Inside

Inside is a puzzle-platformer from 2016, and on this particular hardware pairing—an Intel Core i3-12100F with an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti—the data reveals a system that is almost entirely GPU-bound at higher resolutions but begins to expose CPU limitations at 1080p. The measured frame rates are exceptionally high across the board, but the scaling pattern between resolutions and settings provides a clear picture of where each component’s workload begins and ends.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1080p to 4K on this system shows a classic pattern of GPU saturation. At 1080p High settings, the average frame rate is 228 FPS. Moving to 1440p High drops that to 164 FPS, a 28% reduction. Jumping to 4K High further reduces the average to 103 FPS, which is another 37% drop from the 1440p figure. This steep decline from 1440p to 4K indicates that the RTX 3080 Ti is being pushed progressively harder, with the pixel count doubling and the frame rate nearly halving.

The Low settings data reinforces this trend. At 1080p Low, the system hits 315 FPS average. At 1440p Low, that falls to 282 FPS, a modest 10% decline. However, at 4K Low, the average plummets to 206 FPS, a 27% drop from the 1440p result. The relatively small penalty from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings—only 33 FPS—suggests that at these lower resolutions, the CPU is starting to become a limiting factor, preventing the GPU from fully stretching its legs. Once the resolution increases to 4K, the GPU workload ramps up significantly, and the frame rate scaling becomes more pronounced.

Looking at the Medium preset, the pattern holds. At 1080p, the average is 291 FPS with a minimum of 247 FPS and a maximum of 334 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average is 260 FPS (minimum 221, maximum 299). At 4K Medium, the average drops to 165 FPS, with a minimum of 140 and a maximum of 190. The spread between minimum and maximum frame rates narrows as resolution increases, indicating that the frame time consistency improves when the GPU is the bottleneck.

The Ultra preset shows the most dramatic scaling. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 218 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, it is 156 FPS. At 4K Ultra, it falls to 98 FPS. The gap between 1080p and 4K at Ultra settings is 120 FPS, which represents a 55% reduction in performance. This suggests that the Ultra preset introduces additional shading and post-processing effects that disproportionately impact the GPU at higher pixel counts.

Overall, the resolution scaling data indicates that this system is GPU-limited at 4K across all settings, GPU-limited at 1440p for Medium and High presets, and potentially CPU-limited at 1080p for Low and Medium presets. The 4K results, ranging from 98 FPS at Ultra to 206 FPS at Low, show that the RTX 3080 Ti is the dominant component in this configuration for this game.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti is the clear performance driver in this benchmark. With 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, the card offers 912.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, which is more than sufficient for a game like Inside, which was released in 2016 and has modest texture and geometry requirements compared to modern titles. The GPU’s boost clock of 1665 MHz and base clock of 1365 MHz are standard for the Ampere architecture, but the raw compute resources are substantial: 10,240 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 112 raster output pipelines.

The GPU’s benchmark scores place it in the 83rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 41,187. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070, scores 40,377, which is 2% lower. The AMD Radeon Pro 5300 scores 40,870, a 0.8% difference, while the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB scores 41,707, which is 1.2% higher. These comparisons show that the RTX 3080 Ti sits in a competitive performance tier, though the delta percentages are small, indicating that the card is not dramatically faster or slower than its immediate peers in synthetic benchmarks.

In the context of Inside, the GPU’s role becomes apparent when examining the frame rate data. At 4K Ultra, the card produces an average of 98 FPS, which is still highly playable. At 4K High, it achieves 103 FPS. The fact that the GPU can maintain over 100 FPS at 4K on High settings demonstrates that it is not struggling with the game’s rendering load. The 12 GB VRAM is also a non-issue here; Inside is not a VRAM-heavy title, and the memory capacity is far beyond what the game requires.

The GPU’s performance in synthetic tests, such as the PassMark G3D score of 26,896 and the Geekbench Vulkan score of 192,697, further confirms its capability. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5,077 indicates strong DirectX 12 performance, which aligns with the game’s API requirements. The pixel rate of 186.5 GPixel/s and texture rate of 532.8 GTexel/s are theoretical maxima that support the high frame rates observed.

The data suggests that the RTX 3080 Ti is not the limiting factor in any of the measured configurations. Even at the lowest frame rate recorded (98 FPS at 4K Ultra), the GPU is delivering a smooth experience. The card’s role is to provide headroom, and the measured results show that it does so effectively, with the bottleneck shifting to the CPU only at lower resolutions and settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i3-12100F is a 4-core, 8-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The CPU’s cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The CPU’s TDP is 58 W, and it uses the Intel Socket 1700.

In synthetic benchmarks, the i3-12100F performs solidly for a quad-core part. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 11,860, while the single-core score is 1,674. The Geekbench multi-core score is 7,252, and the single-core score is 1,932. PassMark’s multi-thread score is 14,015, and the single-thread score is 3,444. The CPU’s percentile ranking against all CPUs is 68th, with an average benchmark score of 13,494. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-9500, which scores 13,452 (0.3% lower), and the Intel Core 5 120UL, which scores 13,594 (0.7% higher).

The CPU’s role in Inside is best understood by examining the 1080p results. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 315 FPS average. At 1080p Medium, it achieves 291 FPS. At 1080p High, it achieves 228 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium at 1080p is only 24 FPS, whereas the gap between Medium and High is 63 FPS. This non-linear scaling suggests that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU up to a certain point, but the High preset introduces additional draw calls or physics calculations that the 4-core/8-thread processor must handle.

At 1440p, the CPU’s influence diminishes. The Low preset at 1440p produces 282 FPS, which is 33 FPS lower than at 1080p. The Medium preset at 1440p produces 260 FPS, which is 31 FPS lower than at 1080p. These differences are smaller than the resolution increase would suggest, indicating that the GPU is now the primary constraint. At 4K, the CPU is largely irrelevant; the frame rates are determined almost entirely by the GPU’s pixel throughput.

The CPU’s 3DMark scores provide some context. The 4-thread score is 2,859, the 8-thread score is 4,026, and the 16-thread score is 4,051. The single-thread score is 893. These results show that the CPU scales well with additional threads up to 8, but beyond that, there is little gain, as expected for a 4-core part. Inside is not a heavily threaded game, so the 8 threads are more than adequate.

The data indicates that the i3-12100F is sufficient for Inside at all resolutions, but it does limit the maximum frame rate at 1080p. The 315 FPS at Low settings and 291 FPS at Medium settings are likely near the CPU’s ceiling for this game. The CPU’s boost clock of 4.30 GHz helps maintain responsiveness, but the lack of additional cores means that very high frame rates beyond 300 FPS are not achievable.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates for this combination of Intel Core i3-12100F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti are uniformly high, with no configuration dropping below 98 FPS average. Here is the full breakdown:

At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 315 FPS. The Medium preset delivers an average of 291 FPS, with a minimum of 247 FPS and a maximum of 334 FPS. The High preset delivers an average of 228 FPS. The Ultra preset delivers an average of 218 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 97 FPS, with the Ultra preset being 31% slower than Low.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset delivers an average of 282 FPS. The Medium preset delivers an average of 260 FPS, with a minimum of 221 FPS and a maximum of 299 FPS. The High preset delivers an average of 164 FPS. The Ultra preset delivers an average of 156 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 126 FPS, with the Ultra preset being 45% slower than Low.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset delivers an average of 206 FPS. The Medium preset delivers an average of 165 FPS, with a minimum of 140 FPS and a maximum of 190 FPS. The High preset delivers an average of 103 FPS. The Ultra preset delivers an average of 98 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 108 FPS, with the Ultra preset being 52% slower than Low.

The Medium preset is the only one that includes minimum and maximum frame rate data across all three resolutions. At 1080p, the range is 247 to 334 FPS, a spread of 87 FPS. At 1440p, the range is 221 to 299 FPS, a spread of 78 FPS. At 4K, the range is 140 to 190 FPS, a spread of 50 FPS. This tightening of the frame rate range at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU’s workload becomes more consistent, reducing frame time spikes.

The data shows that the 4K Ultra preset, at 98 FPS average, is the only configuration that dips below the 100 FPS threshold. All other configurations exceed 100 FPS, and most exceed 150 FPS. The combination of this CPU and GPU is more than capable of running Inside at high refresh rates on any monitor, even at 4K.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achievable with this hardware in Inside?

A: The highest average frame rate is 315 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low preset.

Q: Is the RTX 3080 Ti overkill for Inside?

A: The data shows the GPU delivers 98 FPS at 4K Ultra and 103 FPS at 4K High, indicating it is not a bottleneck. The GPU’s 83rd percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 41,187 suggest it is a high-end card, but in this game, it provides significant headroom.

Q: Does the i3-12100F bottleneck the RTX 3080 Ti in this game?

A: At 1080p Low and Medium, the CPU appears to be the limiting factor, as the frame rates (315 FPS and 291 FPS) are likely near the CPU’s maximum. At 1440p and 4K, the GPU becomes the primary constraint, as evidenced by the larger frame rate drops with resolution increases.

Q: What is the performance difference between the Low and Ultra presets at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 206 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 98 FPS. This is a 52% reduction in performance.

Q: How does this system compare to the RTX 3080 Ti’s nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RTX 3080 Ti has an average benchmark score of 41,187. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 scores 40,377, which is 2% lower. The AMD Radeon Pro 5300 scores 40,870, which is 0.8% lower. The NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB scores 41,707, which is 1.2% higher.

Q: Is the Medium preset at 1440p a good target for this hardware?

A: The Medium preset at 2560x1440 averages 260 FPS, with a minimum of 221 FPS and a maximum of 299 FPS. This provides a very smooth experience with good frame time consistency, as indicated by the relatively narrow range.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured frame rates, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and refresh rate. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset averages 218 FPS, which is sufficient for any high-refresh-rate monitor up to 240 Hz. However, the Medium preset at 291 FPS offers a significant boost in frame rate with only a minor visual compromise, making it the best choice for competitive play or maximum smoothness. The High preset at 228 FPS is a middle ground, but the data shows that the jump from High to Ultra costs only 10 FPS, which is negligible.

At 2560x1440, the High preset averages 164 FPS, which is excellent for 144 Hz displays. The Ultra preset at 156 FPS is also viable, as the 8 FPS difference is unlikely to be noticeable. The Medium preset at 260 FPS is ideal for 240 Hz monitors, but the visual fidelity drop from High to Medium may be more apparent at this resolution. For most users, the High preset provides the best balance of image quality and performance at 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the High preset averages 103 FPS, which is just above the 100 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay on 120 Hz displays. The Ultra preset at 98 FPS is marginally below that threshold, but the difference is minimal. The Medium preset at 165 FPS is the standout choice for 4K, offering a 60% improvement over Ultra while still maintaining high visual quality. Given that the game is a puzzle-platformer with a slower pace, the Medium preset at 4K delivers the best experience, as the frame rate headroom ensures no dips below 140 FPS.

The data suggests that the Medium preset is the sweet spot across all resolutions. At 1080p, it provides 291 FPS; at 1440p, it provides 260 FPS; and at 4K, it provides 165 FPS. The only configuration that falls short of 100 FPS is 4K Ultra at 98 FPS, which is still playable but unnecessary given the performance of the Medium preset. For users prioritizing visual fidelity, the High preset at 4K is the recommended choice, as it stays above 100 FPS. For users with high-refresh-rate monitors, the Low preset at 1080p (315 FPS) or 1440p (282 FPS) is the best option.