Inside

The Intel Core i3-12100F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT delivers a performance profile in Inside that is defined by a striking contrast: the GPU is overwhelmingly powerful, yet the 4-core CPU occasionally sets the ceiling. This combination ranks 436th out of 1671 tested combos for this game, placing it in the top 26% of all configurations. That ranking is respectable, but the data reveals that the pairing is far more nuanced than a simple high-end GPU with a budget processor; the benchmark rows show a system that is capable of immense frame rates, but whose scaling characteristics hint at a bottleneck that shifts depending on resolution and preset.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 436 out of 1671 tested combinations is a strong showing, though it does not place the system near the very top. The data indicates that the i3-12100F, which sits at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs, is the limiting factor in this pairing within Inside. The GPU, by contrast, is in the 82nd percentile among all GPUs, suggesting a mismatch in raw potential. The benchmark results confirm this: at 1080p Low, the system produces 317.5 FPS, but at 4K Ultra it drops to 96.5 FPS, a range that shows the GPU is still capable of heavy lifting, but the CPU’s 4 cores and 8 threads may struggle to feed it at lower resolutions. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 13516 is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX (13534, delta -0.1%), and slightly ahead of the Intel Core i7-7700K (13280, delta 1.8%). This suggests that while the i3-12100F is not a top-tier chip, its performance is competitive with much older high-end processors. The ranking is therefore a reflection of the CPU’s limits more than the GPU’s, as the RX 9070 XT’s average score of 39647 is within 1% of the AMD Radeon Pro 575 and the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile, indicating it is a top-tier card that is being held back in some scenarios.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is the dominant component in this pairing for Inside, and its specifications explain why. It features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s. The boost clock is listed at 2970 MHz, with a game clock of 2400 MHz, and these high frequencies allow the card to push massive frame rates. The GPU’s 4096 shading units and 128 ROPs, combined with a pixel rate of 380.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 760.3 GTexel/s, make it an absolute powerhouse for a 2D puzzle platformer like Inside. The measured FPS data shows the GPU is rarely the bottleneck: even at 4K Ultra, it still manages 96.5 FPS, which is far above playable thresholds. At 1080p Low, the card produces 317.5 FPS, a figure that is likely limited by the CPU rather than the GPU, as the card is capable of far more. The GPU’s FP32 performance of 48.66 TFLOPS is more than sufficient for the game’s simple geometry, and the data suggests that the RX 9070 XT is essentially overkill for Inside, providing headroom that is unused in most scenarios. The card’s launch MSRP is 599 USD, and its performance here is consistent with a top-tier product.

FAQ

Q: Why does the frame rate drop so much from 1080p Low to 4K Ultra?

A: The data shows a drop from 317.5 FPS to 96.5 FPS, a 69.6% reduction. This is primarily due to the GPU’s workload increasing with resolution, but the CPU’s 4 cores and 8 threads may also become a limiting factor at lower resolutions where the GPU could otherwise render more frames.

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

A: The benchmark results indicate the CPU is the primary bottleneck. The i3-12100F has a single-thread score of 893 in 3DMark and 1681 in Cinebench R23, which are moderate, while the GPU is in the 82nd percentile. At 1080p Low, the FPS is 317.5, which is high but likely capped by the CPU’s ability to issue draw calls, whereas the GPU could handle more.

Q: How does the i3-12100F compare to its nearest rivals in raw CPU performance?

A: The i3-12100F’s average benchmark score of 13516 is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX (13534, delta -0.1%) and slightly ahead of the Intel Core i7-7700K (13280, delta 1.8%). This shows it holds its own against much more expensive parts in synthetic tests.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to play Inside?

A: The data shows that 1440p High yields 166.5 FPS, which is smooth, while 4K High yields 102.5 FPS, still very playable. For maximum fidelity, 4K Ultra at 96.5 FPS is viable, but the CPU may cause minor stutters at lower resolutions.

Q: Is the RX 9070 XT overkill for Inside?

A: Yes, the data suggests it is. The GPU produces over 200 FPS at 1080p on all settings, and even at 4K Ultra it maintains 96.5 FPS. The card’s 16 GB of VRAM and high clock speeds are far beyond what this game requires, meaning the CPU is the limiting factor in most scenarios.

Q: How does the combo rank relative to all tested configurations?

A: It ranks 436th out of 1671 combos, which is in the top 26%. This ranking is influenced by the CPU’s modest performance, as the GPU alone would likely place the system much higher.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of performance across resolutions and settings. At 1080p, the system delivers 317.5 FPS on Low, 293.6 FPS on Medium, 228.4 FPS on High, and 214.5 FPS on Ultra. These numbers are exceptionally high, indicating that the GPU is not stressed at this resolution. Moving to 1440p, the results are 283.5 FPS on Low, 258.7 FPS on Medium, 166.5 FPS on High, and 157.3 FPS on Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 44.5%, which is more pronounced than at 1080p, suggesting the GPU is becoming a factor. At 4K, the results are 207.7 FPS on Low, 166.4 FPS on Medium, 102.5 FPS on High, and 96.5 FPS on Ultra. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 53.5%, showing that the GPU’s workload is significantly higher. Notably, the 4K Low result of 207.7 FPS is still higher than the 1080p Ultra result of 214.5 FPS, which is a small margin that indicates the CPU is limiting the 1080p Ultra result. The 1440p Medium result of 258.7 FPS is also higher than the 1080p Ultra result, further confirming that the CPU is the bottleneck at lower resolutions and higher settings. The data shows a consistent pattern: the GPU is capable of extreme frame rates, but the CPU’s performance caps the system at around 300 FPS in the best cases.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i3-12100F is a 4-core, 8-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. Its 12 MB of shared L3 cache is modest, and its single-thread performance, as measured by a 3DMark single-thread score of 893 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1681, is adequate but not exceptional. In Inside, the CPU’s role is to manage the game’s physics and logic, which are not demanding, but the low core count may limit the frame rate at lower resolutions where the GPU can render frames faster than the CPU can process them. The data supports this: at 1080p Low, the system produces 317.5 FPS, which is likely near the CPU’s maximum throughput. The CPU’s multi-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11912, is decent, but the 4-core design means it cannot keep up with the GPU’s potential in a game that is not heavily threaded. The CPU’s percentile ranking of 72nd among all CPUs is reflected in the fact that the combo’s rank of 436th is lower than what the GPU alone would achieve. The CPU’s memory support for DDR4 and DDR5, with a dual-channel bus, is sufficient for this game, but the data suggests that the i3-12100F is the component that holds back the system from reaching the top of the rankings.

Settings Recommendations

The data indicates that the best experience is achieved by balancing visual quality with the CPU’s limitations. At 1080p, Ultra settings provide 214.5 FPS, which is far above the refresh rate of most monitors, but the CPU is likely the limiting factor, as the GPU could push higher. At 1440p, High settings yield 166.5 FPS, which is a better balance, as the GPU is more utilized, and the CPU is less likely to bottleneck. At 4K, High settings produce 102.5 FPS, which is smooth, while Ultra drops to 96.5 FPS, which is still playable but not a significant improvement over High. Given that the game is a puzzle platformer, visual fidelity is not critical, so Medium settings at 1440p (258.7 FPS) or High settings at 4K (102.5 FPS) are the most sensible choices. The data shows that the jump from Medium to High at 1440p costs 35.6% of the frame rate (from 258.7 to 166.5 FPS), which is a large penalty for minor visual gains. At 4K, the jump from Medium to High costs 38.4% (from 166.4 to 102.5 FPS), which is also significant. Therefore, the data suggests that Medium settings at 1440p offer the best experience, as they provide a high frame rate without taxing the CPU or GPU excessively. For users with 4K displays, High settings are the sweet spot, as Ultra offers only a 6% improvement in frame rate over High but a 19% drop in performance.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the limiting component. At 1080p Low, the system produces 317.5 FPS, which drops to 283.5 FPS at 1440p Low (an 10.7% decrease) and then to 207.7 FPS at 4K Low (a 34.6% decrease from 1440p). The relatively small drop from 1080p to 1440p suggests that the CPU is the bottleneck at 1080p, as the GPU is not being fully utilized. At 1440p Low, the GPU is more engaged, but the CPU is still likely limiting the frame rate, as the drop to 4K Low is more significant. For High settings, the scaling is different: 228.4 FPS at 1080p, 166.5 FPS at 1440p (a 27.1% drop), and 102.5 FPS at 4K (a 38.4% drop from 1440p). This shows that as settings increase, the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck, and the CPU’s influence diminishes. The data implies that the i3-12100F is the limiting factor at 1080p and 1440p Low, where the GPU could produce higher frame rates if the CPU could keep up. At 4K, the GPU is fully utilized, and the CPU’s limitations are masked. The scaling pattern is consistent with a system where the GPU is overkill for the game, and the CPU’s 4 cores and 8 threads are the primary constraint, particularly at lower resolutions and settings where the GPU can render frames faster than the CPU can process them.