Inside

Inside, the 2016 puzzle platformer from Playdead, proves to be remarkably forgiving on modern hardware. The benchmark data for the Intel Core i5-10400F and AMD Radeon RX 9060 combination shows a system that delivers exceptionally high frame rates across all tested configurations, firmly placing this pairing in the upper echelon of tested systems. The data indicates that this combo ranks 1860th out of 2887 tested combinations, a position that, while not top-tier, is more than sufficient for a game of this visual style and pace. The performance headroom is so substantial that the primary challenge for a user is not achieving playability, but rather deciding how to best utilize the excess capacity, either through resolution scaling, graphical fidelity, or a combination of both. The measured results consistently point to a component pairing where neither the CPU nor the GPU acts as a significant bottleneck at any of the tested settings.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a clear and expected shift in the performance bottleneck. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo produces an average of 155 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same settings drops the average to 111 FPS, a reduction of 44 FPS. The jump to 3840x2160 at High settings further reduces the average to 70 FPS, another 41 FPS drop. This pattern of diminishing returns is classic behavior for a system where the GPU becomes increasingly dominant as the pixel count rises. The fact that the frame rate nearly halves when quadrupling the pixel count from 1080p to 4K strongly suggests that the AMD Radeon RX 9060 is the limiting factor at the highest resolution, while the Intel Core i5-10400F has ample headroom to feed it frames at lower resolutions.

The scaling from Low to Ultra settings at each resolution reinforces this analysis. At 1080p, the difference between Low (233 FPS) and Ultra (147 FPS) is a massive 86 FPS, indicating that the CPU is capable of pushing frame rates far beyond what the GPU can render at higher settings. However, at 4K, the spread narrows significantly. The frame rate at Low is 140 FPS, while at Ultra it drops to 66 FPS, a difference of 74 FPS. While still significant, the absolute values are lower, and the gap between Medium (112 FPS) and High (70 FPS) is particularly steep, indicating that the GPU's rendering workload at 4K is the primary constraint. The data shows that the system is CPU-bound at 1080p, where it can generate over 200 FPS, but transitions to being GPU-bound at 4K, where the maximum achievable frame rate is halved.

The 1440p results show a balanced midpoint. At this resolution, the system is likely neither fully CPU-bound nor fully GPU-bound. The average FPS at High settings (111) sits proportionally between the 1080p and 4K results, suggesting a more equitable distribution of workload between the two components. The data suggests that users targeting high refresh rates at 1440p will find the performance adequate, but those seeking the absolute highest frame rates should consider 1080p. The scaling behavior is consistent and predictable, with no anomalies in the data that would suggest driver issues or unusual thermal throttling. The performance degradation from 1080p to 4K is a textbook example of GPU-bound scaling, where the rendering resolution, not the CPU's processing power, dictates the final frame rate.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060, with its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, provides a 288.0 GB/s memory bandwidth. In the context of Inside, this is more than adequate. The game's art style, while atmospheric and detailed, does not feature the massive, high-resolution textures that would stress a memory subsystem. The data supports this, as even at 4K Ultra, the average frame rate remains at 66 FPS, a playable level. The GPU's 8 GB frame buffer is not a limiting factor at any of the tested resolutions or settings, as there are no minFps values reported for the Low, High, and Ultra presets that would indicate a memory capacity spillover. The Medium preset does report a minFps at 4K (95 FPS), but this is still a high value and more likely a transient frame pacing issue than a memory bottleneck.

The GPU's clock speeds are robust, with a base clock of 1700 MHz and a boost clock of 2990 MHz. The game clock is listed at 2400 MHz. The benchmark results indicate that the GPU is capable of sustaining high performance across all settings. At 1080p, the GPU is not the primary bottleneck, as the CPU is able to generate frame rates that exceed the GPU's rendering capacity at higher settings. However, at 4K, the GPU's raw compute power becomes the determining factor. The transition from High to Ultra at 4K results in a modest 4 FPS drop (from 70 to 66 FPS), while the jump from Medium to High is a significant 42 FPS drop (from 112 to 70 FPS). This non-linear scaling suggests that the High preset hits a specific rendering feature or shader complexity that disproportionately increases the GPU's workload.

The GPU's overall performance, as measured by the Passmark G3D score of 17631, places it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals, according to the data, are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (with a score of 16129 and a deltaPct of -0.7) and the AMD Radeon RX 7700 (with a score of 15852 and a deltaPct of 1). This indicates that the RX 9060 is a solid mid-range performer, and its results in Inside are consistent with its general benchmark standing. The data shows that the GPU's capabilities are well-matched to the demands of this game, providing a high-quality experience without any signs of compromise. The 29,700 million transistors on a 4 nm process deliver a 21.43 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is clearly sufficient for the rendering tasks required by Inside.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal setting for this combo is the High preset. At 1080p, it delivers an average of 155 FPS, which is smooth and responsive. At 1440p, it maintains a solid 111 FPS, and even at 4K, it achieves a playable 70 FPS. The High preset offers the best balance between visual fidelity and performance. The data shows that the jump from High to Ultra yields diminishing returns. At 1080p, the difference is only 8 FPS (155 to 147), and at 4K, it is just 4 FPS (70 to 66). Given the minimal performance cost, the Ultra preset is a viable option for users who prioritize visual quality, but the High preset provides a more significant performance buffer, especially at higher resolutions.

The Medium preset is an interesting case, as it is the only one with recorded minFps and maxFps values. At 1080p, it averages 215 FPS, with a minimum of 183 and a maximum of 247. At 1440p, the average is 178 FPS, and at 4K, it is 112 FPS. While these are excellent numbers, the High preset offers a substantial visual upgrade for a relatively small performance hit at 1080p (60 FPS difference) and 1440p (67 FPS difference). The Low preset, while capable of producing the highest frame rates (233 FPS at 1080p), is not recommended for a game like Inside, where the atmosphere and lighting are core to the experience. The data suggests that Low compromises the visual presentation without providing a tangible gameplay benefit, as the High preset already exceeds the refresh rate of most standard monitors.

For users with a 1440p monitor, the High preset is the clear recommendation. It provides a frame rate that is well above the 60 FPS threshold and is likely to be near the refresh rate limit of a mid-range monitor. For 4K users, the High preset is also the best choice, as it maintains a 70 FPS average, which is above the console-standard 60 FPS. The data indicates that pushing to Ultra at 4K is a trade-off that sacrifices 4 FPS for potentially marginal visual improvements. The overall recommendation is to stick with High settings for a hassle-free, high-performance experience, with Ultra being a reasonable choice for users with high refresh rate 1080p or 1440p displays who want to maximize image quality.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-10400F and AMD Radeon RX 9060 combination holds a rank of 1860 out of 2887 tested combos in Inside. This places it in the 64th percentile of all tested systems. While this rank might sound low, it is important to contextualize it with the absolute frame rates. A rank of 1860 means there are 1860 other combos that perform better, but the data shows that this combo still produces an excellent gaming experience. The rank is likely influenced by the CPU's age, as the Core i5-10400F is a 10th Gen part, and the GPU's mid-range positioning. However, the game's low system requirements mean that even a combo ranking in the middle of the pack can deliver over 60 FPS at 4K.

The combo's ranking is a reflection of the hardware's absolute performance limits, not its suitability for this specific title. The data shows that the combo is capable of a 4K High experience at 70 FPS, which is a strong result. The rank would be more concerning if the game were a demanding AAA title, but for a puzzle platformer with stylized graphics, the performance is more than sufficient. The 1860th rank reflects the fact that the benchmark database includes many high-end systems with top-tier CPUs and GPUs, but it does not diminish the fact that this pairing offers a very capable and enjoyable experience in Inside.

The individual components' rankings support this assessment. The CPU is in the 68th percentile of all CPUs, and the GPU is in the 59th percentile of all GPUs. When combined, their performance is slightly lower than the sum of their parts might suggest, indicating that there is a minor bottleneck somewhere in the system. However, the bottleneck is not severe, as the frame rates remain high across all tested settings. The data suggests that the combo is well-balanced for this game, with no single component being drastically underpowered. The rank is a data point, but the measured FPS provides a much more useful picture of the real-world performance.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, is a capable processor for gaming. Its base clock of 2.90 GHz and boost clock of 4.30 GHz provide solid single-threaded performance. In Inside, the CPU's role is to handle the game's logic, physics, and draw calls. The benchmark data shows that the CPU is not a bottleneck at any resolution up to 1440p. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 233 FPS, which is a clear indication that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU far more frames than it can render at lower settings. Even at 1080p Ultra, the CPU manages to keep the GPU well-fed, resulting in 147 FPS.

The CPU's performance in standard benchmarks is consistent with its gaming results. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10283 and single-core score of 1451 demonstrate a solid balance of multi-threaded and single-threaded capability. The data indicates that for a game like Inside, which is not heavily multi-threaded, the single-core performance is more critical. The 3dmark single-thread score of 688 and the Passmark single-thread score of 2541 reflect a processor that can handle the game's primary thread without issue. The CPU's 12 MB of L3 cache is also a positive factor, as it helps reduce memory latency.

The CPU's nearest rivals in the benchmark database, such as the Intel Xeon 6756E (with an avg score of 14163 and a deltaPct of 0.2) and the AMD EPYC 7552 (with an avg score of 14115 and a deltaPct of 0.5), have nearly identical average benchmark scores. This indicates that the i5-10400F is a solid performer in its class, but it is not a high-end part. In the context of Inside, the data shows that this level of performance is more than enough. The CPU's memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s is also sufficient for this game's data streaming requirements. The data clearly shows that the CPU is a reliable, middle-of-the-road performer that does not hinder the gaming experience in Inside, allowing the GPU to do the heavy lifting at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the system's performance across all tested configurations. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers exceptional performance. On Low settings, it averages 233 FPS. On Medium settings, the average is 215 FPS, with a minimum of 183 FPS and a maximum of 247 FPS. On High settings, the average is 155 FPS. On Ultra settings, the average is 147 FPS. These numbers indicate that at 1080p, the system is capable of delivering a flawless high-refresh-rate experience at any settings level.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance remains very strong. On Low settings, the average FPS is 208. On Medium, the average is 178 FPS, with a minimum of 151 FPS and a maximum of 204 FPS. On High, the average is 111 FPS. On Ultra, the average is 106 FPS. The 1440p results show that the system is still capable of exceeding 60 FPS at Ultra settings, making it a viable resolution for high-fidelity gaming. The step down from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 25-30% of the frame rate, which is a typical scaling penalty.

At 3840x2160, the system still delivers playable frame rates. On Low settings, the average is 140 FPS. On Medium, the average is 112 FPS, with a minimum of 95 FPS and a maximum of 128 FPS. On High, the average is 70 FPS. On Ultra, the average is 66 FPS. The 4K results show that the system is capable of a high-refresh-rate experience on Low, but it dips below the 100 FPS mark on Medium and settles into the 60-70 FPS range on High and Ultra. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy, with 1080p being the most comfortable resolution, 1440p being a great balance, and 4K being possible but demanding. The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data, showing a consistent frame pacing across all three resolutions.