Inside

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti delivers exceptional performance in Inside, a puzzle platformer from 2016. Benchmark results across resolutions and settings show this combination is capable of far exceeding the demands of the game, with frame rates that remain fluid even at maximum graphical fidelity. The data indicates a system that is heavily overqualified for the title, yet the scaling patterns between settings and resolutions provide a clear picture of where the performance ceiling lies and which component dominates the workload.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data for Inside reveals that the Ultra preset is the optimal choice for this hardware combination, as it provides the most visually demanding experience while still maintaining frame rates well above display refresh rate thresholds. At 1080p, the Ultra preset averages 184 FPS, while the High preset averages 193 FPS, a difference of only 9 FPS. Moving to 1440p, Ultra averages 132 FPS and High averages 139 FPS, maintaining a similar 7 FPS gap. At 4K, Ultra averages 83 FPS and High averages 87 FPS, with the delta shrinking to just 4 FPS. This narrow margin between High and Ultra across all resolutions suggests that the graphical uplift from the Ultra preset is nearly free in performance terms, making it the sensible default.

The Medium preset offers a more significant performance jump, with 1080p averaging 309 FPS, 1440p averaging 222 FPS, and 4K averaging 140 FPS. However, the frame rate advantages do not translate into a better experience because the Ultra preset already exceeds 60 FPS at 4K and 120 FPS at 1440p. The Low preset produces 357 FPS at 1080p, 278 FPS at 1440p, and 175 FPS at 4K, but these numbers are only relevant for users targeting extremely high refresh rate displays, such as 240 Hz or higher, where the extra frames could theoretically be utilized. For the vast majority of display configurations, Ultra provides the best balance, as benchmark results indicate no reason to compromise visual quality for additional speed.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti is the primary driver of frame rates in Inside, and its specifications explain why this game runs with such ease. The GPU features 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 896.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is far beyond what a puzzle platformer from 2016 requires, and the data shows that even the most demanding preset at 4K does not strain the memory subsystem. The GPU’s 8,960 shading units and 280 texture mapping units provide ample compute throughput for the game’s rendering workload, while the 96 ROPs handle pixel output efficiently.

Clock speeds for the RTX 5070 Ti are listed at 2295 MHz base and 2452 MHz boost, and these frequencies contribute to its strong benchmark scores, including a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6604 and a Passmark G3D score of 32974. The GPU sits in the 86th percentile versus all GPUs, indicating it is a high-end part. However, its nearest rivals in the synthetic benchmark data include the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 with a deltaPct of -0.1 and the Intel Arc A550M with a deltaPct of 0.4, which are older or lower-tier parts, underscoring how the 5070 Ti’s raw compute is not fully utilized by Inside’s modest graphical requirements. The game’s performance is so high that the GPU is likely idling for significant portions of each frame, with the bottleneck shifting entirely to the CPU at lower resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression from 1080p to 4K illustrates classic resolution scaling behavior, where the GPU becomes more heavily loaded as pixel count increases. At Ultra settings, the average FPS drops from 184 at 1080p to 132 at 1440p, a reduction of 28.3%, and then to 83 at 4K, a further reduction of 37.1% from the 1440p figure. This pattern indicates that the GPU is the limiting component at 4K, as the workload scales directly with resolution. At High settings, the same trend appears: 193 FPS at 1080p, 139 FPS at 1440p, and 87 FPS at 4K, with percentage drops of 28.0% and 37.4% respectively.

The Medium preset shows a similar slope, going from 309 FPS at 1080p to 222 FPS at 1440p and 140 FPS at 4K. The Low preset, however, exhibits an interesting deviation: 357 FPS at 1080p, 278 FPS at 1440p, and 175 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 22.1%, which is smaller than the drops seen at higher settings, suggesting that at Low settings the CPU begins to play a more significant role at 1080p, capping the frame rate before the GPU becomes fully saturated. The 4K Low result of 175 FPS still represents a 50.9% reduction from the 1080p Low figure, indicating that even at the lowest settings, resolution scaling remains steep enough to confirm the GPU as the dominant performance factor. The data points to a system where the CPU is rarely the limiting factor, except perhaps in the most extreme low-resolution, low-settings scenarios.

FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average frame rate achieved by this combo in Inside?*

A: The highest recorded average is 357 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Does the Ultra preset maintain a playable frame rate at 4K?

A: Yes, the Ultra preset at 3840x2160 averages 83 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: How much faster is the Low preset compared to Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 278 FPS, while Ultra averages 132 FPS, making Low approximately 110.6% faster.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for the Medium preset at 1080p?

A: The Medium preset at 1920x1080 has a minimum FPS of 263, with a maximum of 356 FPS.

Q: Which component is more likely to limit performance at 4K in this game?

A: The GPU, as evidenced by the significant frame rate drops from 1440p to 4K across all settings, indicating the rendering workload scales with resolution.

Q: Is there a large performance gap between High and Ultra settings?

A: No, the gap is minimal; at 1080p the difference is 9 FPS (193 vs 184), and at 4K it narrows to 4 FPS (87 vs 83), suggesting Ultra is essentially free.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti combination ranks 946th out of 2,887 tested combos for Inside, placing it in the upper third of all configurations. This ranking is notable because the hardware is exceptionally powerful, yet the game’s age and low graphical complexity mean that many less capable systems can achieve similar frame rates. The combo’s percentile position reflects that while it performs admirably, the game does not require such high-end components to reach its performance ceiling.

The RTX 5070 Ti’s synthetic benchmark percentile of 86 versus all GPUs and the CPU’s percentile of 95 versus all CPUs are far above what the game’s engine can exploit. The nearest rivals to the CPU in average benchmark score include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX with a deltaPct of 0.1 and the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D with a deltaPct of 0.6, showing this processor is competitive with the top tier. For the GPU, the nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT with a deltaPct of -2, indicating the 5070 Ti is slightly faster in aggregate benchmarks. In the context of Inside, the combo’s 946th rank out of 2,887 suggests that the game is so undemanding that the ranking is more indicative of the wide range of hardware that can run it well, rather than a measure of this specific combo’s capability.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. This mobile CPU, part of the 8000 series, is built on a 5 nm process and features 64 MB of L3 cache. Its benchmark scores are substantial, including a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42713 and a single-core score of 6030, placing it in the 95th percentile versus all CPUs. In Inside, a game that is not heavily multithreaded, the CPU’s single-core performance is the more relevant metric, and the data shows it is more than sufficient.

The role of the CPU in this game becomes apparent when examining the Low preset at 1080p, where the average FPS of 357 is significantly higher than at 1440p or 4K. The frame rate at 1080p Low is likely constrained by the CPU’s ability to issue draw calls and process game logic, as the GPU has ample headroom at this resolution and settings level. The fact that the CPU can push frame rates past 350 FPS indicates that its single-threaded performance is excellent. However, as resolution increases, the GPU takes over as the bottleneck, and the CPU’s influence on frame rates diminishes. The processor’s 16 cores and 32 threads are largely underutilized by this game, but its high boost clock ensures that the few threads that are active operate at maximum speed, preventing any CPU-induced stutters or frame pacing issues.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured results show a clear hierarchy across settings. The Low preset delivers an average of 357 FPS, while Medium averages 309 FPS with a minimum of 263 FPS and a maximum of 356 FPS. High averages 193 FPS, and Ultra averages 184 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 48 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 9 FPS, indicating diminishing returns at the top end. The Medium preset’s minimum FPS of 263 is still well above the refresh rate of most displays, confirming that even the most demanding moments in the game do not cause perceptible slowdowns.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates scale down proportionally. Low averages 278 FPS, Medium averages 222 FPS with a minimum of 189 FPS and a maximum of 256 FPS, High averages 139 FPS, and Ultra averages 132 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across settings, with Low falling by 79 FPS and Ultra falling by 52 FPS. At 4K, 3840x2160, the results are 175 FPS for Low, 140 FPS for Medium with a minimum of 119 FPS and a maximum of 161 FPS, 87 FPS for High, and 83 FPS for Ultra. The Medium preset’s minimum of 119 FPS at 4K is the lowest recorded minimum across all configurations, yet it remains comfortably above 60 FPS. These numbers illustrate a system that can handle Inside at maximum settings in 4K with headroom to spare, and at lower resolutions, the frame rates become nearly arbitrary in their excess.