Inside

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti combination delivers a performance profile that is decisively at the upper end of the database, handling the game Inside with substantial headroom across all tested configurations. The measured frame rates indicate a system that is never constrained by its components at standard display resolutions, with the data revealing a clear shift in bottleneck behavior only when scaling to 4K.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s standing within the benchmark database is strong, though the ranking reflects the overall capability of the pair rather than any single component’s peak performance. The combination ranks 406th out of 2887 tested combos for this game, placing it in the top ~14% of all configurations analyzed. This percentile position is notable because Inside is a title that tends to be more forgiving on hardware than modern AAA releases; the rank indicates that this pairing is significantly above the median, but it also shows that there are more than 400 configurations that outperform it in this specific workload.

Examining the individual components provides context for this ranking. The CPU, AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D, sits in the 92nd percentile against all tested CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 58386. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M (avg score 58323, delta +0.1%) and the Intel Core i9-14900 (avg score 58115, delta +0.5%), showing that the 9850X3D is competitively positioned within a tight cluster of high-end processors. The GPU, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti, holds the 83rd percentile against all tested GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 41187. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (avg score 40870, delta +0.8%) and the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB (avg score 41707, delta -1.2%), indicating that the GPU’s raw compute performance is just above the median for top-tier cards, though it is not at the very apex of the GPU hierarchy.

The delta between the CPU’s and GPU’s percentile ranks (92 vs. 83) is a meaningful data point. It suggests that in this configuration, the processor is relatively stronger than the graphics card when compared to their respective peers. For a puzzle platformer like Inside, which is not typically known for extreme graphical fidelity, this CPU advantage can translate into very high frame rates, as the data confirms.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti is built on the Ampere architecture with a GA102 chip, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It features 10240 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 112 raster output pipelines. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1365 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz, with memory running at 1188 MHz (effective 19 Gbps). Its 12 GB of GDDR6X memory is connected via a 384-bit bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 912.4 GB/s.

In the context of Inside, the GPU’s role is primarily to maintain high frame rates at higher resolutions. The measured data shows that the RTX 3080 Ti is not a limiting factor until extreme settings and 4K resolution are combined. At 1080p, the GPU is clearly not the bottleneck; the frame rates are so high that the CPU’s capability is the more relevant constraint. At 1440p, the GPU begins to take on more responsibility, but the data still shows it handling the load with ease. At 4K, however, the GPU’s workload increases substantially, and the frame rates at Ultra settings drop to 98 FPS average, indicating that the graphics card is now the primary performance limiter.

The GPU’s computational throughput, measured at 34.10 TFLOPS for FP32, is more than sufficient for this game’s rendering demands. The pixel rate of 186.5 GPixel/s and texture rate of 532.8 GTexel/s are also high enough to avoid bottlenecks in most scenarios. The fact that the GPU scores 26896 in Passmark G3D and 5077 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 reinforces that it is a capable performer. The data from the measured FPS rows suggests that the RTX 3080 Ti is overprovisioned for 1080p gaming in this title, but its 12 GB VRAM and high bandwidth become relevant when pushing 4K Ultra, where the average FPS of 98 is still highly playable but shows a significant drop from lower settings.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D is a 9000-series desktop processor using the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Granite Ridge, on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The processor’s cache configuration includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a large 96 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports DDR5 memory via a dual-channel interface, with a theoretical bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

For Inside, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic updates. The game is not heavily multithreaded, but the CPU’s high single-thread performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2228, is crucial for achieving the highest frame rates. The measured FPS data shows that at 1080p Low, the combination reaches 433 FPS average, which is a scenario where the CPU is likely the limiting factor. This is supported by the fact that the CPU’s Passmark single-thread score is 4704, placing it in a high percentile for single-threaded workloads.

The CPU’s multi-threaded capabilities are also strong, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22807 and a Passmark multi-thread score of 41318. While Inside may not utilize all 16 threads, the CPU’s overall capability ensures that it does not become a bottleneck even when the GPU is under heavy load. The 3D V-Cache technology, which contributes to the 96 MB of L3 cache, is particularly beneficial in scenarios where data needs to be accessed quickly, though for a game like Inside, the benefit is less pronounced than in cache-sensitive simulation titles. The CPU’s TDP of 120 W suggests it is power-efficient, and its performance relative to rivals (e.g., 0.5% ahead of the Intel Core i9-14900 in average benchmark score) confirms it is a top-tier part. However, the data indicates that the CPU’s high level of performance is somewhat underutilized in this game at 4K, where the GPU becomes the constraint.

FAQ

*Q: Is this combo overkill for playing Inside?*

A: The data shows that at 1080p and 1440p, the frame rates are extremely high, with 1080p Low averaging 433 FPS. This suggests the hardware is capable of far more than the game demands, indicating significant headroom. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 98 FPS, which is still smooth, but the performance gain from lower resolutions is substantial.

Q: Which component is the bottleneck at 4K Ultra settings?

A: The measured FPS data shows a large drop when moving from 1440p Ultra (156 FPS) to 4K Ultra (98 FPS). This 58 FPS decrease indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K, as the CPU’s performance does not degrade with resolution.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D has an average benchmark score of 58386. Its nearest rival, the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M, scores 58323, which is a 0.1% difference. The Intel Core i9-14900 scores 58115, putting it 0.5% behind the 9850X3D.

Q: What is the GPU’s performance percentile, and what does that mean for this game?

A: The RTX 3080 Ti is in the 83rd percentile of all tested GPUs. This means it performs better than 83% of GPUs in the database. In Inside, this translates to playable frame rates even at 4K Ultra, but it is not at the very top tier, as evidenced by its rank relative to other GPUs.

Q: Is there a significant performance difference between Medium and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: Yes. The data shows that at 1080p, Medium settings average 366 FPS, while Ultra settings average 218 FPS. This is a difference of 148 FPS, or roughly 40% lower performance at Ultra compared to Medium.

Q: Does the CPU’s large L3 cache (96 MB) provide any benefit in this game?

A: The data does not isolate the effect of the cache. However, the CPU’s high single-thread score (2228 in Cinebench R23 single-core) and overall percentile rank (92nd) suggest it is very capable. The cache likely contributes to the CPU’s ability to maintain high frame rates, but the game’s performance is more directly correlated with the GPU at higher resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of how performance scales with resolution. At 1080p, the system is heavily CPU-limited, as shown by the high frame rates across all settings. The average FPS at 1080p Low is 433, dropping to 366 at Medium, 228 at High, and 218 at Ultra. This scaling from Low to Ultra at the same resolution shows a reduction of about 50% in frame rate, which is primarily due to increased GPU load.

Moving to 1440p, the frame rates decrease across the board compared to 1080p. At 1440p Low, the average is 329 FPS, which is 104 FPS lower than 1080p Low. At 1440p Ultra, the average is 156 FPS, which is 62 FPS lower than 1080p Ultra. This indicates that the GPU is starting to become more of a factor, but the CPU is still capable of pushing high frame rates.

The most significant drop occurs when moving from 1440p to 4K. At 4K Low, the average is 206 FPS, which is 123 FPS lower than 1440p Low. At 4K Ultra, the average is 98 FPS, which is 58 FPS lower than 1440p Ultra. This substantial decline at 4K, particularly at Low settings where the CPU should be the primary driver, confirms that the GPU is the limiting component at this resolution. The data shows that the system transitions from a CPU-bound state at 1080p to a more balanced state at 1440p, and finally to a GPU-bound state at 4K. The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings is 120 FPS (from 218 to 98), which represents a 55% reduction in performance, highlighting the GPU’s workload increase.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend on the user’s refresh rate and resolution preferences. For 1080p displays with a 144Hz or 240Hz refresh rate, the High preset is the recommended choice. It delivers an average of 228 FPS, which is more than sufficient to saturate high-refresh-rate monitors. The Ultra preset at 1080p averages 218 FPS, which is only slightly lower, but the visual difference may not justify the performance cost for a game like Inside. The Medium preset at 366 FPS is excessive for most displays, and the Low preset at 433 FPS offers no practical benefit.

At 1440p, the High preset is again the sweet spot, averaging 164 FPS. This is ideal for 144Hz monitors and provides a smooth experience. The Medium preset averages 263 FPS, which is higher than necessary, but it could be used for future-proofing. The Ultra preset at 156 FPS is also viable for 144Hz displays, but the marginal visual improvement over High is not worth the 8 FPS drop. The Low preset at 329 FPS is only useful for competitive play, which is not relevant for a puzzle platformer.

For 4K displays, the data suggests that the Medium preset provides the best balance of quality and performance, averaging 165 FPS. This is highly playable and offers a significant visual upgrade over Low (206 FPS). The High preset at 103 FPS is also acceptable for 60Hz displays, but it is below the 120Hz threshold. The Ultra preset at 98 FPS is the most demanding, and while it is playable, the performance difference between Medium and Ultra (a drop of 67 FPS) is substantial. Given that Inside is a slower-paced game, the Medium preset at 4K is the recommended choice to maintain high frame rates without compromising visual fidelity. The data indicates that the Medium settings consistently provide a balanced experience across all three resolutions, with the 1080p Medium averaging 366 FPS, 1440p Medium averaging 263 FPS, and 4K Medium averaging 165 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following is a complete breakdown of the measured average FPS for each resolution and settings combination, as recorded in the database.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 433 FPS average
• Medium: 366 FPS average (min 311, max 420)
• High: 228 FPS average
• Ultra: 218 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 329 FPS average
• Medium: 263 FPS average (min 223, max 302)
• High: 164 FPS average
• Ultra: 156 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 206 FPS average
• Medium: 165 FPS average (min 140, max 190)
• High: 103 FPS average
• Ultra: 98 FPS average

The data shows a consistent pattern: for each resolution, the frame rate decreases as settings increase from Low to Ultra. The largest relative drop is observed at 4K, where the difference between Low and Ultra is 108 FPS (from 206 to 98). At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 215 FPS (from 433 to 218), which is a larger absolute drop but a smaller percentage change. The min and max FPS values for Medium settings provide insight into frame time consistency; at 1080p Medium, the range is 109 FPS (from 311 to 420), while at 4K Medium, the range is 50 FPS (from 140 to 190). This indicates that the frame pacing is relatively stable even at lower frame rates.