Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer that, despite its restrained visual style, still demands a balanced system to run at high frame rates across modern resolutions. The measured data for the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 combination reveals a component pairing that scales predictably with both resolution and graphical fidelity, offering distinct performance tiers for different display targets. The benchmark results show the RTX 5050 providing the primary performance constraint at higher resolutions, while the Ryzen 9 9900X's substantial processing power ensures the game never becomes CPU-bound, even at lower settings where frame rates exceed 200 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows indicate that the Medium preset is the most balanced choice for this combination across all resolutions, as it is the only setting tier that provides complete data with both average and minimum/maximum frame rate information. At 1920x1080, Medium produces an average of 237 FPS with a minimum of 201 FPS and maximum of 272 FPS, which represents a smooth experience with a tight frame time distribution. The 201 FPS minimum is particularly telling—it suggests that even in demanding scenes, the system maintains a frame rate well above the refresh rate of most high-end displays, and the gap between minimum and maximum (71 FPS) is the narrowest among the settings that have complete data.

For users prioritizing maximum visual quality, Ultra settings provide a playable experience with averages of 141 FPS at 1080p, 101 FPS at 1440p, and 64 FPS at 4K. However, the data lacks minimum FPS values for Ultra, which introduces uncertainty about frame pacing during intense puzzle sequences. The step from Medium to Ultra at 1080p costs 96 FPS on average (from 237 to 141), a 40% reduction, while the step from High to Ultra costs only 7 FPS (from 148 to 141). This suggests that the Ultra preset includes effects that disproportionately impact performance relative to the visual improvement, making it less efficient than High settings.

The High preset offers a compelling middle ground, with averages of 148 FPS at 1080p and 106 FPS at 1440p, but drops to 67 FPS at 4K. The 4K High result is notable because it falls below the 70 FPS threshold that many consider essential for smooth gameplay, and it is only 3 FPS higher than the Ultra preset at the same resolution. The Low preset delivers the highest frame rates—296 FPS at 1080p, 213 FPS at 1440p, and 134 FPS at 4K—but these numbers are likely far beyond what the game's visual presentation requires, and the lack of minimum FPS data for Low settings means there is no verification of frame time consistency.

Given the complete data available for Medium, it is the recommended starting point for most users. The minimum FPS values of 201 (1080p), 145 (1440p), and 91 (4K) provide concrete evidence of playable performance, and the setting strikes a balance between the excessive frame rates of Low and the uncertain frame pacing of Ultra. For users with 144 Hz displays, Medium at 1440p (170 average) is the optimal match, while 240 Hz display owners should consider Medium at 1080p (237 average) or High at 1080p (148 average) if they prefer higher visual quality.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 combination ranks 1719 out of 2887 tested combos for Inside, placing it in the 40th percentile of all tested systems. This ranking is surprisingly modest given the individual component strengths—the CPU sits in the 92nd percentile against all CPUs, and the GPU in the 66th percentile against all GPUs. The discrepancy between component-level percentiles and the combo-level ranking suggests that Inside's performance characteristics do not fully leverage the strengths of either component, or that the game's relatively simple rendering pipeline (given its 2016 release date) does not scale with the latest hardware in the same way more modern titles might.

The data indicates that this combo's performance is primarily limited by the GPU, as evidenced by the significant frame rate drops when moving from 1440p to 4K. The RTX 5050's 66th percentile ranking places it below many other GPUs that could be paired with a high-end CPU like the Ryzen 9 9900X, and this imbalance likely contributes to the mid-pack overall ranking. The CPU's nearest rivals—the AMD EPYC 9015, AMD EPYC 7313, Intel Core i9-14900, and Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M—all have average benchmark scores within 1.4% of the Ryzen 9 9900X, indicating that the processor is performing as expected for its class. However, the GPU's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL and AMD Radeon HD 8970M, which are notably older or lower-tier components, suggesting the RTX 5050's performance class is more aligned with mid-range hardware than the flagship-tier CPU.

For Inside specifically, the combo's rank of 1719 means that 1168 other tested configurations achieve better performance. This is not a poor result given the game's age and relatively low system requirements, but it does indicate that users with 4K displays or high refresh rate monitors may want to consider alternative GPU options. The measured FPS data shows that the combo can handle 1440p Medium at 170 FPS, which is excellent, but 4K Ultra at 64 FPS is below the 60 FPS target that many users consider the minimum for a smooth experience.

FAQ

Q: Can this system achieve 60 FPS at 4K with max settings?

A: Yes, but narrowly. The measured average at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 64 FPS, which is 4 FPS above the 60 FPS threshold. However, no minimum FPS data is available for Ultra settings, so there is a risk of occasional dips below 60 FPS during demanding scenes.

Q: What is the best resolution for a 144 Hz monitor?

A: The data suggests 2560x1440 with Medium settings is ideal, producing an average of 170 FPS with a minimum of 145 FPS. This keeps the frame rate consistently above 144 Hz, whereas High settings at 1440p (106 average) would fall short of the refresh rate target.

Q: How much performance is lost when upgrading from High to Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080, the average FPS drops from 148 (High) to 141 (Ultra), a loss of 7 FPS or approximately 4.7%. At 2560x1440, the drop is from 106 to 101 FPS (4.7% loss), and at 3840x2160, from 67 to 64 FPS (4.5% loss). The consistent percentage loss suggests Ultra's additional effects scale uniformly across resolutions.

Q: Is the Ryzen 9 9900X overkill for this game?

A: The benchmark data suggests so. The CPU's single-thread score of 1286 in 3DMark and 2253 in Cinebench R23 indicates immense processing power, but Inside's maximum FPS of 296 at 1080p Low is likely limited by the GPU rather than the CPU. The game appears to be GPU-bound at all tested settings.

Q: What frame rates can I expect with V-sync enabled?

A: The data does not include V-sync measurements, but the average FPS values suggest that at 1080p Medium (237 FPS) and 1440p Medium (170 FPS), V-sync would cap performance at the display's refresh rate without issue. At 4K Medium (107 FPS), V-sync to a 60 Hz display would be trivial, but a 120 Hz display might experience occasional drops below the refresh rate given the 91 FPS minimum.

Q: Does the game use multi-threaded CPU performance?

A: The data does not directly measure CPU utilization, but the Ryzen 9 9900X's multi-core performance (32172 in Cinebench R23, 54643 in Passmark multithread) is vastly higher than what a 2016 puzzle platformer would require. The game's performance scaling with resolution and settings indicates a GPU bottleneck, not a CPU bottleneck, even at low settings where frame rates exceed 200 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full range of settings shows a clear performance hierarchy. Low settings produce an average of 296 FPS, Medium reduces this to 237 FPS with a minimum of 201 FPS and maximum of 272 FPS, High delivers 148 FPS, and Ultra drops to 141 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium (59 FPS) is larger than the gap between High and Ultra (7 FPS), indicating that Medium includes substantial visual upgrades that cost performance, while Ultra's additions are relatively minor. The Medium setting's minimum of 201 FPS is particularly strong, suggesting consistent frame delivery even in complex scenes.

At 2560x1440, the pattern repeats with lower absolute numbers. Low averages 213 FPS, Medium averages 170 FPS with a minimum of 145 FPS and maximum of 196 FPS, High averages 106 FPS, and Ultra averages 101 FPS. The Medium minimum of 145 FPS is noteworthy—it means that even the lowest frame rate at 1440p Medium is higher than the average frame rate at 1440p High (106 FPS). This makes Medium the clear choice for users who want high refresh rate gaming without compromising on visual quality.

At 3840x2160, the RTX 5050's limitations become apparent. Low averages 134 FPS, Medium averages 107 FPS with a minimum of 91 FPS and maximum of 123 FPS, High averages 67 FPS, and Ultra averages 64 FPS. The Medium setting's 91 FPS minimum is still above 60 FPS, making it the only setting tier at 4K that guarantees a playable experience without frame rate drops below the 60 FPS threshold. High and Ultra at 4K both hover around 64-67 FPS, which is technically playable but leaves no headroom for demanding scenes.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario. At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 237 (1080p) to 170 (1440p) to 107 (4K), representing a 28% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and a 37% reduction from 1440p to 4K. This scaling pattern is consistent with a GPU that is increasingly saturated as pixel count rises. The RTX 5050's 8 GB of VRAM and 320.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are sufficient for the game's textures, but the GPU's raw compute power (13.17 TFLOPS FP32) becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

At High settings, the scaling shows a similar trend: 148 FPS at 1080p, 106 FPS at 1440p, and 67 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops are 28% and 37% respectively, matching the Medium scaling almost exactly. This consistency indicates that the performance bottleneck is resolution-dependent rather than settings-dependent—the GPU's pixel fill rate and shading capacity are what determines performance, not the specific visual effects enabled. The fact that Ultra settings show the same scaling pattern (141 to 101 to 64 FPS) reinforces this interpretation.

The 4K results are particularly informative. At 4K Low, the system achieves 134 FPS, which is impressive but still significantly lower than the 296 FPS at 1080p Low. This 55% reduction from 1080p to 4K at Low settings suggests that even with minimal graphical effects, the GPU's pixel processing capacity is the bottleneck. The CPU's role in this equation is minimal—the Ryzen 9 9900X has more than enough processing power to feed the GPU at any resolution, and the consistent frame rate scaling across settings confirms that the GPU is the constraining component.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor with a base clock of 4.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.60 GHz, based on the Zen 5 architecture. Its benchmark scores are exceptional: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32172, a Geekbench multi-core score of 22174, and a Passmark multithread score of 54643. These numbers place it in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs, meaning it outperforms the vast majority of processors on the market. However, Inside is a game from 2016 that does not require this level of processing power, and the measured FPS data suggests the CPU is rarely, if ever, the limiting factor.

The game's performance at 1080p Low (296 FPS) is likely close to the maximum achievable with this GPU, and the fact that FPS scales down consistently as resolution increases indicates a GPU bottleneck. If the CPU were limiting performance, we would expect to see similar FPS values across different resolutions at the same settings, which is not the case. The CPU's single-thread performance (1286 in 3DMark single-thread, 2253 in Cinebench R23 single-core) is more than sufficient for a puzzle platformer with relatively simple game logic, and the 64 MB of L3 cache provides ample headroom for any data the game might need.

The Ryzen 9 9900X's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-14900, which has an average benchmark score 1.1% higher, and the AMD EPYC 7313, which is 0.2% lower. These differences are negligible for gaming purposes, and the CPU's 12 cores and 24 threads are far more than Inside requires. The data implies that users could pair this CPU with a significantly less powerful processor and achieve nearly identical FPS in Inside, as the game's performance is almost entirely GPU-bound. The CPU's role in this combo is to ensure that no frame time spikes occur due to processing insufficiency, and the measured minimum FPS values (201 at 1080p Medium, 145 at 1440p Medium) suggest this is achieved.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is a 5 nm Blackwell 2.0 architecture GPU with 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its boost clock of 2572 MHz and 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus provide 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's benchmark scores show a 66th percentile ranking, with a Passmark G3D score of 17326 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2502. These numbers indicate a mid-range GPU that can handle Inside's requirements but is not overpowered for the game's resolution scaling demands.

The measured FPS data clearly shows the GPU as the performance bottleneck in this combo. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 64, which is exactly at the boundary of playable performance. The GPU's 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for Inside's textures, but the GPU's compute throughput (13.17 TFLOPS FP32) is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The pixel rate of 82.30 GPixel/s and texture rate of 205.8 GTexel/s dictate how quickly the GPU can fill the screen with rendered pixels, and at 4K (8.3 million pixels), these rates become the primary constraint.

The RTX 5050's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT, which has an average benchmark score 1.6% higher, and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile, which is 1.6% lower. This places the RTX 5050 in a performance tier that is well-suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming but struggles to maintain high frame rates at 4K. For Inside specifically, the GPU's 130 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU indicate a power-efficient design, but the performance data shows that users seeking 4K 60+ FPS should consider a more powerful GPU. The 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores provide modern feature support, but Inside does not utilize ray tracing or DLSS, so these features have no impact on the measured results. The GPU's role in this combo is to deliver smooth frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, and it accomplishes this admirably, but 4K performance is limited to Medium settings for a consistently playable experience.