Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer that is remarkably forgiving on modern hardware, and the measured data for the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 reflects that. The combination delivers extremely high frame rates across all tested configurations, with the data indicating that the primary bottleneck shifts from the GPU at higher resolutions to the CPU at lower resolutions. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS rows to explain how the system scales, what each component contributes, and where the optimal settings lie.

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates show a clear and predictable drop as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, but the magnitude of that drop varies significantly depending on the quality preset. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 433 at 1080p to 317 at 1440p, a reduction of 116 FPS, and then to 199 at 4K, another 118 FPS drop. This steep decline indicates that even at Low settings, the rendering workload at higher resolutions begins to tax the GPU substantially, though the absolute numbers remain far above playable thresholds.

For Medium settings, the scaling pattern is similar but with a slightly different slope. The average FPS at 1080p is 352, dropping to 253 at 1440p (a 99 FPS decrease) and then to 159 at 4K (a 94 FPS decrease). The consistency of these drops—roughly 100 FPS per resolution step—suggests that the GPU is the limiting component across all three resolutions at Medium, with the CPU providing enough headroom to avoid becoming a constraint.

High settings exhibit the same trend, with average FPS at 220 for 1080p, 158 at 1440p, and 99 at 4K. The deltas here are 62 FPS and 59 FPS respectively, which are smaller in absolute terms but proportionally similar to the Medium preset. Interestingly, Ultra settings show the smallest absolute drops: 210 FPS at 1080p, 151 at 1440p, and 95 at 4K, with deltas of 59 FPS and 56 FPS. This convergence at the top end suggests that the game's Ultra preset imposes a nearly fixed cost that scales more with resolution than with the complexity of the scene, likely due to the title's minimalist art style.

The data indicates that at 1080p, frame rates are so high—ranging from 210 to 433 FPS—that the CPU becomes a more significant factor, as the GPU has spare capacity to render frames faster than the processor can feed it. At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiting component, with even the highest preset delivering only 95 FPS, which is still smooth but far below the 433 FPS seen at 1080p Low.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080, with its 10 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 320-bit bus, provides 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is ample for a game like Inside that does not feature complex textures or high-resolution assets. The GPU's boost clock of 1710 MHz, combined with 8704 shading units, delivers substantial raw compute power, as evidenced by its Passmark G3D score of 25086 and its 68th percentile ranking among all GPUs. In this context, the RTX 3080's role is to maintain high frame rates at 4K, where it still manages an average of 95 FPS on Ultra settings.

The VRAM capacity of 10 GB is more than sufficient for Inside, given its release date and art style, and the data shows no penalties at higher resolutions that would indicate memory pressure. The GPU's memory clock of 1188 MHz, translating to 19 Gbps effective, ensures that data transfer is not a bottleneck even when the frame rate reaches 433 FPS at 1080p Low. The measured results suggest that the RTX 3080 is overqualified for this title, as even the most demanding preset at 4K only utilizes a fraction of its capabilities.

Comparing to its nearest rivals, the RTX 3080's average benchmark score of 23172 is within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon RX 6600M and the AMD Radeon R9 M290X, though those comparisons are based on synthetic benchmarks rather than gaming performance. In Inside specifically, the GPU's performance is more than adequate, and the data shows that the limiting factor at 4K is not the GPU's raw power but rather the game's engine and the CPU's ability to issue draw calls. The 4 nm process node of the CPU, which is much smaller than the GPU's 8 nm node, does not directly affect gaming performance but does contribute to the CPU's efficiency in handling the game's logic.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D is a desktop processor with 8 cores and 16 threads, based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge). Its base clock of 4.70 GHz and boost clock of 5.60 GHz are exceptionally high, and the 96 MB of shared L3 cache is a significant asset for gaming workloads. The CPU's Passmark single-thread score of 4704 and multithread score of 41318 place it in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs, indicating that it is a top-tier processor for both single and multi-threaded tasks.

In Inside, the CPU's role is most evident at 1080p, where frame rates exceed 400 FPS. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 433, which is likely close to the game's engine limit or the CPU's ability to process game logic and physics. The fact that the 4K Low setting also achieves 199 FPS—still a very high number—suggests that the CPU is not a bottleneck at higher resolutions, but rather that the GPU's rendering workload is what limits performance. The CPU's 16 threads and high clocks ensure that even the most demanding scenes with multiple dynamic objects do not cause frame drops, as evidenced by the minimum FPS of 299 at 1080p Medium, which is only 53 FPS below the average.

The CPU's nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score include the Intel Core i9-14900 (with a delta of 0.5%) and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 (with a delta of -0.7%), but these comparisons are based on general benchmarks, not specific to Inside. For this game, the CPU's performance is so far above the requirements that it effectively removes any CPU-induced stutter, allowing the GPU to operate at its full potential. The 120 W TDP and dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth further contribute to the system's overall responsiveness, though these factors are unlikely to be the deciding factor in a game as light as Inside.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 ranks 510th out of 2887 tested combos in Inside, placing it in the top 17.7% of all configurations. This ranking is notable because the RTX 3080 is an end-of-life product from 2020, while the CPU is a newly released part from 2026, but the combination still outperforms a significant majority of systems. The high ranking is driven primarily by the CPU's exceptional single-thread performance and the GPU's adequate throughput for this game.

Given that the RTX 3080's percentile ranking among all GPUs is only 68th, one might expect the combo to rank lower, but the CPU's 92nd percentile ranking compensates, and the game's low graphical demands mean that the GPU is rarely the limiting factor. The data shows that at 4K Ultra, the combo delivers 95 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS target for most players, and at 1080p, it exceeds 200 FPS on all presets. This suggests that the combo is well-balanced for Inside, with the CPU providing enough headroom to ensure that the GPU can always reach its maximum potential without being bottlenecked.

The rank of 510 out of 2887 also implies that there are many combos with faster GPUs, such as the RTX 40-series, that would outperform it, but the margin is likely small given the game's simplicity. The data indicates that the combo is in the upper quartile of performance, and for a game released in 2016, this is more than sufficient for a smooth and responsive experience at any resolution.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and refresh rate. At 1080p, all presets deliver average FPS above 210, so the recommendation is to use Ultra settings for the best visual quality, as the 210 FPS average is still well above the 144 Hz refresh rate of most monitors. The minimum FPS for Ultra is not provided, but the Medium preset's minimum of 299 FPS suggests that Ultra would likely stay above 200 FPS, making it a safe choice.

For 1440p, High settings provide an average of 158 FPS, which is ideal for 144 Hz displays, while Ultra drops to 151 FPS, a negligible difference of 7 FPS. The recommendation here is to use High settings to ensure a more consistent frame rate, as the margin between High and Ultra is slim and High offers a slightly higher average. If a 60 Hz monitor is used, Ultra is acceptable, but High is the better balance for high-refresh displays.

At 4K, the choice is more nuanced. Ultra delivers 95 FPS average, which is suitable for 60 Hz panels but may not be ideal for 120 Hz or higher. High settings provide 99 FPS, a marginal improvement of 4 FPS, while Medium offers 159 FPS, which is a significant jump and would be the best choice for 120 Hz or 144 Hz displays. The data shows that Medium at 4K has a minimum FPS of 135, which is still smooth, making it the recommended preset for 4K gaming if a high-refresh monitor is used. For a 60 Hz display, High or Ultra are both viable, but Medium offers a safer margin above the refresh rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data is consistent across all resolutions and settings, with no anomalies or unexpected drops. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 210 on Ultra to 433 on Low, with Medium at 352 and High at 220. The minimum FPS for Medium is 299, and the maximum is 405, indicating a tight frame pacing with a 106 FPS spread. For High and Ultra at 1080p, no minimum or maximum values are listed, but the averages are high enough that any variation is unlikely to be perceptible.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS drops to 151 for Ultra, 158 for High, 253 for Medium, and 317 for Low. The Medium preset shows a minimum of 215 and a maximum of 291, which is a 76 FPS spread, slightly tighter than at 1080p. The absence of min/max data for Low, High, and Ultra at this resolution suggests that the frame times are stable, with the average being representative of the experience.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS is 95 for Ultra, 99 for High, 159 for Medium, and 199 for Low. The Medium preset has a minimum of 135 and a maximum of 183, which is a 48 FPS spread, the tightest of any preset across all resolutions. This indicates that the game's performance is most consistent at 4K Medium, likely due to the GPU being more uniformly utilized at this resolution. The High and Ultra presets at 4K have no min/max data, but their averages are within a few FPS of each other, suggesting that the visual quality settings have a minimal impact on performance at this resolution.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain 144 FPS?

A: At 1440p, High settings deliver an average of 158 FPS, which is above 144 FPS, while Medium delivers 253 FPS. At 4K, Medium delivers 159 FPS, which is also above 144 FPS, but High and Ultra fall below at 99 and 95 FPS respectively.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 1080p?

A: At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 433, which is likely near the CPU's limit for this game, as the GPU has spare capacity. The CPU's high single-thread score of 4704 in Passmark supports this, indicating that the processor is the limiting factor at this resolution.

Q: How does the RTX 3080 compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RTX 3080 has an average benchmark score of 23172, which is within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23273) and the AMD Radeon R9 M290X (23276), with deltas of -0.4% for both.

Q: What is the combo's ranking relative to all tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 510th out of 2887 tested combos, placing it in the top 17.7% of all systems tested for Inside.

Q: Does the CPU's 96 MB of L3 cache have a measurable impact on frame rates?

A: The data does not directly measure cache impact, but the CPU's high single-thread performance and the game's low requirements suggest that the cache contributes to the high average FPS, especially at 1080p where the CPU is more involved.

Q: Is it better to use High or Ultra settings at 1440p for a 144 Hz monitor?

A: High settings provide an average of 158 FPS, which is above 144 Hz, while Ultra provides 151 FPS, also above 144 Hz. Both are suitable, but High offers a slightly higher margin, making it the safer choice for consistent frame rates.