Inside

# Inside: AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 — Benchmark Analysis

The pairing of AMD's flagship Ryzen 9 9900X3D with NVIDIA's entry-level GeForce GTX 1650 creates one of the most lopsided hardware combinations in the benchmark database. The CPU sits in the 91st percentile among all processors, while the GPU languishes in the 40th percentile — a 51-percentage-point gap that defines every measurable result in this puzzle platformer. This analysis examines how Inside performs with this combo, where the bottlenecks lie, and what the 12 measured FPS data points reveal about the game's scaling behavior across resolutions and settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Inside shows a dramatic and consistent drop as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K, but the pattern is not uniform across all settings presets. At Low settings, the game delivers 134 FPS at 1920x1080, drops to 97 FPS at 2560x1440 (a 27.6% reduction), and falls further to 61 FPS at 3840x2160 (a 37.1% reduction from 1440p). This translates to a total decline of 73 FPS — or 54.5% — from 1080p to 4K at Low settings.

The Medium preset shows a similar trajectory: 107 FPS at 1080p, 77 FPS at 1440p, and 49 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops are 28.0% from 1080p to 1440p and 36.4% from 1440p to 4K. The High preset follows with 67 FPS at 1080p, 48 FPS at 1440p, and 30 FPS at 4K — reductions of 28.4% and 37.5% respectively. Ultra settings produce 64 FPS at 1080p, 46 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K, with drops of 28.1% and 37.0%.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all four settings presets is striking. Whether the game runs at 134 FPS or 29 FPS, the resolution scaling penalty remains almost identical: roughly 28% for the 1080p-to-1440p step and another 37% for the 1440p-to-4K step. This uniformity suggests that the GPU is the primary limiting factor at every resolution, as the frame rate reduction tracks almost perfectly with the pixel count increase. The GTX 1650's 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 128-bit bus width simply cannot feed enough pixels at higher resolutions, regardless of how light the workload is.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is built on the Turing architecture using the TU117 chip, manufactured on TSMC's 12 nm process. It operates at a base clock of 1485 MHz with a boost clock of 1665 MHz, and its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory runs at 2001 MHz with an effective data rate of 8 Gbps. The memory subsystem consists of a 128-bit bus delivering 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth — a figure that becomes increasingly inadequate as resolution climbs.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7472. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (0.3% faster), Intel UHD Graphics 750 (0.4% faster), and AMD Radeon R7 350 (0.6% faster), while the Intel Arc A310 trails by 1.0%. These narrow margins — all within 1.0% — indicate that the GTX 1650 sits in a crowded performance tier where even integrated graphics solutions are competitive.

The GPU's DirectX scores tell a revealing story about its capabilities in modern game workloads. PassMark DirectX 11 yields a score of 58, DirectX 12 drops to 35, and DirectX 10 falls to 39, while DirectX 9 achieves 124. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test produces a score of 305. These figures suggest that Inside, which relies on relatively modest graphical demands as a 2016 puzzle platformer, still manages to strain the GPU at higher resolutions — the 4K Ultra result of 29 FPS is barely above the threshold of playability.

The GTX 1650's 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units provide a pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance of 2.984 TFLOPS and FP16 of 5.967 TFLOPS (2:1) place it firmly in entry-level territory. The 4 GB VRAM capacity, while sufficient for 1080p gaming in most titles, becomes a constraint at 1440p and especially at 4K, where the measured FPS drops suggest the memory bandwidth is being saturated.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D represents the opposite end of the hardware spectrum. With 12 cores and 24 threads based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge codename), it operates at a base clock of 4.40 GHz and boosts to 5.50 GHz. The chip is manufactured on TSMC's 4 nm process with 16,630 million transistors across a dual-chiplet design with 70.6 mm² dies per chiplet. Its 128 MB of L3 cache, 1 MB L2 per core, and 80 KB L1 per core provide ample data storage for compute-heavy workloads.

The CPU's benchmark results place it in the 91st percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 54762. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF (0.6% faster), Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (1.3% slower), Intel Xeon 6505P (2.0% slower), and Intel Core i7-14700F (2.1% slower). In multi-threaded workloads, the Cinebench R23 score of 47737 and Geekbench multicore score of 22884 demonstrate substantial compute capability, while the single-thread scores of 6739 (Cinebench R23) and 3041 (Geekbench) show strong per-core performance.

The 3DMark thread scaling results reveal an interesting pattern: 2-thread score of 2512, 4-thread of 4885, 8-thread of 9002, 16-thread of 12490, and max-threads of 13795. The scaling from 8 to 16 threads shows a 38.7% improvement, but from 16 to max threads only 10.4% — suggesting diminishing returns beyond 16 threads for threaded workloads. The PassMark physics score of 5340 and multithread score of 56154 further reinforce the CPU's capability.

However, in Inside, the CPU's role is almost entirely passive. The game's frame rates are dictated by the GPU at every resolution and setting combination. The 1080p Low result of 134 FPS represents the ceiling for this combo, and even that figure is well below what the 9900X3D could theoretically support. The CPU's 89.6 GB/s dual-channel DDR5 memory bandwidth and PCIe Gen 5 interface with 24 lanes provide more than enough headroom for the GTX 1650's PCIe 3.0 x16 connection.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Ryzen 9 9900X3D and GTX 1650 ranks 2780 out of 2887 tested combos in Inside — placing it in the bottom 3.7% of all configurations. This abysmal ranking is entirely attributable to the GPU, as the CPU's 91st-percentile standing demonstrates that the processor is not the limiting factor. The data shows a clear mismatch: a flagship CPU paired with an entry-level GPU creates a system that performs far below what either component could achieve individually.

The ranking becomes more understandable when examining the FPS data. At 1080p Ultra, the combo produces 64 FPS — playable but hardly impressive for a game from 2016. At 4K Ultra, the frame rate collapses to 29 FPS, which is below the 30 FPS threshold generally considered minimum for playable performance. The combo's best result is 134 FPS at 1080p Low, which demonstrates that the GPU can handle the game when pixel count and graphical complexity are minimized.

The percentile comparison is instructive: the CPU ranks 51 percentage points higher than the GPU (91st vs 40th percentile). This 51-point gap is among the largest possible in the database and explains why the combo ranks so poorly. The measured FPS values align closely with the GPU's standalone benchmark percentile of 40, suggesting that the CPU contributes virtually nothing to the performance equation in this title. The game's modest CPU requirements — even a mid-range processor would likely produce identical frame rates with this GPU.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance for optimizing the Inside experience with this hardware combo. At 1920x1080, all four settings presets achieve playable frame rates: Low at 134 FPS, Medium at 107 FPS (with a minimum of 91 and maximum of 124), High at 67 FPS, and Ultra at 64 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium costs 27 FPS (20.1% reduction), but the jump from Medium to High costs 40 FPS (37.4% reduction) — a much steeper penalty. High to Ultra costs only 3 FPS (4.5% reduction), suggesting that Ultra is nearly free once High is achieved.

At 2560x1440, the picture changes. Low delivers 97 FPS, Medium 77 FPS (minimum 66, maximum 89), High 48 FPS, and Ultra 46 FPS. The Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance at this resolution, with a 77 FPS average that maintains smooth gameplay. High and Ultra both dip below 50 FPS, which may introduce noticeable stutter in fast-moving scenes.

At 3840x2160, only Low (61 FPS) and Medium (49 FPS, minimum 41, maximum 56) reach playable thresholds. High drops to 30 FPS and Ultra to 29 FPS — both below the 30 FPS floor for acceptable performance. The Medium preset at 4K provides a 49 FPS average with a 41 FPS minimum, which is the only 4K option that maintains consistent playability.

The recommendation is straightforward: for 1080p gaming, the High preset at 67 FPS offers the best quality-to-performance ratio, with Ultra at 64 FPS as a nearly identical alternative. For 1440p, Medium at 77 FPS is the sweet spot. For 4K, Medium at 49 FPS is the only viable option for smooth gameplay, while Low at 61 FPS provides additional headroom if frame rate stability is prioritized.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Inside at 4K?

A: Yes, but only at Low and Medium settings. Low averages 61 FPS and Medium averages 49 FPS (minimum 41, maximum 56). High (30 FPS) and Ultra (29 FPS) both fall below the 30 FPS playability threshold.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p?

A: The Medium preset at 77 FPS average (minimum 66, maximum 89) provides the best balance. Low runs at 97 FPS, while High (48 FPS) and Ultra (46 FPS) both drop below 50 FPS.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 1650's average benchmark score of 7472 is 0.3% below the AMD Radeon HD 8850M, 0.4% below the Intel UHD Graphics 750, 0.6% below the AMD Radeon R7 350, and 1.0% above the Intel Arc A310. All five GPUs are within 1.0% of each other.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The GPU is the bottleneck at every resolution and settings preset. The CPU ranks in the 91st percentile of all processors, while the GPU ranks in the 40th percentile — a 51-point gap. The consistent FPS scaling with resolution changes confirms GPU limitation.

Q: What is the combo's ranking among all tested configurations?

A: This combo ranks 2780 out of 2887 tested combos in Inside, placing it in the bottom 3.7% of all configurations. The ranking reflects the GPU's limitations despite the CPU's top-tier performance.

Q: What frame rates can be expected at 1080p?

A: All four presets are playable: Low averages 134 FPS, Medium 107 FPS (minimum 91, maximum 124), High 67 FPS, and Ultra 64 FPS. The High preset offers the best visual quality without significant FPS loss compared to Ultra.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS data for this combo is presented below, organized by resolution and settings preset.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 134 FPS average
• Medium: 107 FPS average, 91 FPS minimum, 124 FPS maximum
• High: 67 FPS average
• Ultra: 64 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 97 FPS average
• Medium: 77 FPS average, 66 FPS minimum, 89 FPS maximum
• High: 48 FPS average
• Ultra: 46 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 61 FPS average
• Medium: 49 FPS average, 41 FPS minimum, 56 FPS maximum
• High: 30 FPS average
• Ultra: 29 FPS average

Across all 12 measured configurations, the average FPS ranges from a low of 29 (4K Ultra) to a high of 134 (1080p Low). The Medium preset is the only settings level with complete minimum and maximum data at every resolution, providing the most reliable frame time variance information. At 1080p Medium, the frame range spans 91 to 124 FPS (a 33 FPS spread), while at 1440p Medium the range is 66 to 89 FPS (a 23 FPS spread), and at 4K Medium the range narrows to 41 to 56 FPS (a 15 FPS spread). This tightening variance at higher resolutions further confirms the GPU's role as the performance limiter — as the GPU becomes more saturated, frame times become more consistent but at lower absolute values.