Inside

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination sits at rank 3575 out of 3716 tested combos for Inside. This places the pairing in the 4th percentile of all tested systems, indicating that while the game is fully playable, this specific hardware pairing is far from the top of the performance hierarchy. The data shows a configuration that is heavily constrained by the graphics subsystem, with the CPU's substantial processing power largely untapped at the resolutions where the GTX 1650 operates effectively.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 3575 out of 3716 places it in the bottom 4% of all tested system configurations for Inside. This low rank is primarily attributable to the GPU component, which sits at the 40th percentile among all graphics cards with an average benchmark score of 7472. The data shows that the GTX 1650 is the limiting factor here, as the CPU is a high-end desktop processor that ranks in the 85th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 35909.

Benchmark results indicate a stark contrast between the two components' capabilities. The Ryzen 7 7700X posts a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 19088 and a single-core score of 1987, alongside a Geekbench multicore score of 12451 and a single-core score of 2289. Meanwhile, the GTX 1650 delivers a Passmark G3D score of 7880 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of just 305. The GPU's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (0.3% higher average score), Intel UHD Graphics 750 (0.4% higher), and AMD Radeon R7 350 (0.6% higher), while the Intel Arc A310 is 1% faster — all indicating the GTX 1650 is competing with entry-level and integrated graphics solutions.

The CPU's nearest rivals provide context for its relative strength: the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 scores 0.3% higher on average, the Intel Core 7 250H is 0.5% higher, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 is 0.5% higher, and the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H is 0.7% higher. These deltas are minimal, confirming the 7700X is a competitive desktop processor. However, in Inside, the GPU bottleneck means the system cannot leverage this CPU advantage, resulting in the low overall combo ranking.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance for optimal settings at each resolution. At 1080p, the Low preset delivers 134 average FPS, which is more than double the 64 FPS achieved at Ultra. The Medium preset at 107 FPS with a minimum of 91 FPS offers a balanced experience, providing smooth gameplay while maintaining some visual fidelity. For the best experience at 1080p, the Medium preset represents the sweet spot — it delivers well above the 60 FPS threshold with a comfortable minimum frame rate.

At 1440p, the Low preset achieves 97 FPS, while Medium drops to 77 FPS with a minimum of 66 FPS. The High preset falls to 48 FPS, and Ultra to 46 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p remains viable, maintaining a minimum above 60 FPS, making it the recommended choice for this resolution. The data suggests that 1440p Medium is the highest quality setting that consistently maintains playable frame rates.

At 4K, the situation becomes more constrained. The Low preset delivers 61 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS target. Medium drops to 49 FPS with a minimum of 41 FPS, while High and Ultra fall to 30 FPS and 29 FPS respectively. For 4K, the Low preset is the only option that maintains playable performance, and even it sits right at the threshold. Users prioritizing visual quality over frame rate could consider Medium at 4K, but the 41 FPS minimum makes it a compromise.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling across resolutions reveals a clear GPU-bound scenario. At 1080p Low, the system delivers 134 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low, this drops to 97 FPS (a 28% reduction), and at 4K Low, it falls to 61 FPS (a 37% further reduction). This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU-limited system, where increasing pixel count directly impacts frame rate because the graphics card is the bottleneck.

The Medium preset shows similar scaling: 107 FPS at 1080p, 77 FPS at 1440p (28% drop), and 49 FPS at 4K (36% drop). The consistency of these percentage drops across settings confirms that resolution is the primary performance variable, not CPU processing. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect smaller FPS differences between resolutions, as the CPU workload remains relatively constant while GPU load increases.

The 4K High and Ultra presets both land in the 29-30 FPS range, indicating the GTX 1650's 4 GB of VRAM and 128.1 GB/s memory bandwidth are insufficient for these settings at that resolution. The GPU's 2.984 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 53.28 GPixel/s pixel rate are simply too low for 4K high-fidelity rendering, confirming that the GTX 1650 is the limiting component in this configuration.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Inside?*

A: The data shows 1080p is the optimal resolution, with the Medium preset delivering 107 average FPS and a 91 FPS minimum. The Low preset reaches 134 FPS, but Medium offers a better balance of visual quality and performance.

*Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming in Inside?*

A: At 4K, only the Low preset achieves a playable 61 FPS average. Medium drops to 49 FPS, and High/Ultra fall to 30 FPS and 29 FPS respectively. The GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for high-quality 4K rendering in this game.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700X's average benchmark score of 35909 is within 0.7% of its closest competitors. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 scores 0.3% higher, the Intel Core 7 250H is 0.5% higher, and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 is 0.5% higher, showing the 7700X is highly competitive in its class.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the bottleneck for this game?

A: The data clearly indicates the GPU is the bottleneck. The CPU ranks in the 85th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU sits at the 40th percentile. The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K follows GPU-bound patterns, with consistent percentage drops across resolutions.

Q: What is the GTX 1650's performance relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 1650's average benchmark score of 7472 is nearly identical to its closest competitors. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M scores 0.3% higher, the Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 0.4% higher, and the AMD Radeon R7 350 scores 0.6% higher. The Intel Arc A310 is 1% faster.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the defining component in this configuration. Its specifications — 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus providing 128.1 GB/s bandwidth, 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs — directly explain the measured performance in Inside. The GPU's base clock of 1485 MHz and boost clock of 1665 MHz, combined with its 2.984 TFLOPS FP32 performance, determine its rendering capability.

The GPU's 40th percentile ranking among all graphics cards and its Passmark G3D score of 7880 place it firmly in entry-level territory. Its nearest rivals include integrated and low-end discrete solutions, confirming its position. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 305 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 33042 further illustrate its limited compute capability relative to modern standards.

In Inside, the GTX 1650's limitations become apparent at higher resolutions and settings. The 4GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for 1080p Medium (107 FPS) but struggles at 4K High (30 FPS). The GPU's memory bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s and pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s are adequate for 1080p gaming but insufficient for 4K high-fidelity rendering. The data shows the GPU is the definitive performance ceiling for this combo.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X provides substantial processing headroom that the GTX 1650 cannot utilize in Inside. With 8 cores and 16 threads, base clock of 4.50 GHz, and boost clock of 5.40 GHz, the CPU demonstrates exceptional multi-threaded capability. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 19088 and single-core score of 1987, along with a Geekbench multicore score of 12451, place it in the 85th percentile among all CPUs.

The CPU's architecture — Zen 4 on TSMC's 5 nm process with 6,570 million transistors across a 71 mm² die — provides significant compute resources. Its 32 MB of shared L3 cache and DDR5 memory support with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth offer ample data throughput. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 8859 and 8-thread score of 7057 confirm robust multi-core performance.

However, in Inside, the CPU's capabilities remain largely underutilized due to the GPU bottleneck. The FPS data shows no signs of CPU limitation — frame rates scale consistently with resolution changes, and even at 1080p Low (134 FPS), the CPU is not the constraint. The CPU's average benchmark score of 35909, which sits within 0.7% of its nearest rivals, indicates it is performing at expected levels, but this performance cannot translate to higher FPS in Inside because the GTX 1650 cannot render frames fast enough to benefit from the CPU's processing power.