Inside

The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D delivers exceptional performance in Inside, a 2016 puzzle platformer that is not particularly demanding by modern standards. This combination ranks 54th out of 2,887 tested combos, placing it in the top 2% of all configurations. The measured frame rates are uniformly high across all resolutions and settings, with the 1080p Low preset reaching 387 FPS and even the most demanding 4K Ultra configuration maintaining 153 FPS. The data indicates a system with massive headroom, where the CPU’s 12-core Zen 4 architecture and the GPU’s 32 GB of GDDR7 memory combine to eliminate any potential bottleneck in this title.

FAQ

*Q: What is the overall performance ranking of this CPU and GPU combo in Inside?*

A: This combination ranks 54th out of 2,887 tested combos, placing it in the 98th percentile of all configurations tested for this game.

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X compare to its nearest rivals in general CPU benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 9 7900X has an average benchmark score of 53,288, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD EPYC 7313P (53,206) and 0.6% higher than the Intel Xeon 634 (52,974). It trails the Intel Core i7-14700F (53,620) by 0.6%.

Q: What is the maximum frame rate achievable with this system at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 387 FPS. The Medium preset shows a max FPS of 411, which is the highest single-frame measurement recorded in the dataset.

Q: Is there a significant performance difference between the High and Ultra presets at 1440p?

A: The difference is modest. At 2560x1440, the High preset averages 255 FPS, while Ultra averages 243 FPS—a reduction of only 12 FPS, or roughly 4.7%, for the highest visual quality settings.

Q: Does the RTX 5090 D’s 32 GB VRAM play a role in this game’s performance?

A: The 32 GB GDDR7 memory pool is far beyond what Inside requires, but it ensures the GPU operates without memory constraints at any resolution. The data shows the GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 44,065, indicating substantial headroom for more demanding titles.

Q: How does the GPU’s average benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 5090 D has an average score of 77,712. It is 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT (76,904) and 1.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (78,940). The NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB scores 79,605, which is 2.4% higher.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D is a Blackwell 2.0 architecture GPU built on a 5 nm process by TSMC, featuring 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die. Its 32 GB of GDDR7 memory operates across a 512-bit bus, delivering 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth—a figure that is entirely irrelevant to Inside’s modest texture requirements but ensures zero memory-related stuttering. The GPU’s boost clock of 2407 MHz and base clock of 2017 MHz provide the raw processing power, with 21,760 shading units and 176 ROPs handling the game’s simple 2D side-scrolling visuals with ease.

In the context of Inside, the GPU never approaches its limits. The PassMark G3D score of 44,065 places this card in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs, yet the game’s graphical complexity is closer to a PlayStation 3-era title. The GPU’s FP32 performance of 104.8 TFLOPS is effectively wasted on this puzzle platformer, as the frame rates are primarily constrained by the game engine’s single-threaded rendering path and the CPU’s ability to feed draw calls. The RTX 5090 D’s 575 W TDP and dual-slot design are overkill for this workload, but the hardware ensures that the GPU is never the limiting factor at any resolution.

The GPU’s architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, all of which are more than sufficient for Inside’s 2016-era DirectX 11 rendering. The data shows a PassMark DirectX 11 score of 371, which is higher than the DirectX 12 score of 219, suggesting the game’s API calls are handled efficiently. At 4K High settings, the system produces 160 FPS, indicating that even at maximum resolution, the GPU has ample bandwidth and pixel throughput to maintain high refresh rates. The 176 ROPs deliver a pixel rate of 423.6 GPixel/s, which explains how the system can push 297 FPS at 4K Low without breaking a sweat.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D achieves a combo rank of 54 out of 2,887 tested configurations in Inside. This places the system in the top 1.9% of all combos, a position that reflects the sheer computational power of both components rather than any optimization for this specific title. The CPU alone scores in the 91st percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 53,288, while the GPU sits in the 92nd percentile with an average score of 77,712.

The rank is somewhat surprising given Inside’s age and simplicity; many lower-tier components can run this game at high frame rates. However, the data shows that this combo’s performance is near the absolute ceiling of what the engine can deliver. The 1080p Low result of 387 FPS and the 1440p Low result of 347 FPS suggest that the system is approaching the engine’s frame rate cap or the CPU’s single-thread limits, as the GPU is clearly capable of far more. The rank of 54 indicates that only 53 other combinations out of nearly 3,000 tested produce higher average frame rates across the measured scenarios.

In comparison to the CPU’s nearest rivals, the Ryzen 9 7900X’s multi-threaded performance is nearly identical to the AMD EPYC 7313P, with a delta of 0.2%. The GPU’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT, is 1.6% faster in average benchmark score, yet the RTX 5090 D’s superior memory bandwidth and newer architecture likely contribute to the combo’s high ranking. The data suggests that for Inside, the bottleneck shifts from the GPU to the CPU’s single-thread performance at lower resolutions, which is why the 1080p results show the smallest gains over 1440p compared to the larger jumps seen when moving from 4K to 1440p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates. The Low preset averages 387 FPS, while Medium averages 357 FPS with a minimum of 304 FPS and a maximum of 411 FPS. The High preset drops to 298 FPS, and Ultra maintains 293 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 94 FPS, or roughly 24%, indicating that the visual settings have a moderate impact on performance even at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain exceptionally high. Low settings produce 347 FPS, Medium averages 320 FPS with a range of 272 to 368 FPS, and High drops to 255 FPS. Ultra at 1440p averages 243 FPS, which is only 12 FPS lower than High—a smaller gap than at 1080p. The transition from 1080p to 1440p costs between 40 FPS (Low) and 50 FPS (Ultra), representing a 10-17% reduction in performance.

At 3840x2160, the system still maintains triple-digit frame rates across all presets. Low averages 297 FPS, Medium averages 256 FPS with a minimum of 218 FPS and a maximum of 295 FPS, High averages 160 FPS, and Ultra averages 153 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 144 FPS, or 48%, which is the largest spread across the three resolutions. The Medium preset at 4K shows a minimum of 218 FPS, meaning even the lowest recorded frame rate in this dataset is well above the 144 Hz refresh rate of most gaming monitors.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a system that is heavily CPU-bound at lower resolutions and becomes increasingly GPU-bound as resolution increases. At Low settings, the transition from 1080p (387 FPS) to 1440p (347 FPS) results in a 10.3% drop, while moving from 1440p to 4K (297 FPS) costs another 14.4%. The total drop from 1080p to 4K at Low is 23.3%, which is relatively small, suggesting the CPU is the primary limiter even at 4K for the least demanding preset.

At Ultra settings, the scaling is more pronounced. The drop from 1080p (293 FPS) to 1440p (243 FPS) is 17.1%, and from 1440p to 4K (153 FPS) is 37.0%. The cumulative reduction from 1080p to 4K at Ultra is 47.8%, indicating that the GPU’s rendering load becomes significant at higher resolutions with all visual features enabled. This pattern is typical for a game where the CPU can maintain high draw call throughput but the GPU’s pixel shading workload scales with resolution.

The Medium preset shows a middle ground: 1080p (357 FPS) to 1440p (320 FPS) is a 10.4% drop, and 1440p to 4K (256 FPS) is a 20.0% drop. The total reduction from 1080p to 4K at Medium is 28.3%. The data suggests that at 4K Ultra, the system is finally approaching a balanced state where both CPU and GPU are contributing to the frame rate ceiling. The 153 FPS at 4K Ultra is still exceptionally high, but the 47.8% drop from 1080p indicates that the GPU’s 32 GB memory and 512-bit bus are not the limiting factors—rather, it is the raw shader throughput required for 4K rendering.

Settings Recommendations

For players seeking the highest possible frame rates on high-refresh-rate monitors, the Low preset at 1080p delivers 387 FPS, which exceeds the capabilities of most displays. However, the Medium preset at 1080p offers a more balanced experience at 357 FPS, with a minimum of 304 FPS ensuring consistency. Given that the difference between Medium and Ultra at 1080p is only 64 FPS (357 versus 293), the Ultra preset is a reasonable choice for those prioritizing visual quality, as it still easily exceeds 240 Hz.

At 1440p, the Medium preset (320 FPS average, 272 FPS minimum) provides an excellent experience for 240 Hz monitors, while the High preset (255 FPS) is better suited for 144 Hz displays. The Ultra preset at 1440p (243 FPS) is also viable for 240 Hz panels, but the 4.7% performance gain from dropping to High is negligible in practice. The data suggests that Medium at 1440p is the sweet spot, offering a 31.7% improvement over High while maintaining frame rates well above any display’s refresh rate.

At 4K, the Medium preset (256 FPS average, 218 FPS minimum) is the clear recommendation for high-refresh-rate gaming, as it delivers more than double the frame rate of High (160 FPS) with only a modest reduction in visual fidelity. The Ultra preset at 4K (153 FPS) is still playable on 144 Hz monitors, but the 40% drop from Medium makes it a less attractive option. For players with 60 Hz or 120 Hz displays, the High preset at 4K (160 FPS) is more than sufficient and offers the best visual quality per the measured data, while those with 240 Hz monitors should select Medium at 4K to fully utilize the display’s capabilities.