Inside

The pairing of AMD’s flagship 12-core Ryzen 9 9900X3D with NVIDIA’s entry-level GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is a study in extremes, pitting a 2025 processor with a 128 MB L3 cache and 5.50 GHz boost clock against a 2016 GPU with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and a 1392 MHz boost clock. In Inside, a 2D puzzle platformer, this combination produces a fascinating bottleneck reversal, where the GPU is almost certainly the limiting factor at higher settings, yet the CPU’s immense headroom allows for surprising performance at lower presets. The measured data reveals a system that can be either barely playable or exceptionally smooth, depending entirely on how the graphics load is balanced.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is severe, but the pattern is not uniform across settings, revealing a classic case of GPU-bound scaling. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 109 at 1920x1080 to 78 at 2560x1440, a 28% reduction, and then plummets to 49 at 3840x2160, a 55% drop from 1440p. This steep falloff at 4K indicates that the GTX 1050 Ti’s pixel throughput and memory bandwidth are being saturated, as the workload transitions from being partially CPU-limited at 1080p to fully GPU-limited at 4K. The data strongly suggests that the 112.1 GB/s memory bandwidth and 44.54 GPixel/s pixel rate are the primary constraints at ultra-high resolutions.

At Medium settings, the scaling is slightly less aggressive but still shows a clear GPU bottleneck. The average FPS goes from 87 at 1080p to 62 at 1440p (a 29% drop) and then to 39 at 4K (a 37% drop from 1440p). The fact that the percentage drop between 1440p and 4K is smaller than the drop between 1080p and 1440p is intriguing; it suggests that while the GPU is still the main constraint, the additional shading complexity at Medium is not the primary issue, but rather the raw fill-rate and memory bandwidth needed for the higher pixel counts. The 4K Medium row also reports a minimum FPS of 33 and a maximum of 45, indicating significant frame time variance, likely due to the GPU struggling to maintain consistent throughput.

The High and Ultra presets tell a different story of scaling. At High, the FPS drops from 54 at 1080p to 39 at 1440p (a 28% reduction) and then to 25 at 4K (a 36% reduction from 1440p). At Ultra, the values are 52 at 1080p, 37 at 1440p, and 23 at 4K, showing a nearly identical relative drop. This consistency suggests that once the settings are high enough, the bottleneck is almost purely on the GPU’s shading units and texture units, leading to a predictable, linear scaling with the number of pixels. The 4K Ultra result of 23 FPS is a clear indicator that this resolution is not viable for this combo with any visual fidelity.

The key insight from the scaling is that the Ryzen 9 9900X3D is never the limiting factor in this game, even at 1080p. The CPU’s massive headroom (evidenced by its 91st percentile ranking among all CPUs) means that the GPU is always the first component to reach its limit. This is confirmed by the fact that the FPS scales almost exactly with the pixel count when moving from 1440p to 4K, which is the signature of a pixel-bound workload. The investigation points to a single conclusion: the GTX 1050 Ti is the sole arbiter of performance here, and its 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus are the walls that this combo hits.

FAQ

Q: Why is the frame rate so much lower at 4K compared to 1080p?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti has a 128-bit memory bus and 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth, which is insufficient for the pixel throughput required at 3840x2160. The data shows a drop from 109 FPS at 1080p Low to 49 FPS at 4K Low, a 55% reduction, indicating the GPU’s fill-rate is the primary bottleneck at high resolutions.

Q: Is the CPU holding back the GPU in this game?

A: No. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D has 12 cores and 24 threads with a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. Since the FPS scales almost linearly with pixel count at 4K, the data indicates the GPU is the sole limiting component, not the CPU.

Q: What is the best settings preset for a smooth experience at 1080p?

A: The Low preset at 1920x1080 achieves 109 FPS average, which is the highest measured value. The Medium preset still provides a smooth 87 FPS, but the Low preset offers the most headroom and is the only one that nearly doubles the refresh rate of a standard 60Hz monitor.

Q: How does the GTX 1050 Ti compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GPU has an average benchmark score of 4193, which is 0.6% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M330 (4170) and 1% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4151). It is 1.1% slower than the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M (4241) and 1.8% slower than the AMD Radeon Vega 3 (4268).

Q: Is the 4K resolution playable with this combo?

A: At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 23, which is not playable. Even at 4K Low, the average FPS is 49, which is borderline but likely to suffer from frame pacing issues. The data suggests 4K is not a viable resolution for this GPU, regardless of settings.

Q: Does the game benefit from the CPU's 3D V-Cache?

A: The data does not provide a direct comparison, but the CPU’s 128 MB L3 cache is a significant feature. However, since the game is GPU-bound at all measured resolutions, the cache is unlikely to have a measurable impact on these specific frame rates, as the GPU is the component reaching its limit.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Ryzen 9 9900X3D and GTX 1050 Ti ranks 2837 out of 2887 tested combos in Inside, placing it in the bottom 1.7% of all pairings. This abysmal ranking is not due to the CPU, which is a top-tier processor, but entirely due to the GPU’s lowly position in the performance hierarchy. The GTX 1050 Ti sits in the 25th percentile of all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 4193 is only slightly above the AMD Radeon R5 M330 (4170) and NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4151). This rank highlights a fundamental mismatch: the CPU is capable of far more, but the GPU acts as a severe performance cap.

The ranking is more reflective of the GPU’s limitations than the combo’s actual in-game experience at lower settings. While the combo ranks poorly overall, the measured FPS at 1080p Low (109 FPS) shows that the system can deliver a playable experience when the graphics load is minimized. The rank of 2837 is a global average across all settings, and it drags down the perception of the combo because the high-resolution results are so poor. In the context of other combos, this pairing would likely rank much higher if only 1080p Low results were considered, but the database ranking treats all settings equally, punishing the GPU’s weakness at 4K.

The data implies that this combo is a classic case of a bottlenecked system, where the CPU’s potential is wasted. The nearest CPU rivals, like the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF (avg score 55093, -0.6% delta) and the Intel Core i7-14700F (avg score 53620, 2.1% delta), would likely produce identical in-game results with this same GPU, as the frame rates are determined by the graphics card. Therefore, the combo’s low rank is a direct consequence of the GPU’s 25th percentile standing, not the CPU’s 91st percentile standing. The analysis suggests that any modern CPU would achieve similar scores in Inside when paired with a GTX 1050 Ti, making the CPU choice irrelevant for this specific game.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo shows its best performance. The Low preset delivers an average of 109 FPS, the highest of any setting. Medium drops to 87 FPS, with a minimum of 74 and a maximum of 100, indicating a stable frame time. High averages 54 FPS, and Ultra averages 52 FPS, showing that the jump from High to Ultra has a minimal impact on performance. This suggests that at 1080p, the GPU is still able to handle the load, but the rendering overhead of High and Ultra settings begins to weigh on the 768 shading units.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance degrades significantly. Low averages 78 FPS, which is still playable but a substantial drop from 1080p. Medium averages 62 FPS, with a minimum of 53 and maximum of 72, showing more variance. High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 37 FPS, both of which are below the smooth threshold. The data shows that 1440p is only viable with Low or Medium settings, and even Medium is borderline for a 60Hz display.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly overwhelmed. Low averages 49 FPS, which is technically playable but not smooth. Medium averages 39 FPS, with a minimum of 33 and maximum of 45, indicating significant stuttering. High averages 25 FPS, and Ultra averages 23 FPS, rendering both presets unplayable. The 4K results are uniformly poor, confirming that the GTX 1050 Ti’s 4 GB VRAM and 112.1 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for this resolution. The progression from 109 FPS at 1080p Low to 49 FPS at 4K Low represents a 55% loss, while the progression from 52 FPS at 1080p Ultra to 23 FPS at 4K Ultra represents a 56% loss, showing a consistent penalty for the higher pixel count.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, with a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. It features a massive 128 MB L3 cache, which is a defining characteristic of the X3D series. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 47737 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 6739 in single-core, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score is 54762, which is 2.1% higher than the Intel Core i7-14700F (53620) and 1.3% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (54053).

Despite this raw power, the CPU’s role in Inside is largely passive. The game’s 2D nature and low graphical complexity mean that the CPU is not stressed by the processing demands. The data shows that frame rates are entirely dependent on the GPU, as evidenced by the linear scaling with resolution. The CPU’s high single-thread score of 6739 in Cinebench R23 is more than sufficient for a puzzle platformer, which typically relies on a single or few threads for game logic. The 12 cores and 24 threads are massively overprovisioned for this workload, and the 128 MB L3 cache is unlikely to provide any tangible benefit in a game that does not require large data sets to be cached.

The data implies that the CPU is not a factor in this combo’s performance. The bottleneck is unequivocally the GPU, and the CPU’s performance headroom is wasted. This is a scenario where the CPU’s high percentile ranking (91) is irrelevant to the actual gaming experience, as the GPU’s lowly percentile ranking (25) dominates. The analysis suggests that a much weaker CPU, such as a dual-core or quad-core model, would produce identical frame rates in this game, as long as it could keep up with the GPU’s output. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D is overkill for this pairing, and its features are not leveraged by the game’s demands.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy for the best experience. The highest average FPS is 109 at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which is the only preset that delivers a frame rate well above 100 FPS. For a smooth 60 FPS experience at 1080p, the Medium preset is the best choice, with an average of 87 FPS, a minimum of 74, and a maximum of 100. This provides a good balance between visual fidelity and performance, as the High and Ultra presets only achieve 54 and 52 FPS, respectively, which are below the 60 FPS threshold.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset is the only viable option for a consistently smooth experience, averaging 78 FPS. The Medium preset averages 62 FPS, which is just above 60, but the minimum of 53 FPS suggests occasional dips below the threshold. For players who prioritize frame rate stability over image quality, Low is the recommended setting at 1440p. The High and Ultra presets at 1440p, with averages of 39 and 37 FPS, are not recommended for a playable experience.

At 3840x2160, no setting provides a truly smooth experience. The Low preset averages 49 FPS, which is below 60 and likely to feel stuttery. The Medium preset averages 39 FPS, and the High and Ultra presets average 25 and 23 FPS, respectively. The data strongly suggests that 4K is not a viable resolution for this combo, and players should either lower the resolution to 1440p or accept a sub-60 FPS experience with significant compromises. The best overall experience per the measured rows is to play at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which maximizes frame rate and minimizes the risk of stuttering, given the GPU’s limited VRAM and bandwidth.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is a Pascal architecture GPU with 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. It has a base clock of 1291 MHz and a boost clock of 1392 MHz, with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth. Its FP32 performance is 2.138 TFLOPS, and it has a pixel rate of 44.54 GPixel/s. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 6340 in Passmark G3D, placing it in the 25th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 4193, which is 1.8% lower than the AMD Radeon Vega 3 (4268) and 1.1% lower than the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M (4241).

In Inside, the GPU is the definitive limiting factor. The data shows that the frame rates are directly constrained by the GPU’s capabilities, with the 4K results being uniformly poor across all settings. The 4 GB VRAM is a particular concern, as high-resolution textures and effects at Ultra settings can easily exceed this capacity, leading to the observed 23 FPS average at 4K Ultra. The 128-bit memory bus and 112.1 GB/s bandwidth are also insufficient for the pixel throughput required at 3840x2160, as evidenced by the steep drop from 49 FPS at 4K Low to 39 FPS at 4K Medium.

The GPU’s 25th percentile ranking is consistent with its in-game performance, as it struggles to maintain playable frame rates at resolutions above 1080p with medium or higher settings. The data implies that the GTX 1050 Ti is the sole reason this combo ranks 2837 out of 2887 in the game. Even with a top-tier CPU like the Ryzen 9 9900X3D, the GPU’s limitations are insurmountable, and the system’s performance is capped by the graphics card. The analysis shows that to improve performance in Inside, the GPU must be upgraded first, as the CPU has ample headroom to support a much more powerful graphics card.