Inside

The AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D and Intel Arc B370 pairing represents a stark contrast in compute capability, and the benchmark results for Inside reflect this imbalance clearly. The data shows a combination where the CPU holds a commanding lead in synthetic workloads, while the GPU sits near the bottom of the performance percentile, ultimately creating a bottleneck that shapes the frame rate across all resolutions and settings.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D is a desktop-class processor built on the Zen 4 architecture, code-named Raphael. It features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The chip is manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 11,270 million transistors packed into a 71 mm² die. Its cache hierarchy is notable: 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a substantial 96 MB of shared L3 cache. This large cache is particularly relevant for gaming workloads, as it reduces latency when accessing frequently used data.

The CPU's benchmark scores reinforce its high-end positioning. In Cinebench R23, it scores 16817 multi-core and 1713 single-core. Geekbench shows 15610 multi-core and 2426 single-core. The 3DMark results are equally telling: 7980 for 16 threads, 6539 for 8 threads, 3684 for 4 threads, and 1887 for 2 threads, with a single-thread score of 959. The PassMark suite shows a multithread score of 34293 and a single-thread score of 3759. Across all benchmarks, the CPU averages a score of 33079, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the AMD Ryzen 7 8700G and Intel Core i7-13650HX both score 33089, with a delta of 0%, while the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H scores 33201, representing a -0.4% delta.

In the context of Inside, a puzzle platformer, the CPU's role is less about raw multi-threaded throughput and more about maintaining consistent frame pacing. The game is not heavily threaded, so the single-core performance of 1713 in Cinebench R23 and 3759 in PassMark is sufficient to handle the game's logic. The 3DMark 2-thread score of 1887 suggests that even with just two threads active, the CPU has ample headroom. However, the data indicates that this headroom is rarely the limiting factor in the measured results. The 7800X3D's 120 W TDP and DDR5 memory support (with dual-channel bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s) provide a solid foundation, but the GPU's constraints dominate the final output. The CPU's percentile rank of 83 and its position relative to rivals—all within a fraction of a percent of each other—show that it is a top-tier part, yet the game's frame rates do not reflect this dominance, pointing directly at the GPU as the bottleneck.

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

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, part of the Arc Graphics-M generation for Panther Lake. It is built on a 3 nm process at Intel, with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The GPU has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operation units, along with 10 ray tracing cores. Its peak pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput is 6.144 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1). The TDP is a modest 25 W, and it draws power from the system rather than external connectors.

The memory configuration is system-shared, meaning the GPU uses the host's DDR5 memory with a system-dependent bandwidth. This is a critical limitation for gaming, as shared memory can introduce latency and bandwidth contention. The GPU's benchmark results are stark: a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184. This places the Arc B370 in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, a very low standing. Its nearest rivals are all older or lower-end parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (-0.2% delta), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (-0.5% delta), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (-0.7% delta), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (1.4% delta). The GPU's average benchmark score of 1184 is consistent across these results.

Given this data, the Arc B370 is the clear performance ceiling in this pairing. In Inside, the GPU's role is to render the game's 2D side-scrolling visuals, which are not graphically intensive by modern standards. However, the benchmark results show that even this light workload struggles at higher resolutions. The 5th percentile ranking and the proximity to decade-old mobile parts indicate that the GPU is severely underpowered relative to the CPU. The boost clock of 2400 MHz is high, but with only 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, the raw compute is insufficient to push high frame rates at 4K. The system-shared memory further compounds the issue, as there is no dedicated VRAM bandwidth to rely on.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combined ranking for this CPU-GPU pair in Inside is 2654 out of 2887 tested combos. This places it in the bottom 8% of all configurations, which is a poor result given the CPU's high-end nature. The rank reflects the GPU's bottleneck: while the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is in the 83rd percentile for CPUs, the Arc B370 is in the 5th percentile for GPUs. The combination of a top-tier CPU with a bottom-tier GPU drags the overall ranking down significantly.

To contextualize, the CPU's nearest rivals—the Ryzen 7 8700G, Core i7-13650HX, and Ryzen 7 7745HX—all have nearly identical CPU scores (33089-33091), yet the combo rank would vary based on the GPU paired with them. The data suggests that this particular pairing is not balanced for Inside. The 2654th rank out of 2887 means there are only 233 combos that perform worse, which is a narrow margin. This is a telling statistic: the build is close to the bottom of the database, and the GPU is almost entirely responsible for that position.

The deltaPct values for the GPU's rivals are all within a couple of percentage points (ranging from -0.7% to 1.4%), confirming that the Arc B370 is grouped with the weakest GPUs in the database. The CPU, by contrast, has rivals that are effectively identical in performance (0% delta), but that advantage is nullified by the GPU. In practical terms, this combo is a case study in how a single weak component can undermine an otherwise strong system.

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

The measured FPS data for Inside reveals a consistent pattern across all resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the Low preset yields an average of 141 FPS. The Medium preset drops to 113 FPS, with a min of 96 and max of 130. High produces 70 FPS, and Ultra falls to 67 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 74 FPS, showing that the GPU's limited throughput is heavily taxed by higher settings.

At 2560x1440, the numbers decline predictably. Low averages 101 FPS, Medium averages 81 FPS (with min 69 and max 93), High averages 51 FPS, and Ultra averages 48 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 53 FPS. The Medium preset's min and max values (69-93) indicate some frame pacing variability, but the averages remain above 60 FPS for Low and Medium.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's limitations become pronounced. Low averages 64 FPS, Medium averages 51 FPS (with min 43 and max 59), High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. The High and Ultra presets fall below the 60 FPS threshold, and the Low preset is just above it. The Medium preset's min of 43 FPS shows that even at this setting, the GPU struggles to maintain smooth playback at 4K. The data shows a clear trend: as resolution increases, the average FPS drops by roughly 30-40% for each step up, which is a direct consequence of the GPU's limited pixel rate and texture rate.

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

The resolution scaling behavior is a clear indicator that the GPU is the limiting component. From 1080p to 1440p, the average FPS across all presets drops by approximately 28-30%. For example, Low goes from 141 to 101 FPS (a 40 FPS drop), and Medium goes from 113 to 81 FPS (a 32 FPS drop). From 1440p to 4K, the drop is even steeper: Low goes from 101 to 64 FPS (a 37 FPS drop), and Medium goes from 81 to 51 FPS (a 30 FPS drop).

The most telling data point is the 1080p to 4K scaling for each preset. At Low, the FPS drops from 141 to 64, a 54.6% reduction. At Medium, it drops from 113 to 51, a 54.9% reduction. At High, it drops from 70 to 32, a 54.3% reduction. At Ultra, it drops from 67 to 30, a 55.2% reduction. The consistency of this ~55% drop across all presets suggests that the GPU is hitting a hard computational limit, not a bandwidth or cache bottleneck. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the scaling would be less pronounced at higher resolutions, as the CPU workload would remain constant while the GPU workload increases.

The fact that the 4K Low preset (64 FPS) is lower than the 1080p Ultra preset (67 FPS) is particularly revealing. It shows that resolution has a greater impact on performance than settings, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. The Arc B370's system-shared memory and low FP32 throughput (6.144 TFLOPS) are simply not enough to handle the pixel count at 4K, even with reduced graphical fidelity. The CPU, with its high single-thread score of 1713 in Cinebench R23, is not the constraint here; the data consistently points to the GPU as the performance ceiling.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the recommended settings depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For a smooth 60 FPS experience, the data shows that 1080p Low (141 FPS) and 1080p Medium (113 FPS) are the only presets that comfortably exceed this threshold. At 1080p High (70 FPS), the frame rate is still above 60, but the margin is thinner. For players prioritizing visual quality at 1080p, the High preset offers a playable experience, while Ultra (67 FPS) is marginal.

At 1440p, the Low preset (101 FPS) is the only setting that maintains a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. The Medium preset (81 FPS) is also viable, and its min of 69 FPS ensures that frame drops are rare. The High preset (51 FPS) and Ultra preset (48 FPS) fall below 60 FPS, which may be acceptable for a puzzle platformer but is not ideal for consistent smoothness. The data suggests that 1440p Medium is the sweet spot for this resolution, balancing visual fidelity with performance.

At 4K, none of the presets achieve a stable 60 FPS. The Low preset (64 FPS) is the only one above 60, but the margin is slim, and the Medium preset (51 FPS) drops below. The High (32 FPS) and Ultra (30 FPS) presets are effectively unplayable for a responsive experience, with frame rates in the low 30s. Given that the Medium preset at 4K shows a min of 43 FPS, even this setting has noticeable drops. For 4K, the Low preset is the only recommendation, and even then, players should expect occasional dips.

The overall recommendation is to target 1080p Medium or High for the best balance of quality and performance. At 1440p, the Medium preset is the most sensible choice, offering 81 FPS average with a 69 FPS minimum. For 4K, the data indicates that the GPU is not capable of delivering a consistently smooth experience at any setting, so players should either lower the resolution to 1440p or accept the Low preset's 64 FPS average. The benchmark results make it clear that the Arc B370 is the limiting factor, and the settings should be adjusted to accommodate its capabilities rather than the CPU's.