Inside

The Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 combination delivers a remarkably smooth experience in Inside, a 2D puzzle-platformer that is far more dependent on raw frame throughput than on complex CPU physics. The data shows this pairing is heavily GPU-limited, meaning the processor’s role is to stay out of the way, which it does effectively. The i5-10400F, a 6-core, 12-thread Comet Lake part with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, provides ample headroom for a game of this scope. Its 12 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support are more than sufficient to feed the RTX 5050, ensuring the GPU is never starved of data.

This is evident in the benchmark results, where even at the highest settings and resolution, the CPU is not the bottleneck. The processor’s multi-threaded performance, as measured by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10283, is far beyond what Inside requires. Single-thread performance, often more critical for game logic, is also solid, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1451. The 68th percentile ranking among all CPUs tested indicates this is a mid-pack processor, but in this specific title, its capabilities are more than adequate. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 4748 and max-thread score of 4735 show consistent scaling, confirming that the processor can handle a variety of workloads, though Inside will never push it to those limits.

The extreme frame rates observed, such as 233 FPS at 1080p Low, suggest that the CPU can handle the game's draw calls and logic without breaking a sweat. The performance delta between the i5-10400F and its nearest rivals, such as the Intel Xeon 6756E (0.2% faster) and the AMD EPYC 7552 (0.5% slower), is negligible in the context of this game. These differences are within a single percentage point, which would translate to a difference of a frame or two at best, an imperceptible change. Therefore, the CPU's role is purely supportive; it provides a stable platform for the RTX 5050 to operate at its full potential, and the data confirms it never becomes the limiting factor.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience in Inside, the data strongly favors the Medium preset, which offers an exceptional balance between visual fidelity and performance. At 1080p, the Medium preset delivers an average of 215 FPS, with a minimum of 183 FPS and a maximum of 247 FPS. This high minimum frame rate ensures there are no noticeable stutters, providing a perfectly fluid experience for a game that requires precise timing and smooth scrolling. While the Ultra preset is playable at 141 FPS, the jump to Medium provides a 74 FPS increase, a 52% uplift, for what is likely a minimal visual difference given the game's art style.

The argument for Medium becomes even stronger at higher resolutions. At 1440p, the Medium preset maintains an average of 170 FPS, with a minimum of 145 FPS. This is still incredibly smooth and well above the refresh rate of most monitors. In contrast, the Ultra preset at 1440p drops to an average of 101 FPS. At 4K, the difference is more pronounced: Medium yields an average of 107 FPS (minimum 91 FPS), while Ultra falls to 64 FPS. The Low preset is technically the fastest, but it compromises the game's atmospheric lighting and shadow quality, which are core to its moody presentation. The Low preset at 4K does achieve 134 FPS, but this is unnecessary given that Medium already clears the 60 FPS threshold comfortably.

Therefore, the measured rows indicate that Medium is the optimal choice across all resolutions. It provides a high enough average frame rate to avoid any potential for screen tearing and ensures a consistent minimum frame rate that prevents judder. Choosing Ultra does not yield a gameplay advantage and sacrifices a significant amount of performance. The data suggests that the visual gains from Ultra are not worth the 40% performance cost compared to Medium at 4K and 41% at 1440p. The best experience per the measured rows is unequivocally the Medium preset, which provides the highest frame rate with a guaranteed minimum above 90 FPS at all resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a clear picture of a GPU-bound scenario. At 1080p with Medium settings, the average FPS is 215. Moving to 1440p, the average drops to 170 FPS, a 21% decrease. Further scaling to 4K results in an average of 107 FPS, a 50% drop from the 1080p figure and a 37% drop from the 1440p figure. This pattern is consistent across all settings. For instance, at High settings, the performance goes from 148 FPS at 1080p to 106 FPS at 1440p (a 28% drop) and then to 67 FPS at 4K (a 55% drop from 1080p).

This scaling behavior is the signature of a GPU bottleneck. As resolution increases, the number of pixels the RTX 5050 must render grows exponentially, and the frame rate falls accordingly. The i5-10400F's performance remains constant, but the GPU's workload increases. The fact that the performance drop is not linear with the pixel count (4K has 4x the pixels of 1080p, but the FPS only drops by roughly half) suggests that the GPU is not completely saturated at 1080p, but the trend is unmistakable. The limiting component in this combination for Inside is clearly the graphics card.

The data also shows this is not a CPU limitation. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates would be much closer together across resolutions. For example, a CPU-bound game might show 100 FPS at 1080p and 95 FPS at 4K, because the CPU is the one struggling to keep up. Here, the 1080p Medium average of 215 FPS is more than double the 4K Medium average of 107 FPS, indicating that the GPU is working progressively harder as the pixel count increases. The RTX 5050, with its 8 GB of memory and 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth, is the primary driver of performance scaling in this title. The game's simple geometry and effects mean the CPU has little to do, making the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth the determining factors for the final frame rate. The 4K High average of 67 FPS and 4K Ultra average of 64 FPS demonstrate that the GPU is near its limit at that resolution, while the CPU remains idle, waiting for the next frame to render.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of 2,887 tested combinations, this pairing of the Intel Core i5-10400F and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 ranks 1973rd for Inside. This rank places it in the lower third of all tested combinations, which might seem surprising given the high frame rates observed. However, this ranking is relative to all other combos, which includes systems with far more powerful CPUs and GPUs, such as flagship processors paired with top-tier graphics cards. The combo's percentile ranking is not provided, but its position at 1973 out of 2887 means that a significant majority of other tested hardware configurations achieve higher average frame rates in this specific game.

The primary reason for this lower rank is the GPU's position in the market. The RTX 5050, while a modern Blackwell architecture part, is an entry-level offering. Its average benchmark score of 21035 places it in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (1.6% faster) and the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (0.6% faster). These are not high-end parts, and in a game like Inside where frame rates can soar into the hundreds with a more powerful GPU, the RTX 5050's limitations become apparent. The CPU is not the issue; the i5-10400F holds a 68th percentile ranking and is within 0.5% of its nearest rivals, proving it is a competent mid-range processor.

The rank of 1973 is a direct consequence of the GPU's performance ceiling. While the 4K Ultra average of 64 FPS is playable, other combos will push that number to 144 FPS or higher. The data indicates that this combo is not a top-tier performer for Inside, but it is important to contextualize the ranking. The game is entirely playable, and the experience is smooth. The rank is a relative measure against the best hardware available; it does not reflect a poor user experience. For a user with a standard 60Hz or 144Hz monitor, the performance of this combo is more than sufficient. The rank simply indicates that there is a large amount of more powerful hardware in the database that can produce higher frame rates.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is the dominant component in this pairing for Inside, serving as the definitive bottleneck. The GPU's specifications are well-suited for this game, but its performance ceiling is what determines the final frame rates. The RTX 5050 features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 320.0 GB/s. This capacity is more than enough for Inside, which does not have high-resolution textures or large memory footprints, even at 4K. The GPU's 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs are all fully utilized as the resolution increases, which is reflected in the observed frame rate drops.

The GPU's clock speeds, with a base of 2317 MHz and a boost of 2572 MHz, allow it to process the game's simple 2D graphics at very high speeds. The FP32 performance of 13.17 TFLOPS is ample for a puzzle-platformer. However, the data shows that this level of performance is the limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 233 FPS. This high number suggests that the GPU is not fully saturated, and the CPU is still feeding it data fast enough. But as the resolution increases, the GPU's pixel fill rate (82.30 GPixel/s) and texture rate (205.8 GTexel/s) become the primary constraints. The 4K Low average of 134 FPS is still high, but the 4K Ultra average of 64 FPS shows that the GPU is running out of steam when the settings are maxed out.

The RTX 5050's 66th percentile ranking among all GPUs, and its proximity to the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (1.6% faster), confirms its status as a mid-range performer. Its nearest rivals are not modern high-end cards, indicating that its performance level is comparable to previous-generation mid-range options. The GPU's 8 GB of VRAM is a future-proofing concern for other titles, but for Inside, it is not a factor. The 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores are largely irrelevant for this game, as it does not use ray tracing or DLSS. The GPU's role is purely to rasterize the scene, and the measured FPS data shows that it does so with sufficient speed for a high-refresh-rate experience at 1080p and 1440p, but it is the element that prevents higher frame rates at 4K Ultra.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of this combo's performance across three resolutions and four quality presets. The data is consistent and shows a clear hierarchy, with the Low preset being the fastest and the Ultra preset being the slowest.

At 1920x1080, the performance is exceptionally high. The Low preset averages 233 FPS, which is likely beyond the refresh rate of most monitors. The Medium preset averages 215 FPS, with a minimum of 183 FPS and a maximum of 247 FPS, indicating a very stable experience. The High preset averages 148 FPS, which is still excellent for a 144Hz display. The Ultra preset averages 141 FPS, a minor drop from High, showing that the GPU is capable of handling the maximum settings at this resolution without dipping below 60 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra is 92 FPS, or a 39% performance decrease, which is a significant but manageable trade-off for higher visual fidelity.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high. The Low preset averages 208 FPS, a 11% drop from 1080p. The Medium preset averages 170 FPS, with a minimum of 145 FPS and a maximum of 196 FPS, which is still well within the high-refresh-rate territory. The High preset averages 106 FPS, which is a 28% drop from its 1080p counterpart. The Ultra preset averages 101 FPS, a 29% drop from 1080p. The scaling here is linear and expected for a GPU-bound scenario. The gap between Low and Ultra is 107 FPS, or a 51% performance decrease.

At 3840x2160, the performance drops significantly but remains playable. The Low preset averages 134 FPS, which is a 42% drop from 1080p. The Medium preset averages 107 FPS, with a minimum of 91 FPS and a maximum of 123 FPS, ensuring a smooth experience on a 60Hz display. The High preset averages 67 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS target. The Ultra preset averages 64 FPS, the lowest recorded figure, but still technically playable. The drop from 1080p to 4K on the Ultra preset is 77 FPS, or a 55% decrease, highlighting the heavy load placed on the GPU at this resolution. The data confirms that the Medium preset is the sweet spot at all resolutions, providing the best combination of high average FPS and a high minimum FPS, while the Ultra preset is only viable at 1080p and 1440p.