statistically identical to the AMD Radeon Pro 575 (39703, deltaPct -0.1) and the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile (39568, deltaPct 0.2). This is surprising given the architectural differences, but it highlights that the RX 9070 XT’s raw compute in synthetic benchmarks is on par with these workstation-class parts. However, the measured FPS in Inside suggests that the RX 9070 XT’s real-world gaming performance is far superior, as the game’s rendering pipeline favors the RDNA 4.0 architecture’s strengths.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is the clear performance leader in this pairing. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s, which is more than sufficient for Inside’s texture-heavy scenes. The GPU’s boost clock of 2970 MHz and game clock of 2400 MHz are high, and the RDNA 4.0 architecture with 4096 shading units ensures that fill-rate and shader work are not limiting factors.

The data shows that the GPU is the limiting component across all tested settings. At 1080p Ultra, the system achieves 216.3 FPS, while at 4K Ultra it drops to 98.3 FPS. This scaling pattern shows that the GPU’s compute throughput is what determines the final output. The CPU, with its 8 cores and 16 threads running at a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, is never a bottleneck, as evidenced by the relatively small frame rate differences between 1080p and 1440p at the same settings. The GPU’s 128 ROPs and 256 TMUs are also well-utilized in this title, which is a side-scroller with many alpha-blended effects.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K provides a clear picture of the system’s behavior. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 227 at 1920x1080 to 161.6 at 2560x1440, a reduction of 28.8%. Moving to 3840x2160, the frame rate falls to 105.7, a further 34.6% drop from 1440p. This is a classic GPU-bound scaling pattern, where the workload increases quadratically with pixel count.

At Low settings, the scaling is even more pronounced. The system achieves 370.8 FPS at 1080p, which drops to 325.9 at 1440p and then to 209.1 at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 4K is 43.6%, indicating that the GPU is still the primary constraint even when the render load is minimal. Interestingly, the difference between 1080p and 1440p at Low settings is only 12.1%, suggesting that the CPU is starting to have a minor influence at the lowest resolution, but it is still far from being a limiting factor.

The scaling at Ultra settings follows a similar trend, with a 28.1% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a further 36.9% drop from 1440p to 4K. This consistent pattern across all settings confirms that the RX 9070 XT is the sole determinant of performance. The CPU’s 32 MB of L3 cache and 83.2 GB/s memory bandwidth are sufficient to feed the GPU without causing any significant stalls.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive look at the system’s capabilities. At 1920x1080, the system is exceptionally fast. The Low preset yields 370.8 FPS, the Medium preset yields 345.8 FPS, and the High preset yields 227 FPS. The Ultra preset yields 216.3 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is substantial (118.8 FPS), which suggests that High settings introduce effects that are significantly more demanding on the GPU.

At 2560x1440, the performance remains high. Low settings produce 325.9 FPS, Medium produces 262.9 FPS, and High produces 161.6 FPS. Ultra produces 155.7 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra is only 5.9 FPS, indicating that the visual fidelity gained from Ultra is not worth the performance cost. The drop from Medium to High is 101.3 FPS, again showing that High settings are a major step up in GPU load.

At 3840x2160, the system still delivers playable frame rates. Low settings average 209.1 FPS, Medium averages 166.8 FPS, and High averages 105.7 FPS. Ultra averages 98.3 FPS. The 4K results show that even at the highest resolution, the system never dips below 98 FPS, which confirms the GPU’s raw power. The scaling from 1440p to 4K at High settings is a 34.6% drop, which is expected given the 2.25x increase in pixel count.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target display refresh rate. For a 1080p display with a 240 Hz refresh rate, the High preset is the best choice, as it delivers 227 FPS, which is close to the refresh rate limit. The Ultra preset at 216.3 FPS is also viable, but the 10.7 FPS difference does not justify the potential for more demanding scenes to cause minor dips.

For 1440p displays, the Medium preset is the most balanced. It delivers 262.9 FPS, which is sufficient for even the fastest 240 Hz panels. The High preset at 161.6 FPS is better suited for 144 Hz or 165 Hz displays, as it provides a high level of visual quality while staying above the refresh rate. The Ultra preset at 155.7 FPS is also acceptable for 144 Hz displays, but the gain over High is minimal.

For 4K displays, the High preset is the recommended choice. It delivers 105.7 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay and is suitable for 120 Hz displays. The Medium preset at 166.8 FPS is the better option for 144 Hz 4K displays, but the visual sacrifices are noticeable. The Ultra preset at 98.3 FPS is playable but does not offer a significant visual improvement over High to warrant the 7.4 FPS loss.

In summary, the data indicates that the High preset is the sweet spot for this game, offering a substantial improvement over Medium while maintaining frame rates well above 100 FPS at 4K. The Ultra preset is not recommended, as it provides only a marginal visual upgrade for a measurable performance hit. The Low preset is only useful for extreme refresh rate displays, as it pushes the frame rate to 370.8 FPS at 1080p, but the visual degradation is severe.