Inside

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER combination delivers exceptional performance in Inside, a 2016 puzzle platformer that is far more demanding at high refresh rates than its minimalist art style suggests. The measured frame rates show this pairing is not merely capable of running the game, but of overwhelming it at nearly every resolution and preset, with the data indicating a system that will likely be constrained by the CPU at lower resolutions and by the GPU only at the most extreme settings. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS, scaling behavior, and component roles based strictly on the provided benchmark data.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a classic shift in system bottleneck. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces an average of 431 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at Low, the average drops to 368 FPS, a reduction of 63 FPS (approximately 14.6%). Pushing to 3840x2160 at Low, the average falls to 231 FPS, a further reduction of 137 FPS (approximately 37.2%). This steep decline at 4K indicates that while the CPU is strong enough to feed the GPU at lower resolutions, the GPU's rendering load begins to dominate as pixel count increases.

The scaling pattern is consistent across all settings. For High settings, the averages are 256 FPS at 1080p, 184 FPS at 1440p, and 116 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 72 FPS (28.1%), while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 68 FPS (37.0%). This shows that the transition to 4K is consistently the most punishing step, regardless of visual preset. The data suggests that at 1080p and 1440p, the game is heavily CPU-bound; the Ryzen 7 9700F provides enough headroom to push frame rates into the high hundreds, but the GPU cannot maintain that pace when asked to render four times the pixels.

At 4K, the limiting factor shifts clearly to the RTX 4070 SUPER. The difference between Low (231 FPS) and High (116 FPS) at 4K is a massive 115 FPS, showing that the GPU's workload is the primary constraint. The scaling from Medium to High at 4K (185 FPS to 116 FPS, a 37.3% drop) further confirms this, as the GPU is increasingly saturated. In contrast, the scaling from 1080p Low (431 FPS) to 1080p High (256 FPS) shows a 40.6% drop, but the absolute numbers remain so high that the CPU is likely still the primary limiter, as the GPU is not yet fully stressed. The data indicates that for this game, 4K is where the GPU becomes the definitive bottleneck, while 1080p and 1440p are where the CPU's capabilities are most visible.

FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average frame rate achieved by this combo in Inside?*

A: The maximum measured average is 431 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the RTX 4070 SUPER perform at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the combo delivers an average of 110 FPS, which is the lowest average recorded in the dataset.

Q: Is the game playable at 4K with this hardware?

A: Yes. Even at the most demanding preset (Ultra), the average FPS is 110, which is well above standard 60 FPS thresholds. At High settings, the average rises to 116 FPS, and at Medium, it reaches 185 FPS.

Q: What is the frame time consistency like at Medium settings?

A: The data includes min and max FPS values for Medium settings. At 1080p, the range is 338 to 457 FPS. At 1440p, it is 250 to 338 FPS. At 4K, it is 157 to 213 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its closest rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F has an average benchmark score of 69996. It is 0.2% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, 0.7% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, and 0.9% ahead of the Intel Core i7-14700K. It is 0.2% behind the Intel Core i7-14700KF.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER is in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs, indicating it performs better than the vast majority of its peers in general benchmark tests.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER is the primary driver of visual quality in Inside, and its 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth is more than sufficient for this title's demands. The GPU's boost clock of 2475 MHz and base clock of 1980 MHz are key to its high frame rates. The data shows that the GPU's performance is the deciding factor at higher resolutions and settings. For instance, at 4K, the jump from Low to Medium settings yields an increase from 231 FPS to 185 FPS, but the jump from Medium to High (185 to 116 FPS) and High to Ultra (116 to 110 FPS) shows diminishing returns as the GPU approaches its limits.

The RTX 4070 SUPER's raw compute power, measured at 35.48 TFLOPS for FP32, allows it to handle the game's lighting and shadow effects efficiently. However, the benchmark results reveal that at 1080p, the GPU is not the limiting factor. The difference between High (256 FPS) and Low (431 FPS) at 1080p is 175 FPS, a 40.6% difference, which is significant but occurs because the CPU can feed frames faster than the GPU can render them at lower settings. The GPU's role is more pronounced at 4K, where the pixel fill rate becomes critical. The GPU's 80 ROPs and 198.0 GPixel/s pixel rate are exercised heavily at 3840x2160, resulting in the lower frame rates observed.

The GPU's benchmark scores support its mid-to-high-end positioning. Its Passmark G3D score of 29995 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4627 place it in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in average score include the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile (0.1% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile (1% behind). This suggests that while the RTX 4070 SUPER is not a top-tier halo product, it is a very strong performer that can handle Inside at 4K with ease. The measured data confirms this, as even at 4K Ultra, the average FPS remains above 100.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this hardware depend heavily on the user's display and performance targets. For 1080p and 1440p displays, the data suggests that High settings provide an excellent balance. At 1080p High, the combo averages 256 FPS, which is far beyond the refresh rate of most monitors. At 1440p High, the average is 184 FPS, still exceptionally smooth. Ultra settings at these resolutions (244 FPS at 1080p, 175 FPS at 1440p) offer only marginal gains in visual quality for a slight drop in frame rate, making High the more sensible choice for maintaining maximum headroom.

For 4K displays, the recommendation shifts. High settings (116 FPS) are preferable to Ultra (110 FPS) because the 6 FPS difference is negligible, while High likely offers a better balance of visual fidelity and performance. However, the data shows that Medium settings at 4K (185 FPS) provide a massive performance boost over High (116 FPS), a 59.1% increase. If a user prioritizes a high refresh rate experience at 4K, Medium settings are the clear winner, offering a frame rate that is 69 FPS higher than High. Low settings at 4K (231 FPS) are viable for extreme refresh rates but will compromise visual quality. The data does not include min FPS values for High or Ultra, but the Medium settings data shows a consistent range (157-213 FPS at 4K), indicating stable performance.

The "best experience" per the measured rows is subjective. For a 60 Hz 4K display, Ultra settings (110 FPS) are more than sufficient. For a 144 Hz 4K display, High (116 FPS) is borderline, but Medium (185 FPS) is the only way to fully utilize the refresh rate. For 1440p and 1080p, High settings are recommended as they provide the best combination of visual quality and performance, with average frame rates (184 and 256 FPS) that far exceed the capabilities of most high-refresh-rate monitors. The data suggests avoiding Low settings at lower resolutions, as the frame rate gains (431 FPS at 1080p) are unnecessary and come with a significant visual penalty.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete dataset provides a clear picture of performance across all tested configurations. At 1920x1080, the averages are 431 FPS (Low), 398 FPS (Medium), 256 FPS (High), and 244 FPS (Ultra). The Medium setting at 1080p has a documented min of 338 FPS and max of 457 FPS, showing a broad but smooth spread. The jump from Low to Medium is a 33 FPS drop, while the jump from Medium to High is a 142 FPS drop, indicating that High settings introduce a significant rendering cost. The difference between High and Ultra is only 12 FPS, suggesting that Ultra is not much more demanding than High at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 368 FPS (Low), 294 FPS (Medium), 184 FPS (High), and 175 FPS (Ultra). The Medium setting at 1440p shows a min of 250 FPS and max of 338 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 74 FPS, and from Medium to High is 110 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra narrows further to 9 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 14-15% for Low and Medium, but for High and Ultra, the drop is 28.1% and 28.3% respectively, showing that the higher settings are more sensitive to resolution increases.

At 3840x2160, the averages are 231 FPS (Low), 185 FPS (Medium), 116 FPS (High), and 110 FPS (Ultra). The Medium setting at 4K has a min of 157 FPS and max of 213 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 46 FPS, from Medium to High is 69 FPS, and from High to Ultra is only 6 FPS. The data reveals a clear pattern: at 4K, the GPU is the bottleneck, and the performance difference between High and Ultra is minimal. The 4K Low setting (231 FPS) is higher than the 1440p High setting (184 FPS), which reflects the CPU's strength in avoiding a bottleneck at lower resolutions. The data confirms that the combo is capable of delivering playable frame rates at all tested settings, with 4K Ultra being the only configuration that dips below 120 FPS.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is a critical component in this system, and its 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge) are more than sufficient for Inside. The CPU's base clock of 3.80 GHz and boost clock of 5.50 GHz are high, and its 32 MB of shared L3 cache helps feed the GPU quickly. The benchmark data shows that the CPU is likely the limiting factor at 1080p and 1440p. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 431, which is a very high number. If the GPU were the bottleneck, we would expect similar frame rates across different resolutions at the same settings, but the data shows a significant drop at 4K, proving the GPU is not the constraint at lower resolutions.

The CPU's Passmark multithread score is 36470, and its single-thread score is 4691. These scores place it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 69996. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (0.2% faster), the Intel Core i7-14700KF (0.2% faster), the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (0.7% slower), and the Intel Core i7-14700K (0.9% slower). This indicates that the 9700F is a top-tier performer for gaming, and its high single-thread performance is particularly relevant for Inside, which is a puzzle platformer that likely has a single dominant game thread.

The data supports the conclusion that the CPU is not a hindrance in this game. At 1080p Ultra, the combo still achieves 244 FPS, which is far above the threshold where a weaker CPU would cause stutters or frame drops. The CPU's ability to maintain over 400 FPS at 1080p Low shows that it has significant headroom. The fact that the average FPS at 4K Low (231 FPS) is lower than at 1080p Low (431 FPS) is entirely due to the GPU's pixel processing limits, not the CPU. The Ryzen 7 9700F's 65W TDP and 4nm process node are not directly relevant to the measured FPS, but its high boost clock of 5.50 GHz is likely a key factor in achieving these high frame rates. The data shows that for Inside, the CPU is a non-issue, providing ample performance to keep the RTX 4070 SUPER fed at all but the most extreme resolutions.