Inside

Inside is a puzzle platformer from 2016, and benchmark data for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 shows a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-limited at higher resolutions, yet reveals a curious CPU bottleneck at 1080p. The measured frame rates across a 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 range indicate that this combination is capable of delivering exceptionally high performance, but the scaling pattern suggests that the processor's single-thread performance becomes a limiting factor only when the graphical load is reduced to its minimum.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate data across the three tested resolutions reveals a classic performance curve that shifts from CPU-bound at 1080p to firmly GPU-bound at 4K. At 1080p with Low settings, the system produces 381 FPS average. When moving to 1440p Low, this drops to 325 FPS, a reduction of approximately 14.7%. Scaling further to 4K Low yields 204 FPS, which is a 37.2% drop from the 1440p result. This pattern demonstrates that the GPU is still the primary driver of performance even at lower resolutions, as the frame rate continues to fall significantly with each resolution increase.

Examining the High preset tells a similar story. The 1080p High result of 226 FPS drops to 163 FPS at 1440p, a 27.9% reduction, and then falls to 102 FPS at 4K, another 37.4% decline. The consistency of these percentage drops across both Low and High settings indicates that the game's rendering pipeline scales predictably with pixel count.

The most revealing data point comes from the Medium preset, which includes minimum and maximum frame rates. At 1080p Medium, the average is 351 FPS with a minimum of 299 FPS and a maximum of 404 FPS. This wide spread suggests some frame pacing variability even at high frame rates. At 1440p Medium, the average falls to 260 FPS with a minimum of 221 FPS and a maximum of 299 FPS. The 4K Medium result shows 163 FPS average with a minimum of 139 FPS and a maximum of 188 FPS.

The Ultra preset follows the same downward trend: 215 FPS at 1080p, 155 FPS at 1440p, and 97 FPS at 4K. Comparing the 1080p to 4K scaling for Ultra shows a 54.9% reduction in average frame rate. This is less severe than the Low preset's 46.5% reduction, which is counterintuitive until considering that at Ultra settings, the GPU is more consistently the bottleneck at all resolutions, making the relative drop more proportional to pixel count.

The limiting component analysis points to the GPU being the primary constraint at 4K, where even the fastest settings produce only 204 FPS. The CPU's role becomes apparent at 1080p Low, where 381 FPS represents a practical ceiling for the processor's single-thread performance in this game engine. The fact that 1080p Low (381 FPS) is only 17.2% faster than 1080p High (226 FPS) suggests that the CPU begins to limit performance when the GPU has less work to do.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achieved by this combination?

A: The highest measured average is 381 FPS at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This represents the absolute ceiling for this CPU-GPU pairing in Inside.

Q: How does the 4K Ultra performance compare to the 1080p Ultra performance?

A: The 4K Ultra average of 97 FPS is 54.9% lower than the 1080p Ultra average of 215 FPS. Both are well above playable thresholds, but the gap demonstrates the significant pixel count increase.

Q: At which resolution and settings does the system fail to maintain 100 FPS average?

A: Only the 4K Ultra preset falls below 100 FPS, with an average of 97 FPS. All other tested combinations, including 4K High at 102 FPS, maintain averages above this threshold.

Q: What is the frame rate variability at 1440p Medium settings?

A: The 1440p Medium preset shows an average of 260 FPS with a minimum of 221 FPS and a maximum of 299 FPS. This represents a spread of 78 FPS between minimum and maximum.

Q: Is the RTX 5080's performance in this game consistent with its overall benchmark percentile?

A: The RTX 5080 ranks in the 87th percentile among all GPUs in synthetic benchmarks. In Inside, the frame rates suggest it is performing at a high level, though the game's modest graphical demands mean the results are more indicative of the CPU's capabilities at lower resolutions.

Q: How does the 1080p Low result compare to the 4K Low result?

A: The 1080p Low average of 381 FPS is 86.8% higher than the 4K Low average of 204 FPS. This substantial gap indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor when moving to higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 brings substantial hardware to this puzzle platformer. Its 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is far more than Inside requires at any tested resolution. The memory clock runs at 1875 MHz, translating to 30 Gbps effective, and the GPU's boost clock is 2617 MHz with a base clock of 2295 MHz.

The GPU's architecture is Blackwell 2.0 on a 5 nm process from TSMC, with 45,600 million transistors packed into a 378 mm² die. It features 10,752 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 112 raster output pipelines. The compute capabilities include 56.28 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 operations, which is more than sufficient for a game released in 2016.

In terms of benchmark results, the RTX 5080 scores 36,565 on Passmark G3D and 21,789 on Passmark GPU Compute. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 8,637. These numbers place the GPU in the 87th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 56,083.

The GPU's performance in Inside is characterized by its ability to handle the game's rendering demands at high frame rates. At 4K High, the average is 102 FPS, and even at 4K Ultra, the system maintains 97 FPS. The GPU's role becomes more pronounced as resolution increases; the frame rate drops from 226 FPS at 1080p High to 102 FPS at 4K High, a 54.9% reduction that aligns with the increased pixel workload.

The RTX 5080's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks are the AMD Radeon 8060S with an average score of 55,757 (0.6% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB at 55,698 (0.7% lower), and the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X at 54,828 (2.3% lower). The AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE scores 57,367, which is 2.2% higher than the RTX 5080. This tight grouping indicates that in raw compute terms, the RTX 5080 is competitive with these alternatives, though Inside's specific engine optimizations may favor certain architectures.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 ranks 706th out of 3,716 tested combos in Inside, placing it in the top 19% of all systems tested for this game. This ranking reflects the high frame rates achieved across all tested settings and resolutions.

The CPU's contribution to this ranking is significant. The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 carries an average benchmark score of 77,740 and sits in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX with an average score of 76,513 (1.6% lower), the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P at 76,492 (1.6% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX at 76,212 (2.0% lower). The Intel Core i9-14900K scores 79,097, which is 1.7% higher.

The GPU's ranking at 87th percentile among all GPUs is lower than the CPU's 95th percentile, suggesting that the processor is the stronger component in this pairing. This is reflected in the game's performance: at 1080p Low, the system reaches 381 FPS, which is likely constrained by the CPU's single-thread performance rather than the GPU's capabilities.

Considering the combo rank of 706 out of 3,716, this system outperforms 81% of all tested configurations in Inside. The high ranking is attributable to both components being in the upper echelons of their respective performance distributions, with the CPU's strong multi-threaded and single-threaded scores complementing the GPU's high compute throughput.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Strix Halo. It operates with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, within a 55 W TDP. The CPU is manufactured on a 4 nm process from TSMC and features a dual-die design with each die measuring 70.6 mm².

The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support includes LPDDR5X with a quad-channel interface providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The processor supports ECC memory and uses an AMD Socket FP11.

In terms of CPU benchmarks, the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 scores 35,314 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,044 in single-core. Its Geekbench scores are 20,992 multi-core and 2,464 single-core. Passmark results show 54,934 for multi-thread and 4,147 for single-thread. The Passmark physics score is 3,481, and the floating-point math score is 128,682.

For Inside, the CPU's single-thread performance is particularly relevant. The game was released in 2016 and likely does not utilize more than a few cores effectively. The boost clock of 5.10 GHz provides strong single-thread performance, which is reflected in the 2,044 Cinebench R23 single-core score. This translates to the high frame rates observed at 1080p Low, where the CPU becomes the limiting factor.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 95th among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 77,740, indicates it is a top-tier processor. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i9-14900K, scores 1.7% higher on average, yet the Ryzen AI Max+ 395's power efficiency (55 W TDP) makes it a compelling choice for mobile platforms.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates for Inside with this hardware configuration provide a comprehensive picture of performance across nine distinct scenarios.

1920x1080:

• Low: 381 FPS average
• Medium: 351 FPS average, 299 FPS minimum, 404 FPS maximum
• High: 226 FPS average
• Ultra: 215 FPS average

2560x1440:

• Low: 325 FPS average
• Medium: 260 FPS average, 221 FPS minimum, 299 FPS maximum
• High: 163 FPS average
• Ultra: 155 FPS average

3840x2160:

• Low: 204 FPS average
• Medium: 163 FPS average, 139 FPS minimum, 188 FPS maximum
• High: 102 FPS average
• Ultra: 97 FPS average

The data shows a clear hierarchy: at each resolution, the Low preset delivers the highest frame rate, followed by Medium, then High, with Ultra being the most demanding. The gap between Low and Medium is relatively small at 1080p (381 vs 351 FPS, a 7.9% difference), but widens at 1440p (325 vs 260 FPS, a 20.0% difference) and 4K (204 vs 163 FPS, a 20.1% difference).

The transition from Medium to High is more substantial. At 1080p, the drop is from 351 to 226 FPS, a 35.6% reduction. At 1440p, the drop is from 260 to 163 FPS, a 37.3% reduction. The 4K Medium to High transition sees a decrease from 163 to 102 FPS, a 37.4% reduction. These consistent percentages suggest that the High preset introduces a fixed additional rendering cost relative to Medium.

The High to Ultra transition is smaller. At 1080p, the drop is from 226 to 215 FPS, a 4.9% reduction. At 1440p, the drop is from 163 to 155 FPS, a 4.9% reduction. The 4K High to Ultra transition shows a decrease from 102 to 97 FPS, also a 4.9% reduction. This consistency indicates that Ultra settings add a modest but predictable overhead over High.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured frame rates, the optimal settings depend on the user's refresh rate and resolution preferences.

For 4K displays, the High preset at 102 FPS average is the recommended choice for smooth gameplay. The Ultra preset drops to 97 FPS, which is only a 4.9% reduction but may be imperceptible in a puzzle platformer. The Medium preset at 163 FPS offers a significant improvement over High, with a 59.8% higher average frame rate, making it the best option for users with high refresh rate 4K displays.

At 1440p, the Medium preset delivers 260 FPS average, which is suitable for most high refresh rate monitors. The High preset at 163 FPS is also a solid choice, offering a balance between visual quality and performance. The Ultra preset at 155 FPS is nearly identical to High, suggesting that the visual differences are minimal in this game.

For 1080p, the High preset at 226 FPS is the recommended starting point. The Ultra preset at 215 FPS is only 4.9% slower, so users with 240 Hz displays may prefer Ultra for maximum visual quality. The Medium preset at 351 FPS is the best choice for competitive play or for users with 360 Hz monitors, as the frame rate is well above typical refresh rates.

The Low preset provides the highest frame rates at all resolutions but sacrifices visual quality. Given that the Medium preset at 4K still achieves 163 FPS, there is little reason to use Low settings except for extreme competitive scenarios. The data indicates that Medium settings offer the best balance of visual fidelity and performance across all resolutions, with the only exception being 4K Ultra where the 97 FPS average may cause noticeable frame pacing issues on high refresh rate displays.