Inside

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT combination delivers exceptionally high frame rates in Inside, a 2016 puzzle platformer that is far more demanding on the GPU than the CPU at higher resolutions. The data shows a configuration capable of maxing out high-refresh-rate displays at 1080p and 1440p, with performance scaling predictably as resolution increases.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X is an 8-core, 16-thread processor built on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge) using a 4 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. This desktop chip features 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 32 MB L3 cache. It supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU demonstrates strong multi-threaded and single-threaded capabilities. It scores 20,485 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,211 in single-core. In Geekbench, it reaches 17,906 multi-core and 3,023 single-core. The 3DMark results show a progressive scaling from 1,280 in single-thread to 9,824 with 16 threads, indicating efficient core utilization. The processor’s overall average benchmark score is 37,943, placing it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context for this performance. The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X is essentially tied with the Intel Core i9-14901E, showing a delta of 0.1% higher average score. It also leads the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 by 0.1%, the Intel Core 5 211E by 0.3%, and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 by 0.4%. These margins are negligible, indicating that the 9700X sits at the top of its immediate performance class.

For Inside, the CPU’s role is largely secondary. The game’s 2D side-scrolling perspective and puzzle mechanics do not demand high thread counts or extreme single-core throughput. The benchmark results confirm this. At 1080p Low settings, the combination produces 353 FPS average. This high frame rate suggests that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck, as the GPU is still able to render frames at a very high rate. The processor’s 8 cores and 16 threads provide ample headroom for game logic and physics, which are not heavily taxed in this title. The 3DMark 2-thread score of 2,525 and 4-thread score of 4,869 indicate that even when the game scales across a few cores, the 9700X has sufficient per-core strength to avoid limiting frame output.

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

Q: What is the average frame rate at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 168 frames per second, with no recorded minimum or maximum values provided.

Q: How does the CPU's multi-core performance compare to its nearest rival?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X has an average benchmark score of 37,943, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i9-14901E’s score of 37,911. This shows a statistically negligible performance difference.

Q: What is the GPU's memory bandwidth and size?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s.

*Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo in Inside?*

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 353 at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Does the GPU support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT includes 40 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes ray tracing features.

Q: How does the GPU's overall benchmark score rank relative to other GPUs?

A: The GPU has an average benchmark score of 26,011, placing it in the 71st percentile of all GPUs. It is 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 M395X and 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile.

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

The measured frame rates across resolutions reveal a clear scaling pattern that indicates the GPU is the primary limiting factor as resolution increases. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 353 at 1080p to 254 at 1440p, a reduction of 99 FPS or 28%. Moving from 1440p to 4K (3840x2160) Low, the average further drops to 160 FPS, a 94 FPS reduction or 37%. This steep decline demonstrates that the rendering load is scaling heavily with pixel count.

The High settings show a similar trend. The average FPS is 177 at 1080p, which falls to 127 at 1440p (a 50 FPS drop) and then to 80 at 4K (a 47 FPS drop). The percentage decrease from 1080p to 4K is 55%, highlighting the GPU’s workload. Medium settings follow the same pattern: 283 FPS at 1080p, 203 FPS at 1440p, and 128 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 4K is 155 FPS, or 55%.

Ultra settings show the lowest frame rates but also the most consistent relative scaling. The average is 168 FPS at 1080p, 121 FPS at 1440p, and 76 FPS at 4K. The total reduction from 1080p to 4K is 92 FPS, or 55%. The consistent percentage drop across all settings strongly suggests that the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is the bottleneck. If the CPU were limiting, the frame rates would plateau at higher resolutions rather than continuing to decline. The CPU’s performance, as indicated by its high benchmark scores and the fact that it is tied with its nearest rivals, is sufficient to feed the GPU at all tested resolutions. The data indicates a GPU-bound scenario across the board.

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

The complete dataset for Inside provides a comprehensive view of performance at three resolutions and four quality presets.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: Average FPS is 353. No minimum or maximum values are listed.
• Medium: Average FPS is 283, with a minimum of 240 and a maximum of 325.
• High: Average FPS is 177. No minimum or maximum values are listed.
• Ultra: Average FPS is 168. No minimum or maximum values are listed.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: Average FPS is 254. No minimum or maximum values are listed.
• Medium: Average FPS is 203, with a minimum of 173 and a maximum of 234.
• High: Average FPS is 127. No minimum or maximum values are listed.
• Ultra: Average FPS is 121. No minimum or maximum values are listed.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: Average FPS is 160. No minimum or maximum values are listed.
• Medium: Average FPS is 128, with a minimum of 109 and a maximum of 147.
• High: Average FPS is 80. No minimum or maximum values are listed.
• Ultra: Average FPS is 76. No minimum or maximum values are listed.

The Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values, providing a window into frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the spread from minimum to maximum is 85 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the spread is 61 FPS. At 4K Medium, the spread narrows to 38 FPS. This indicates that frame pacing becomes more consistent as the resolution increases, likely due to the GPU becoming more uniformly saturated.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific configuration of AMD Ryzen 7 9700X and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT ranks 1,529 out of 3,716 tested combos in Inside. This places it in the upper-middle tier of all tested systems, roughly in the 41st percentile of combinations. While the raw frame rates are very high, the ranking reflects that many other hardware pairings in the database achieve even higher performance.

The rank must be interpreted with the game’s age and nature in mind. Inside is not a demanding title by modern standards, and its performance ceiling is easily reached by many mid-range and high-end components. The combo’s position in the rankings suggests that while it delivers an excellent experience, there are 1,528 other configurations that do so at higher frame rates. The delta between this combo and the top performers is not detailed in the data, but the rank indicates that the GPU is not a top-tier part. The RX 6750 XT sits in the 71st percentile of all GPUs, which aligns with the combo’s overall ranking. The CPU’s high percentile (86th) does not boost the combo further, confirming that the GPU is the performance limiter in this pairing. For a game like Inside, the 1,529 rank is more than sufficient for a smooth experience, as the lowest average FPS recorded is 76 at 4K Ultra, which is still well above standard 60 FPS targets.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the user’s display and preference for frame rate over visual fidelity.

For 1080p displays, the Low preset delivers the highest average FPS at 353, which is beneficial for very high refresh rate monitors (e.g., 360 Hz). However, the Medium preset at 283 FPS average is a more balanced choice, offering a significant visual upgrade over Low while still providing frame rates far above what any current 1080p display can refresh. The High preset at 177 FPS is also viable for 240 Hz monitors, while Ultra at 168 FPS is suitable for 165 Hz displays.

At 1440p, the Low preset yields 254 FPS, which is excessive for most monitors. The Medium preset at 203 FPS is excellent for 240 Hz panels. High at 127 FPS is a strong option for 144 Hz displays, providing a good balance of quality and speed. Ultra at 121 FPS is also playable on 120 Hz monitors, though the visual difference between High and Ultra may not justify the slight frame rate reduction.

For 4K displays, the data shows a different story. The Low preset at 160 FPS is the only way to hit very high refresh rates at this resolution. The Medium preset at 128 FPS is an excellent choice for 120 Hz 4K TVs or monitors. High at 80 FPS is playable but does not fully saturate a 120 Hz display. Ultra at 76 FPS is the most demanding setting, still delivering above 60 FPS, but the 4 FPS difference between High and Ultra is minimal. Given that the Medium preset provides a 48 FPS advantage over High (128 vs 80), it offers the best experience for 4K users seeking high frame rates. For users prioritizing maximum visual quality, Ultra at 76 FPS remains a viable option, but Medium provides a substantial performance headroom with a likely modest visual compromise.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture using a 7 nm process at TSMC. It features 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The GPU has 40 ray tracing cores. Its base clock is 2150 MHz, with a game clock of 2495 MHz and a boost clock of 2600 MHz. The memory operates at 2250 MHz, effectively 18 Gbps, across a 192-bit bus.

The 12 GB of GDDR6 memory provides a bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is more than sufficient for Inside, which is a 2D game with relatively simple textures and geometry. The game’s release in 2016 predates the GPU by several years, so VRAM capacity is not a limiting factor at any tested resolution or setting. The GPU’s pixel rate is 166.4 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 416.0 GTexel/s, both of which contribute to its ability to handle the game’s rendering demands.

The GPU’s FP32 performance is 13.31 TFLOPS, and its FP16 performance is 26.62 TFLOPS. These compute figures are far beyond what Inside requires, as the game does not utilize heavy compute shaders or advanced post-processing effects. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 26,011, placing it in the 71st percentile. Its nearest rivals show a tight grouping, with the AMD Radeon R9 M395X being 0.5% slower, the AMD FirePro W7100 0.6% slower, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile 1.1% slower.

The benchmark results in Inside show the GPU scaling as expected with resolution. The fact that the 4K Ultra setting still produces 76 FPS indicates that the RX 6750 XT has ample headroom for this title. The GPU is clearly the performance limiter in this combo, as evidenced by the consistent FPS drops when moving from 1080p to 4K. The CPU is not holding back the GPU, as the frame rates would not scale so predictably with resolution if the processor were the bottleneck. The RX 6750 XT’s 12 GB of VRAM and high bandwidth ensure that memory is never a constraint in this game, allowing the GPU to operate at its full potential across all tested configurations.