Inside

The AMD Ryzen 9 5950X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER combination delivers a performance profile in Inside that is defined by a clear division of labor. The CPU, a 16-core, 32-thread Zen 3 part with a 3.40 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost clock, provides an enormous amount of processing headroom. Its benchmark scores, including a Cinebench R23 multicore result of 38607 and a single-core score of 5450, place it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, indicating it is unlikely to be a bottleneck in a game of this genre. The GPU, a Turing-architecture card with 2560 shading units and a 1605 MHz base clock boosting to 1770 MHz, is the more constrained component, particularly at higher resolutions.

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

The Ryzen 9 5950X is a high-end desktop processor designed for heavy multi-threaded workloads, but its architecture also ensures strong single-thread performance. This is crucial for a puzzle platformer like Inside, which, while not graphically demanding, still requires a responsive CPU to manage game logic, physics, and frame pacing. The processor’s 64 MB of L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth provide a solid foundation for data throughput. In synthetic tests, the CPU scores 3470 in Passmark single-thread and 45424 in Passmark multithread, showing a robust balance. Its nearest rivals in average benchmark score are the Intel Core i5-14600K at -0.2% delta and the Intel Core i5-14600KF at -0.6% delta, meaning the 5950X is statistically on par with these newer parts in general compute, despite being from an older generation.

For Inside, the CPU's high single-thread performance is the key attribute. The game’s 2D side-scrolling perspective and simple geometry mean that the GPU is often not fully saturated at lower resolutions. In such cases, the CPU’s ability to quickly process draw calls and game state becomes the limiting factor. The 5950X’s Cinebench R20 single-core score of 2289 and Geekbench single-core score of 2211 suggest it can handle this task with ease. The data confirms this: at 1080p with Low settings, the combination reaches 307.1 FPS, a figure that is more likely constrained by the game engine’s frame rate limits or the CPU’s single-thread speed than by the GPU. The 16-core design is overkill for this title, but it ensures that the CPU will never be the cause of a frame rate drop, even in complex scenes with many moving objects.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER is a mid-to-high-end graphics card from the Turing generation, built on a 12 nm process. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. The GPU’s 64 ROPs and 160 TMUs are more than adequate for a game with Inside’s visual style, which uses a dark, atmospheric art direction with limited particle effects. The card’s FP32 performance of 9.062 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 113.3 GPixel/s indicate a capable rasterizer. In the Passmark G3D benchmark, it scores 18169, placing it in the 65th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA RTX A400, has a delta of -0.5%, while the AMD Radeon RX 5700 is 2.5% behind, showing the 2070 SUPER sits in a competitive midrange tier.

In Inside, the GPU’s role becomes more prominent as resolution increases. At 1080p, the GPU has an easier time, but at 4K, the pixel fill rate and shading power become the primary determinants of performance. The 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for this title, as the game’s textures and frame buffers are not likely to exceed that capacity at any setting. The GPU’s boost clock of 1770 MHz is a modest overclock from the base, providing consistent performance. The measured data shows that the GPU can handle the game’s highest visual preset, but the frame rate drops significantly at 4K, indicating that the GPU is the component being stressed. The card’s DirectX 12 Ultimate support ensures compatibility with modern rendering paths, though Inside is an older title and likely uses simpler APIs.

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

The measured FPS data across resolutions reveals a classic scaling pattern that underscores the CPU-bound nature of the game at lower settings and the GPU-bound nature at higher resolutions. At 1080p with Low settings, the combination achieves 307.1 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 222.1 FPS, a 27.7% decrease. At 4K Low, the FPS falls to 138.8, which is a 37.5% drop from 1440p. This large drop from 1440p to 4K indicates that the GPU is becoming the primary bottleneck as pixel count increases, even on Low settings. The CPU, meanwhile, has ample headroom, as evidenced by the high absolute FPS numbers.

The scaling on High settings tells a similar story. At 1080p High, the FPS is 157.1. At 1440p High, it is 111.4, a 29.1% reduction. At 4K High, the FPS drops to 73.2, a 34.3% reduction from 1440p. The percentage drops are consistent, suggesting that the GPU’s workload scales linearly with resolution, which is expected. The fact that the 1080p High result (157.1 FPS) is much lower than the 1080p Low result (307.1 FPS) shows that increasing settings has a more pronounced effect at lower resolutions, where the CPU is not the limiting factor. This indicates that the GPU is the component that determines the performance ceiling when settings are raised, and the CPU’s role is to provide a high enough frame rate floor to avoid stutters.

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

The benchmark data provides a complete matrix of average FPS for each resolution and settings preset. At 1920x1080, the results are: Low 307.1 FPS, Medium 244.4 FPS, High 157.1 FPS, and Ultra 147.5 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 62.7 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 9.6 FPS, suggesting that the Ultra preset offers diminishing returns over High. At 2560x1440, the numbers are: Low 222.1 FPS, Medium 176 FPS, High 111.4 FPS, and Ultra 108.9 FPS. The drop from Medium to High is significant at 64.6 FPS, but High to Ultra is again a small 2.5 FPS difference. At 3840x2160, the data shows: Low 138.8 FPS, Medium 109.9 FPS, High 73.2 FPS, and Ultra 68.7 FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium is a 28.9 FPS drop, and from High to Ultra is a 4.5 FPS drop.

These numbers reveal that the Ultra preset is a marginal upgrade over High across all resolutions, with a maximum difference of 9.6 FPS at 1080p. The High preset, in contrast, offers a substantial performance penalty over Medium, with a 87.3 FPS drop at 1080p and a 66.1 FPS drop at 1440p. The data also shows that the combination can maintain a playable frame rate at 4K on all settings, with the lowest average being 68.7 FPS on Ultra. This suggests that the RTX 2070 SUPER is capable of handling this game at 4K, even on the highest preset, but the frame rate headroom is limited compared to lower resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the database of tested CPU and GPU combinations for Inside, this pairing holds a rank of 983 out of 1671 total combos. This places it in the upper-middle portion of the rankings, meaning it outperforms the majority of systems tested, but it is not among the elite configurations. The rank reflects the balance of the components: the high-end CPU is paired with a mid-range GPU, which limits its overall standing. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking and the GPU’s 65th percentile ranking suggest that the GPU is the weaker link in this pairing, pulling the combo’s overall rank down from what the CPU alone could achieve.

This rank is contextually significant. With 1671 combos tested, a rank of 983 means that roughly 59% of all tested systems are faster in Inside. This is not a poor result, given that the GPU is from the previous generation and has been marked as end-of-life. The data implies that many newer mid-range GPUs, such as the RTX 4060 Mobile which has a -2.3% delta to the 2070 SUPER’s average score, can perform similarly or better in this title. The combo’s strength lies in its CPU, which ensures that the frame rate is stable and high in CPU-bound scenarios, but the GPU caps the maximum performance in GPU-bound scenarios like 4K Ultra. Overall, this rank is a fair reflection of the hardware’s capabilities in this specific game.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the user’s resolution and refresh rate target. For 1080p displays, the Low preset at 307.1 FPS is excessive for most monitors, which typically cap at 144 Hz or 240 Hz. The Medium preset at 244.4 FPS is also above typical refresh rates, but the High preset at 157.1 FPS is sufficient for a 144 Hz monitor and provides a better visual experience. The Ultra preset at 147.5 FPS is nearly identical to High but with a 9.6 FPS penalty, making High the better choice for 1080p due to the negligible visual difference and higher frame rate.

For 1440p, the Medium preset at 176 FPS is excellent for high-refresh-rate gaming, while the High preset at 111.4 FPS is suitable for a standard 60 Hz or 120 Hz display. The Ultra preset at 108.9 FPS is only 2.5 FPS slower than High, so users with a 120 Hz monitor could opt for Ultra without a noticeable difference. For 4K, the High preset at 73.2 FPS is ideal for a 60 Hz display, providing a smooth experience. The Ultra preset at 68.7 FPS is playable but offers a 4.5 FPS drop, which may not be worth the marginal visual upgrade. The Low preset at 138.8 FPS is overkill for 4K and sacrifices too much visual quality. Therefore, the High preset is the recommended balance across all resolutions, offering a significant improvement over Medium while avoiding the diminishing returns of Ultra. In summary, for the best experience, choose High settings at 1080p or 1440p for high refresh rates, and High at 4K for a locked 60 FPS experience.