Inside

The Intel Core i5-10400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER delivers a solid, highly playable experience in Inside, a side-scrolling Puzzle Platformer. This combo ranks 1471st out of 1671 tested combinations in this game, placing it in the lower-middle tier of the database. While that rank might sound low, it reflects the sheer number of high-end configurations tested; the actual frame rates show this pairing is far more capable than its percentile suggests. The data indicates a system that is entirely sufficient for this title, offering excellent performance at standard resolutions and remaining playable even at 4K with adjusted settings.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's position at 1471 out of 1671 tested combos in Inside places it in the 12th percentile of all configurations. This low rank is typical for a mid-range pairing of a 2020 CPU and a 2019 GPU. However, the ranking is heavily skewed by the presence of many top-tier components in the database. The actual gameplay metrics show this is a well-balanced pairing for this specific title. The CPU's 73rd percentile ranking against all CPUs, combined with the GPU's 55th percentile ranking against all GPUs, suggests a balanced system where neither component is a dramatic bottleneck. The measured results show the combo provides a 1.4x performance headroom over 60 FPS at 1440p High settings, and even at 4K High, it maintains an average of 50.1 FPS, which is a very respectable result for a game of this genre. The data points to a system that outperforms its overall rank, with the rank being a product of a crowded field of high-end hardware rather than a reflection of this combo's actual gaming capabilities.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is the primary driver of frame rates in Inside. With 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, it provides 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is more than sufficient for the game's art style and texture loads. The GPU's boost clock of 1785 MHz and base clock of 1530 MHz allow it to handle the game's rendering efficiently. In synthetic benchmarks, the GPU scores 12699 in Passmark G3D and 14286 in its average benchmark score, which places it in the 55th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11, Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics, and AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT, with the GTX 1660 SUPER trailing by only 0.2% to 0.7% in average score. This is a tight grouping, but the GTX 1660 SUPER's advantage in this specific game is clear. The measured FPS shows that the GPU is the scaling factor when moving between settings presets. At 1080p, the jump from Low (217.8 FPS) to Ultra (101.5 FPS) represents a 53% reduction in frames, demonstrating how the GPU's shading units and ROPs are taxed by higher graphical fidelity. The GPU's 1408 shading units and 48 ROPs are fully utilized in this title, but they are capable enough to deliver high refresh rate experiences at 1080p and maintain a solid 60+ FPS experience at 1440p.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data reveals a predictable scaling pattern across resolutions, highlighting the GPU as the limiting factor. At 1080p High, the combo achieves 107.3 FPS. Moving to 1440p High, the frame rate drops to 80.3 FPS, a 25% decrease. At 4K High, the average FPS falls to 50.1, a 38% drop from 1440p and a 53% drop from 1080p. This scaling is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario; the CPU has ample headroom, while the GPU's workload increases with pixel count. Looking at the Low preset, the scaling is even more dramatic: 217.8 FPS at 1080p, 156.1 FPS at 1440p, and 96.6 FPS at 4K. The performance at 4K Low is still above 60 FPS, which is noteworthy. The data suggests that for a locked 60 FPS experience, 1440p High or 4K Medium (80 FPS) are viable options. The gap between 1080p and 4K at the same settings illustrates the pixel throughput demands on the GTX 1660 SUPER. This is not a case where the CPU limits scaling; the i5-10400F's strong multithreaded performance is more than adequate for the game's physics and logic, leaving the GPU as the sole determinant of resolution scaling.

FAQ

*Q: Can this combo handle Inside at 4K resolution?*

A: Yes, at 4K Medium settings, it averages 80 FPS, and at 4K High, it averages 50.1 FPS. Even at 4K Low, it reaches 96.6 FPS, making it a playable experience across all presets.

Q: What is the best resolution for a high refresh rate monitor?

A: At 1080p, the combo delivers between 101.5 FPS (Ultra) and 217.8 FPS (Low). At 1440p, it ranges from 75.5 FPS (Ultra) to 156.1 FPS (Low), making 1440p viable for 144Hz displays on lower presets.

Q: How does this CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F's average benchmark score of 14168 is 0.4% higher than the AMD EPYC 7552 and 1.1% lower than the Intel Core i5-8500. It trails the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C by 0.8%.

Q: Is the GTX 1660 SUPER a bottleneck for the i5-10400F in this game?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary scaling factor. The FPS drops significantly when increasing resolution, indicating the GPU is the limiting component. The CPU's high percentile rank versus all CPUs suggests it is not the bottleneck.

Q: What kind of performance can be expected from the Ultra preset?

A: At Ultra settings, the combo averages 101.5 FPS at 1080p, 75.5 FPS at 1440p, and 45.6 FPS at 4K. This preset provides the highest visual fidelity but will require lower resolutions for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the GPU's benchmark score compare to its rivals?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 14286 is only 0.2% lower than the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 and Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics, and 0.7% lower than the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F, a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the Comet Lake architecture, plays a supporting but crucial role in this combo. With a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, it provides robust single-threaded performance, which is often critical for game logic. In synthetic tests, its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1453 and multi-core score of 10297 place it in the 73rd percentile of all CPUs. The data shows that in Inside, the CPU is not the limiting factor. The frame rates scale predictably with GPU load (resolution and settings), indicating that the CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU. Its 12 MB of shared L3 cache and 42.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth are more than adequate for this title's data demands. While its average benchmark score of 14168 is nearly identical to its nearest rivals (AMD EPYC 7552, AMD Ryzen 3 7320C, Intel Core i5-8500), the CPU's architecture provides consistent performance that avoids frame pacing issues. The Passmark multithread score of 12115 confirms that even when the game does utilize multiple threads, the processor responds effectively. The CPU's 65W TDP and 14nm process node are secondary considerations here; the focus is on its ability to maintain high minimum frame rates, which the data supports.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy for optimizing the experience. For a 1080p display, the High preset at 107.3 FPS is an excellent balance, offering a significant visual upgrade over Medium (175.7 FPS) while still providing enough headroom for a 60Hz or 100Hz monitor. The Ultra preset at 101.5 FPS is also viable if visual fidelity is the priority, but the 5.4% performance cost over High is negligible for most users. At 1440p, the High preset at 80.3 FPS is the recommended choice for a smooth experience on a 60Hz monitor, while the Medium preset at 123.1 FPS is better for high-refresh-rate panels. The Low preset at 1440p yields 156.1 FPS, but the visual trade-offs in a game like Inside are substantial. For 4K, the Medium preset at 80 FPS is the clear winner, providing a fluid experience that is 37% faster than High (50.1 FPS) and 43% faster than Ultra (45.6 FPS). The data suggests that for the best overall experience, users should prioritize 1440p High or 4K Medium. The Low preset is only recommended for competitive play on high refresh rate monitors, as it provides a 2.1x performance increase over High at 1080p. The Ultra preset offers diminishing returns in this title, with only a 5.4% FPS drop from High at 1080p, but a 43% drop from Medium at 4K, making it the least efficient setting at higher resolutions.