Inside

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D is an 8-core, 16-thread desktop processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, built on a 4 nm process. Its base clock is 4.70 GHz, boosting up to 5.60 GHz, with a substantial 96 MB of shared L3 cache. For a game like Inside, which is a 2D puzzle platformer rather than a multi-threaded simulation, the processor’s single-thread performance is the dominant factor; the data shows strong Cinebench R23 single-core results at 2228 points, placing it in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs. This high single-core throughput ensures that the game’s physics and logic threads are fed without becoming a bottleneck, especially when the GPU is producing hundreds of frames per second.

The CPU’s multi-core capability, while not heavily stressed by Inside, remains robust; its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22807 points and PassMark multithread score of 41318 indicate ample headroom for background tasks. Compared to its nearest rivals, the Ryzen 7 9850X3D’s average benchmark score of 58386 is effectively tied with the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M (0.1% ahead) and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 (0.7% behind), while it holds a 0.5% edge over the Intel Core i9-14900. In this title, the CPU’s job is to maintain high minimum frame pacing, and given the measured FPS, it performs admirably, though the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

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

The Ryzen 7 9850X3D’s architecture provides a wide margin of performance for Inside. The game’s 2016 release date predates the CPU’s 2026 launch, but the measured data reflects a modern pairing. With 8 cores and 16 threads, the processor has more than enough parallel resources; however, the game’s engine likely relies on a few primary threads, making the 5.60 GHz boost clock and the large 96 MB L3 cache the key assets. The L3 cache helps reduce memory latency, which is critical for maintaining consistent frame times in a game where the action is often on a single scene.

In the measured results, the CPU does not appear to be the constraint. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 387 FPS, a figure that requires extremely fast thread scheduling and low overhead. The PassMark single-thread score of 4704 further confirms the processor’s strength in lightly-threaded workloads. The data shows that the CPU’s performance is more than sufficient to keep up with the GPU across all tested settings, as the FPS deltas between resolutions are more indicative of GPU load than CPU limitations. The processor’s 120W TDP and DDR5 memory support (89.6 GB/s bandwidth) ensure that data feeding the GPU is never starved, but the game’s modest requirements mean the CPU is likely idling well below its full potential.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT is the primary driver of frame rates in Inside. This GPU features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is ample for the game’s textures and effects. The GPU’s boost clock is 2544 MHz, with a game clock of 2171 MHz, and it is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with 3456 shading units. For a 2D title, the GPU’s raw fill rate and pixel throughput are the main factors; the data lists a pixel rate of 244.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 549.5 GTexel/s, both of which are far beyond the requirements of Inside.

The GPU’s 67th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it as a mid-to-high tier part, but the measured FPS in this game are exceptionally high. At 1080p Ultra, the combo hits 184 FPS, while at 4K Ultra it drops to 83 FPS, indicating that the GPU is still the scaling factor as resolution increases. The GPU’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile, scores 0.5% higher in average benchmarks, while the RTX 2080 is 1.5% ahead; however, these differences are negligible in a game running at these frame rates. The 12 GB VRAM is never a concern, as even at 4K, the game’s asset sizes are manageable, and the bandwidth ensures no stutter from texture streaming. The GPU’s DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) is overkill for Inside, but it ensures full compatibility.

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

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture for optimal settings. At 1080p, the High preset delivers 193 FPS, while Medium yields 309 FPS and Low reaches 387 FPS. The difference between Medium and Low is 78 FPS, but the jump from High to Medium is 116 FPS, suggesting that the Medium preset offers a substantial performance headroom without the visual compromises of Low. For the smoothest experience on a 144Hz or 240Hz display, Medium at 1080p is the sweet spot, as it maintains an average of 309 FPS with a minimum of 263 FPS, ensuring no frame drops below typical refresh rates.

Moving to 1440p, the Medium preset still holds up strongly at 222 FPS on average, with a minimum of 189 FPS. This makes Medium the recommended choice for 1440p as well, as it provides a high frame rate buffer. The High preset at 1440p drops to 139 FPS, which is still playable but less smooth on high-refresh monitors. At 4K, the Medium preset is the best balance, averaging 140 FPS with a minimum of 119 FPS. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, yielding 184 FPS at 1080p, 132 FPS at 1440p, and 83 FPS at 4K. Given that Ultra only offers a marginal visual upgrade over High in a game with muted colors and simple geometry, the data suggests that High is the better choice for Ultra’s performance cost, but Medium provides the best overall experience across all resolutions due to its high minimum FPS.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D and the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT ranks 1168th out of 3716 tested combos in Inside. This places it in the top 31.4% of all systems tested for this game, which is a strong showing given the game’s age and the prevalence of higher-end GPUs in the database. The rank reflects the balance of the pairing: the CPU is in the 92nd percentile, but the GPU is only in the 67th percentile, meaning the GPU is the limiting factor in this combo’s overall standing.

The data shows that the combo’s performance is not competitive with top-tier systems that feature flagship GPUs, but it far exceeds the average. The rank is more indicative of the GPU’s position than the CPU’s, as the CPU is clearly overqualified for this title. In comparison to other tested combos, this pairing is positioned among mid-range configurations, with the GPU’s benchmark score of 22547 being the primary driver of the rank. The CPU’s high single-core scores do not translate to a higher rank because the game is not CPU-bound, even at lower resolutions. The 1168th rank out of 3716 is a solid mid-pack result, showing that this combo handles Inside with ease, but it is not at the very top of the leaderboard.

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

The FPS scaling across resolutions reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 193 at 1080p to 139 at 1440p (a 28% decrease) and then to 87 at 4K (a 55% decrease from 1080p). This pattern is consistent with the GPU’s pixel throughput being the limiting factor, as the number of pixels increases geometrically. The CPU’s performance does not change with resolution, so the FPS drop is entirely attributable to the GPU’s workload.

For Medium settings, the drop is less steep: 309 FPS at 1080p, 222 FPS at 1440p, and 140 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is 54.7%, which is nearly identical to the High preset’s 54.9%, confirming that the GPU is the sole bottleneck. At Low settings, the FPS drops from 387 at 1080p to 278 at 1440p and 175 at 4K, a 54.8% reduction. This consistency across all presets is a strong indicator that the CPU, with its high single-core and multi-core scores, is never the limiting component. The GPU’s 12 GB VRAM and 432 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for all resolutions, but the raw shading and pixel fill rates determine the frame rates, which scale predictably with pixel count.

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

At 1920x1080, the measured data shows a wide spread across settings. Low settings produce an average of 387 FPS, with no minimum or maximum listed. Medium settings yield an average of 309 FPS, with a minimum of 263 FPS and a maximum of 356 FPS. High settings drop to an average of 193 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 184 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 78 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is 116 FPS, indicating a significant performance hit when enabling higher-quality textures and effects. The gap between High and Ultra is only 9 FPS, suggesting that Ultra offers diminishing returns at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the pattern remains similar but compressed. Low settings average 278 FPS, Medium averages 222 FPS (with a minimum of 189 and maximum of 256), High averages 139 FPS, and Ultra averages 132 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 56 FPS, from Medium to High is 83 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 7 FPS. This shows that the Medium preset is the most efficient in terms of FPS per visual quality step, as the jump to High costs a substantial 37% of the Medium frame rate. At 3840x2160, Low settings average 175 FPS, Medium averages 140 FPS (with a minimum of 119 and maximum of 161), High averages 87 FPS, and Ultra averages 83 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra is a mere 4 FPS, making Ultra a poor choice at 4K, while Medium provides a playable 140 FPS with a minimum above 119 FPS, which is suitable for most displays.