Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer that places minimal stress on modern hardware, and the measured results for the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 confirm this. The data shows a combination capable of delivering extremely high frame rates across all tested resolutions and settings, with the only potential bottleneck appearing at the highest fidelity presets in 4K. This analysis interprets the measured FPS, component benchmarks, and ranking data to explain exactly where this combo stands for this specific title.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is an 8-core, 16-thread processor from the 9000 series, built on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge) using a 4 nm process. It features a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. For a game like Inside, which is a 2D side-scrolling puzzle platformer with relatively simple physics and logic, the CPU is rarely the limiting factor. The benchmark data supports this interpretation: the processor achieves a PassMark single-thread score of 4691 and a multithread score of 36470, placing it in the 94th percentile among all CPUs.

The game's demands are so modest that even at 1080p Low settings, where the GPU has the least work to do, the combo reaches 296 FPS average. This suggests the CPU is capable of feeding frames far beyond typical display refresh rates. The 8 cores and 16 threads are overkill for a title of this era, but the high boost clock of 5.50 GHz ensures that even single-threaded game logic runs without any hiccups. Comparing to nearest rivals, the Ryzen 7 9700F scores 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX and 0.7% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X in average benchmark scores, while being 0.2% lower than the Intel Core i7-14700KF. These negligible deltas (all within 1%) mean that any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Inside, confirming that the game is not CPU-bound.

The L3 cache is 32 MB shared, and the memory support is DDR5 with dual-channel bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. For a game with small asset sizes and minimal streaming, this memory bandwidth is more than sufficient. The data implies that the CPU's role here is to stay out of the way, and the measured FPS at 1080p Low (296 FPS) versus 4K Low (134 FPS) shows a 55% drop, which is primarily a GPU workload increase, not a CPU limitation. The processor's PassMark physics score of 2122 and floating point math score of 77955 further indicate strong computational headroom that this game never approaches.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo achieves in Inside, and at what settings?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 296, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. The next highest is 237 FPS at 1080p Medium, showing that even mid-tier settings retain very high performance.

Q: Does the RTX 5050 bottleneck the Ryzen 7 9700F in this game?

A: The data suggests the GPU becomes the limiting factor only at 4K Ultra, where the average FPS drops to 64. At 1080p Low (296 FPS) and 1440p Low (213 FPS), the frame rates are high enough that the CPU is likely not the constraint; the GPU's workload scaling with resolution indicates a typical GPU-bound scenario at higher settings.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested configurations for Inside?

A: The combo ranks 1719 out of 2887 total tested combos for this game. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the ranking, which is surprising given the high absolute FPS, but it reflects that many other higher-end GPUs achieve even higher frame rates in this easy-to-run title.

Q: What is the difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings yield an average of 213 FPS, while Ultra settings yield 101 FPS. This represents a 52.6% reduction in average FPS when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset, indicating a significant but not crippling performance cost for maxing out visuals.

Q: Is the RTX 5050's 8 GB VRAM sufficient for Inside?

A: Given that the game is from 2016 and has modest texture requirements, the 8 GB GDDR6 memory is more than adequate. The measured FPS does not show any signs of VRAM-related stuttering, as even at 4K Ultra the average FPS remains playable at 64.

Q: How does the RTX 5050 compare to its nearest rival in GPU benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 5050 has an average benchmark score of 21035, which is 1.6% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT but 0.6% lower than the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL and 1% lower than the AMD Radeon HD 8970M. These differences are minimal, suggesting similar raw performance levels for this workload.

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

Examining the measured FPS across resolutions at the same settings reveals a clear scaling pattern that identifies the bottleneck. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 296 at 1080p to 213 at 1440p (a 28% decrease), and then to 134 at 4K (a 37% further decrease from 1440p). The total drop from 1080p to 4K at Low is 54.7%. This steep decline is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, as the CPU's frame generation capability remains constant while the GPU's pixel processing workload quadruples from 1080p to 4K.

The same pattern appears at High settings: 148 FPS at 1080p, 106 FPS at 1440p (28% drop), and 67 FPS at 4K (37% drop from 1440p). The consistency of these percentage drops across settings indicates that the limiting component is the GPU in all cases. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to plateau at lower resolutions, but instead it scales inversely with pixel count. The RTX 5050's specifications align with this: it has a pixel rate of 82.30 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 205.8 GTexel/s, which are the metrics that determine fill-rate-bound performance in a 2D game like Inside.

At Medium settings, the only preset with min/max FPS data, the drop from 1080p (237 FPS avg, 201 min, 272 max) to 1440p (170 FPS avg, 145 min, 196 max) is 28.3%, and to 4K (107 FPS avg, 91 min, 123 max) is 37.1% from 1440p. This linear scaling with resolution suggests that the game's rendering complexity is purely pixel-driven, and the RTX 5050's 128-bit memory bus with 320.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient to feed the shaders without unexpected hitches. The data implies that for 4K gaming, the RTX 5050 is adequate for this title only at Low or Medium settings, while at 1080p it is overkill for any setting.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 ranks 1719 out of 2887 tested combinations for Inside. This places it in the 59.5th percentile of all combos, meaning roughly 40% of tested systems perform worse and 60% perform better. Given that the absolute FPS numbers are very high (e.g., 141 FPS at 1080p Ultra), this ranking might seem low, but the context is crucial. Inside is a game that can run on integrated graphics, and many high-end combos (with RTX 4090s or RX 7900 XTX equivalents) will push frame rates into the hundreds even at 4K Ultra. The RTX 5050's 66th percentile ranking among all GPUs and the CPU's 94th percentile ranking show that this is a mainstream combo, but the game's low requirements mean that the ranking is more a reflection of the GPU's absolute ceiling rather than any deficiency.

The deltaPct values from the GPU's nearest rivals are small: the RTX 5050 is 1.6% ahead of the RX 5600 XT and 0.6% behind the RX Vega M GL. This suggests that in Inside, swapping to any of these GPUs would yield nearly identical frame rates, all hovering in the same performance tier. The combo rank of 1719 indicates that while the system is capable of smooth gameplay, there are 1168 other combos that achieve higher average FPS, likely due to more powerful GPUs or CPUs with higher boost clocks. The data does not list individual combo scores, but the ranking implies that for enthusiasts chasing the absolute highest FPS in this game, this CPU-GPU pairing is not at the top, though it remains entirely playable.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is a Blackwell 2.0 architecture GPU (chip GB207) built on a 5 nm process. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The core clocks are 2317 MHz base and 2572 MHz boost, with 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. For Inside, a game that relies heavily on 2D sprite rendering and simple shaders, the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are the primary determinants of performance. The pixel rate of 82.30 GPixel/s and texture rate of 205.8 GTexel/s directly translate to the FPS numbers seen: at 4K (3840x2160), the GPU must process approximately 8.3 million pixels per frame, and at 67 FPS High settings, it is processing 556 million pixels per second, which is within its rated pixel rate.

The 8 GB VRAM is not a concern for this title, as even at 4K Ultra, the game's textures and framebuffer likely consume less than 4 GB. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra is 64 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS threshold, indicating that the GPU is fully utilized. The RTX 5050's PassMark G3D score is 17326, and its average benchmark score is 21035, placing it in the 66th percentile of all GPUs. Compared to its nearest rivals, the data shows it is 1.6% faster than the RX 5600 XT, but 1% slower than the HD 8970M and 1.6% slower than the RTX A4000 Mobile. These differences are within the margin of error for this type of game, so the RTX 5050's role is to provide a solid 60+ FPS experience at 4K Medium and above 200 FPS at 1080p Low.

The GPU's boost clock of 2572 MHz is crucial for maintaining high frame rates in a game with potentially inconsistent frame times. The min FPS at 4K Medium is 91, which is 85% of the average 107 FPS, showing good frame pacing. The RTX 5050's 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores are irrelevant for Inside, as the game does not use ray tracing or DLSS, but they do not detract from its rasterization performance. The 130 W TDP and dual-slot design are typical for this class, and the 1x 8-pin power connector is sufficient for the game's load.

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

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers exceptional performance across all settings. Low settings produce an average of 296 FPS, Medium averages 237 FPS (with a minimum of 201 and maximum of 272), High averages 148 FPS, and Ultra averages 141 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra is minimal (7 FPS), suggesting that the Ultra preset adds little visual benefit for the cost. The 1080p results show that the CPU and GPU combination is never stressed, as even the lowest FPS (141 at Ultra) is far above any display's refresh rate.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but show the GPU's workload increasing. Low settings average 213 FPS, Medium averages 170 FPS (min 145, max 196), High averages 106 FPS, and Ultra averages 101 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent at around 28% for all settings, confirming a purely GPU-bound scaling. At 1440p Ultra, the 101 FPS average is still smooth, but the gap between High (106 FPS) and Ultra (101 FPS) narrows further, indicating that the Ultra preset's extra effects are taxing the GPU more proportionally.

At 3840x2160, the RTX 5050 starts to show its limits. Low settings average 134 FPS, which is still very playable. Medium settings average 107 FPS (min 91, max 123), providing a good balance. High settings drop to 67 FPS average, and Ultra falls to 64 FPS average. The 4K results show a 52% drop from Low to Ultra (134 to 64 FPS), which is a significant penalty for maxing out settings. The min FPS at 4K Medium (91) indicates that the GPU can maintain a playable frame rate even in demanding scenes, but the High and Ultra presets might dip below 60 FPS in the worst cases, though min FPS data is not provided for those settings.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and display refresh rate. For 1080p displays, any setting is viable, but the Medium preset (237 FPS average) offers the best balance between visual quality and performance, as the jump from Medium to High (148 FPS) is a 37.5% FPS loss for what is likely a marginal visual improvement in a 2D game. The Ultra preset at 1080p (141 FPS) provides no meaningful benefit over High (148 FPS) and is not recommended.

For 1440p, the Medium preset (170 FPS average) is the clear winner, as it delivers over 144 FPS (common for high-refresh monitors) while maintaining good visual fidelity. The High preset (106 FPS) is still smooth for 60 Hz displays, but the 37.6% drop from Medium is substantial. The Low preset (213 FPS) is excessive for most displays and sacrifices visual quality unnecessarily. At 1440p, Ultra (101 FPS) is not worth the performance hit compared to High (106 FPS) or Medium (170 FPS).

For 4K, the recommendation is more nuanced. The Medium preset (107 FPS average) provides the best experience, as it is the only setting that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS while offering higher quality than Low (134 FPS). The High preset (67 FPS) is borderline, as it averages above 60 FPS but may drop below in intense scenes, and the Ultra preset (64 FPS) is not recommended due to the minimal visual difference from High and the risk of sub-60 FPS dips. For a locked 60 FPS experience at 4K, the data suggests that High settings (67 FPS average) are acceptable, but Medium (107 FPS) provides a safety margin that ensures smooth gameplay throughout. The Low preset at 4K (134 FPS) is overkill for most 4K displays, which typically have 60 Hz refresh rates, but it could be used for future-proofing if a high-refresh 4K monitor is used.