Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer with modest visual demands, but the combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D and the Intel Arc B370 produces a surprisingly uneven performance profile. The data shows a system that can deliver very high frame rates at lower settings, yet struggles to maintain playable numbers at 4K with high-end presets. The Arc B370, with a benchmark percentile of just 5 among all GPUs, is clearly the limiting factor at higher resolutions, while the Ryzen 7 9800X3D’s 87th percentile CPU standing ensures the processor is never the bottleneck. This analysis breaks down exactly what each component contributes and where the system’s practical limits lie.

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates reveal a steep performance cliff as resolution increases, which is a classic sign of GPU-bound rendering. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 141 FPS. Moving to 1440p at the same Low preset drops that to 101 FPS, a 28% reduction. At 4K, the Low preset yields just 64 FPS, which is a 55% drop from the 1080p result. This scaling pattern is consistent with a GPU that is quickly overwhelmed by pixel count, while the CPU has ample headroom to feed frames at lower resolutions.

The situation becomes more pronounced at higher settings. With the Medium preset, the frame rate falls from 113 FPS at 1080p to 81 FPS at 1440p (a 28% drop), and then to 51 FPS at 4K (a 55% drop from 1080p). The High preset shows a similar trajectory: 70 FPS at 1080p, 51 FPS at 1440p, and 32 FPS at 4K. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, starting at 67 FPS at 1080p, dropping to 48 FPS at 1440p, and collapsing to 30 FPS at 4K. The pattern is consistent: every doubling of pixel count from 1080p to 4K roughly halves the frame rate, which is the expected behavior for a system where the GPU is the primary constraint.

Notably, the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low (141 FPS) and Ultra (67 FPS) is 74 FPS. At 4K, that gap shrinks to 34 FPS (64 vs. 30), because the GPU is so saturated at 4K that even lowering settings cannot fully recover performance. This suggests that at 4K, the Arc B370 is running near its absolute limits regardless of the preset, and the frame rate is governed more by raw pixel throughput than by the specific graphics options selected. The medium preset at 4K does show a min FPS of 43 and max of 59, indicating some variance, but the average of 51 FPS is still well below the 60 FPS target most players would prefer.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the optimal balance of visual quality and frame rate depends heavily on the target resolution. At 1080p, the High preset delivers 70 FPS, which is smooth for a puzzle platformer, while the Ultra preset only improves visuals marginally at 67 FPS. The Medium preset at 113 FPS is the sweet spot for high refresh rate displays, and Low at 141 FPS is available for maximum smoothness. For a 60 Hz monitor at 1080p, High is the recommended choice because it holds above 60 FPS without the performance cost of Ultra.

At 1440p, the situation changes. The High preset produces 51 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold and may feel slightly stuttery for sensitive players. The Medium preset at 81 FPS is the clear recommendation for 1440p, as it provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS while retaining most visual fidelity. The Low preset at 101 FPS is viable for competitive play, but the visual downgrade is noticeable. Ultra at 48 FPS is not recommended for 1440p, as the frame rate dips below 50 FPS and the visual gains over High are minimal.

At 4K, the data shows a tough trade-off. The Medium preset is the only option that stays above 50 FPS, with an average of 51 FPS and a minimum of 43 FPS. The High preset drops to 32 FPS, which is borderline unplayable for a game that requires precise timing in its puzzles. Low at 64 FPS is technically the only preset that hits the 60 FPS mark at 4K, but it sacrifices significant visual detail. For players who prioritize smooth gameplay at 4K, Low is the only viable choice; for those who can tolerate occasional dips, Medium offers a better visual experience at 51 FPS. Ultra at 30 FPS should be avoided entirely, as it falls below the standard playability threshold.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the dominant factor in this system’s gaming performance, and the benchmark data confirms its limited capabilities. The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (deltaPct -0.2%) and the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (deltaPct -0.5%), which are both legacy parts, underscoring the B370’s position at the bottom of the modern GPU hierarchy. The GPU has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, with a boost clock of 2400 MHz, but its memory is system-shared, meaning bandwidth is dependent on the system’s DDR5 configuration.

The GPU’s clock speeds are not the issue; the 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 compute is modest, but the real constraint is memory bandwidth. With system-shared memory, the B370 must compete with the CPU for the same DDR5 bandwidth, which explains the steep performance drop at 4K. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are low by modern standards, directly limiting fill-rate-bound scenes. In Inside, which uses a distinctive silhouette art style with heavy lighting effects, the GPU’s fill rate becomes the bottleneck at higher resolutions, as evidenced by the 4K Ultra result of 30 FPS.

The GPU’s 25 W TDP and IGP slot width indicate it is designed for integrated use, likely in a mobile or compact form factor. This explains why it rivals decade-old discrete GPUs like the Radeon HD 5770. For this game, the B370 can handle 1080p and 1440p with reasonable settings, but 4K is only playable at Low settings. The 3DMark score of 1184, compared to the Ryzen 7 9800X3D’s average benchmark score of 39768, shows a massive imbalance: the CPU is roughly 33 times more powerful in synthetic benchmarks, yet the GPU limits real-world frame rates.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Inside at 4K with smooth frame rates?

A: Only at Low settings, where the average FPS is 64. The Medium preset at 4K produces 51 FPS, while High and Ultra drop to 32 and 30 FPS respectively. For consistent 60 FPS at 4K, Low is the only option.

Q: What is the best setting for a 1440p monitor?

A: The Medium preset gives 81 FPS at 1440p, which is well above the 60 FPS target. High (51 FPS) and Ultra (48 FPS) fall below 60 FPS, making Medium the best balance of quality and performance.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The GPU is clearly the bottleneck. The Arc B370 ranks in the 5th percentile among GPUs, while the Ryzen 7 9800X3D ranks in the 87th percentile among CPUs. The frame rate drops by roughly half when moving from 1080p to 4K at any given setting, which is a GPU-bound signature.

Q: How does the Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The B370’s 3DMark score of 1184 is nearly identical to the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, deltaPct -0.2%) and the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, deltaPct -0.5%). It is slightly ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, deltaPct 1.4%). All are within a 1.4% performance delta, making them effectively equivalent.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1080p with High settings?

A: The measured average is 70 FPS. This is above 60 FPS, making it smooth for most players, though the Ultra preset only manages 67 FPS, so High is the recommended maximum at 1080p.

Q: Does the system show any frame time variance at 4K?

A: The Medium preset at 4K has a minimum FPS of 43 and a maximum of 59, indicating noticeable variance around the 51 FPS average. This can cause occasional stutters, especially during scene transitions.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is a high-end desktop processor with 8 cores and 16 threads, based on the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm process. Its base clock is 4.70 GHz with a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, and it features 96 MB of shared L3 cache, which is substantial for gaming workloads. The CPU’s benchmark results are strong: it scores 23230 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2080 in single-core, with a Geekbench multi-core score of 18696. In Passmark, it achieves 40009 in multithreaded tests and 4430 in single-threaded tests. These numbers place it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 39768.

The nearest CPU rivals are all within a 0.8% deltaPct, including the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS (39603, deltaPct 0.4%), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (40048, deltaPct -0.7%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 (40081, deltaPct -0.8%). This shows that the 9800X3D is competitive with, but not dramatically ahead of, other modern mid-range and high-end parts. For Inside, however, the CPU’s performance is largely irrelevant because the game is not CPU-intensive. The measured frame rates are far below what the CPU could theoretically deliver, as evidenced by the fact that at 1080p Low, the system only achieves 141 FPS, whereas a CPU-bound scenario would likely exceed 200 FPS.

The CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads, combined with the large L3 cache, ensure that it will never bottleneck the Arc B370 in this title. Even at 4K Ultra, where the GPU is struggling to maintain 30 FPS, the CPU is likely idle most of the time. The data suggests that Inside’s rendering is almost entirely GPU-limited, and the 9800X3D’s 5.20 GHz boost clock and high single-thread performance (Passmark single-thread 4430) are more than sufficient for the game’s physics and logic. In practical terms, players could pair this CPU with a much weaker GPU and see identical frame rates in Inside, as the bottleneck is firmly on the graphics side.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best results. Low settings produce an average of 141 FPS, making it the only preset that exceeds 120 FPS. Medium settings drop to 113 FPS, with a minimum of 96 FPS and a maximum of 130 FPS, indicating smooth performance with minor dips. High settings average 70 FPS, which is still above the 60 FPS threshold, while Ultra settings average 67 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra is negligible at just 3 FPS, suggesting that the Ultra preset offers diminishing returns at 1080p.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates scale downward as expected. Low settings average 101 FPS, which is excellent for 1440p. Medium settings average 81 FPS, with a minimum of 69 FPS and a maximum of 93 FPS, providing a stable experience above 60 FPS. High settings drop to 51 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target, and Ultra settings further drop to 48 FPS. The medium preset is clearly the best choice for 1440p, as it maintains a comfortable margin above 60 FPS while offering better visuals than Low.

At 3840x2160, the GPU’s limitations become severe. Low settings average 64 FPS, which is the only 4K preset that reaches 60 FPS. Medium settings average 51 FPS, with a minimum of 43 FPS and a maximum of 59 FPS, showing significant frame time variance. High settings drop to 32 FPS, and Ultra settings bottom out at 30 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium at 4K is 13 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is 19 FPS, indicating that each step up in settings costs more performance at 4K than at lower resolutions. The data shows a clear hierarchy: 1080p is playable at any preset, 1440p is best at Medium, and 4K requires Low for smooth gameplay.