Inside

The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 pairing in Inside presents an unusual bottleneck dynamic. The CPU is a top-tier 12-core processor with a 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs, while the GPU is an entry-level card sitting at the 43rd percentile. In a 2D puzzle-platformer, this combination produces a wide spectrum of results, from unplayable at 4K Ultra to exceptionally smooth at 1080p Low. The data suggests that while the CPU has headroom to spare, the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus are the primary constraints at higher resolutions and presets.

FAQ

Q: Is this combination capable of running the game at 60 FPS?

A: Yes, but only at lower resolution and settings. The data shows 60 FPS is achievable at 1080p High (65.6 avg), 1440p Medium (76.8 avg), and even 4K Low (63.6 avg). However, 4K High drops to 33.2 FPS, indicating that high settings at 4K are beyond this GPU's reach.

Q: What is the best resolution for a consistent 60+ FPS experience?

A: At 1920x1080, all four presets—Low (132.3), Medium (106.5), High (65.6), and Ultra (65.2)—average above 60 FPS. For 1440p, you must stick to Medium or Low to stay above 60 FPS, as High averages 49.4 FPS.

Q: How much of a performance difference exists between Low and Ultra presets?

A: At 1080p, the difference is a 67.1 FPS gap (132.3 vs 65.2), representing roughly a 2x improvement from Ultra to Low. This gap widens at higher resolutions; at 4K, Low is 37 FPS faster than Ultra (63.6 vs 26.6).

Q: Does the Ryzen 9 7900X bottleneck the GTX 1650 in this game?

A: The benchmark data does not indicate a CPU bottleneck. The CPU's 43,695 Cinebench R23 multicore score and 6,168 single-core score are far beyond what a puzzle-platformer requires. The FPS drops correlate directly with GPU load (higher resolution and settings), not CPU activity.

*Q: This GPU has 4 GB of VRAM. Does that matter for Inside?*

A: Yes, VRAM appears to be a decisive factor. The game's visual style uses large dark scenes with subtle lighting, which can consume memory. The performance collapse at 4K Ultra (26.6 FPS) versus 4K Low (63.6 FPS) suggests that the GPU is running out of memory bandwidth or capacity at higher presets, not just raw shader power.

Q: How does this combo rank against other system configurations for this game?

A: This specific CPU+GPU pairing ranks 1615 out of 1671 tested combinations for Inside. This places it in the bottom 3.4% of all tested systems, confirming that the GTX 1650 severely limits the overall experience despite the powerful processor.

GPU Role

The GTX 1650 is the defining component in this configuration. With 896 shading units, 32 ROPs, and a boost clock of 1665 MHz, the card delivers a modest 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. In a game like Inside, which relies on atmospheric rendering and smooth scrolling, the GPU's fillrate and memory throughput are critical. The 4 GB GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth, which is sufficient for 1080p but becomes strained at higher pixel counts.

The benchmark results clearly show the GPU's limitations. At 1080p, the card is adequate, but moving to 1440p causes a noticeable drop across all presets. For example, 1080p High averages 65.6 FPS, while 1440p High drops to 49.4 FPS—a 24.7% reduction. At 4K, the situation worsens; 4K High runs at 33.2 FPS, which is borderline playable but not smooth. The Ultra preset at 4K is the worst case at 26.6 FPS, indicating the GPU is completely overwhelmed.

The GPU's percentile ranking of 43 places it just above mid-pack historically, but its nearest rivals include the Quadro P2200 (0.5% faster) and the Radeon Pro WX 5100 (0.5% slower). This means the GTX 1650 is performing exactly as expected for its class—it is not a defective unit but simply an underpowered card for 4K gaming.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a GPU-bound scenario. At Low settings, the frame rate drops from 132.3 FPS at 1080p to 94.7 FPS at 1440p (a 28.4% drop) and then to 63.6 FPS at 4K (a 51.9% drop from 1440p). This is a predictable pattern for a GPU with limited memory bandwidth; as pixel count quadruples from 1080p to 4K, the GPU cannot maintain its throughput.

The scaling becomes more severe at higher presets. With High settings, the drop from 1080p (65.6 FPS) to 1440p (49.4 FPS) is 24.7%, and the drop to 4K (33.2 FPS) is another 32.8%. The Ultra preset shows an even steeper cliff: 65.2 FPS at 1080p, 46.2 FPS at 1440p, and only 26.6 FPS at 4K. This indicates that the combination of high resolution and high settings quickly exhausts the GPU's resources.

Notably, the gap between 1440p and 4K is consistently larger than the gap between 1080p and 1440p across all presets. This suggests that 4K is a hard boundary for this GPU, whereas 1440p remains viable if settings are moderated. The data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor here; if it were, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions, which is not the case.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the GTX 1650 delivers playable performance on all presets. Low averages 132.3 FPS, Medium hits 106.5 FPS, and High runs at 65.6 FPS. Ultra is nearly identical to High at 65.2 FPS, suggesting that the Ultra preset adds little visual benefit for the performance cost at this resolution. All four presets exceed the 60 FPS threshold, making 1080p the only resolution where the user has full freedom to choose any settings.

At 2560x1440, performance becomes more selective. Low averages 94.7 FPS, which is excellent, and Medium runs at 76.8 FPS. However, High drops to 49.4 FPS and Ultra falls to 46.2 FPS. The 1440p High and Ultra results are below 60 FPS, indicating that users should stick to Medium or Low for a smooth experience at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the GPU struggles. Low averages 63.6 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS line. Medium averages 48 FPS, High drops to 33.2 FPS, and Ultra falls to 26.6 FPS. Only the Low preset is viable for 4K gaming, and even then, it barely clears the 60 FPS mark. The data shows a clear pattern: each step up in resolution halves the available settings headroom.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience, the data suggests prioritizing resolution over settings. At 1080p, the Medium preset (106.5 FPS) offers a significant improvement over High (65.6 FPS) with only a minor visual downgrade, making it the sweet spot for smooth gameplay. The Ultra preset is not worth the 41.3 FPS drop from Medium, as the visual difference in a 2D game is minimal.

At 1440p, the Medium preset (76.8 FPS) is the recommended choice for maintaining a high refresh rate experience. Low (94.7 FPS) is also viable if you prefer maximum smoothness, but Medium provides a better balance of image quality and performance. Avoid High and Ultra at this resolution, as they dip below 50 FPS.

At 4K, Low (63.6 FPS) is the only playable option. Medium (48 FPS) is playable but not ideal for a game that benefits from smooth motion, and High/Ultra are not recommended. If you own a 4K display, the data indicates that you should either drop to 1440p for better visuals or accept the reduced detail of the Low preset.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X is exceptionally powerful for this game. With 12 cores and 24 threads based on Zen 4 architecture, it has a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. Its benchmark scores are outstanding: a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 43,695 and a single-core score of 6,168, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. This processor has no difficulty feeding frames to the GTX 1650.

The CPU's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 (0.1% slower), the AMD Ryzen 9 5900XT (0.4% slower), and the Intel Core i9-13980HX (0.8% slower). This places the 7900X at the very top of the performance hierarchy for this game. However, the measured FPS data shows that this CPU power is largely wasted in Inside, as the GPU becomes the bottleneck at every resolution above 1080p.

In a game like Inside, which is a 2D puzzle-platformer with simple physics, the CPU's 64 MB of L3 cache and high single-thread performance are more than sufficient. The data shows that even at 1080p Low (132.3 FPS), the CPU is not maxed out. The 24-lane PCIe Gen 5 interface and DDR5 memory support (83.2 GB/s bandwidth) ensure that the system has no bandwidth limitations that would hinder the GPU. The bottleneck is purely graphical, and the 7900X is essentially idle while the GTX 1650 works at full capacity.