Inside

The Intel Core i5-11400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER combination delivers a surprisingly robust experience in Inside, a game that proves far more scalable than its minimalist aesthetic suggests. The measured data reveals a system capable of high refresh rates at 1080p, with performance degrading predictably but gracefully as resolution increases. This analysis breaks down exactly how the CPU and GPU contribute to the 12 measured FPS data points, what the scaling curves imply about the bottleneck, and which settings offer the best trade-off.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i5-11400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Rocket Lake architecture, built on a 14 nm process. Its base clock of 2.60 GHz boosts up to 4.40 GHz, and it carries 12 MB of shared L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU sits at the 75th percentile among all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 17181. That places it in a tight cluster with rivals like the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U (avg score 17189, 0% delta) and the Intel Core i7-1260P (avg score 17212, -0.2% delta). The data shows this is a mid-to-upper tier desktop part, more than capable of feeding a mid-range GPU in a puzzle platformer.

For Inside, the CPU's role is not about raw multi-threaded muscle but about consistent single-thread performance. The game's physics and logic are not heavily parallelized, so the 3DMark single-thread score of 868 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2029 are more relevant than the multi-core figures. The 4.40 GHz boost clock ensures that the game's main thread has ample headroom. The benchmark results indicate that at 1080p Low, the system reaches 217.3 FPS, a figure that strongly suggests the CPU is not a limiting factor at lower resolutions; it is delivering frames faster than most displays can show. The 12 threads and 6 cores provide enough overhead for background tasks without impacting frame pacing, though the game itself likely uses only a fraction of that capacity.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is a Turing-architecture GPU with 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 1530 MHz, boosting to 1785 MHz, and it offers 1408 shading units. The GPU's average benchmark score is 14286, placing it at the 55th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are integrated or lower-tier discrete parts: the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (avg score 14314, -0.2% delta) and the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics (avg score 14315, -0.2% delta). This percentile ranking underscores that the GTX 1660 SUPER is an entry-level discrete card, yet the measured FPS in Inside shows it performing admirably.

The GPU's 6 GB VRAM is ample for Inside, which has a simple art style but still benefits from texture quality. The 336.0 GB/s bandwidth helps maintain stable frame rates when memory is under load. The most telling GPU metric is the scaling from Low to Ultra settings. At 1080p, the GPU's fill rate and shader throughput are the primary variables. The data shows a 217.3 FPS at Low, dropping to 104.3 FPS at Ultra, a 113 FPS swing that indicates the GPU is being taxed significantly by the higher-quality presets. However, the GPU is not the bottleneck at 1080p Low; the fact that it can exceed 200 FPS points to a system that is well-balanced, with the CPU able to keep up with the GPU's output.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of how the system scales across resolutions. At 1080p High, the average FPS is 110.9. Moving to 2560x1440 High, it drops to 80.3, a 27.6% decrease. At 3840x2160 High, the average is 48.7, a further 39.4% decrease from 1440p. This scaling curve is a textbook example of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU's performance is relatively constant across resolutions, so the FPS drop is directly proportional to the increase in pixel count. The GTX 1660 SUPER's 5.027 TFLOPS FP32 performance is the limiting factor here, as it must render four times the pixels at 4K compared to 1080p.

The data also reveals how settings interact with resolution. At 1080p Ultra (104.3 FPS), the system is more performant than at 4K Low (95.5 FPS). This is a critical insight: the GPU is so taxed at 4K that even dropping to Low settings cannot recover the performance lost to the resolution increase. The 4K Low score of 95.5 FPS is lower than the 1080p Ultra score, proving that the pixel count is the dominant bottleneck at higher resolutions. Conversely, at 1080p, the system is likely CPU-limited at Low settings, but becomes GPU-limited as settings increase. The data suggests that for a smooth 60 FPS experience, the system can handle 1440p High (80.3 FPS) comfortably, but 4K requires sacrificing settings to stay above 60 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The 12 measured data points break down as follows. At 1920x1080, the system achieves 217.3 FPS on Low, 174 FPS on Medium, 110.9 FPS on High, and 104.3 FPS on Ultra. The jump from Low to Medium is a 43.3 FPS drop, while the jump from High to Ultra is a smaller 6.6 FPS drop, indicating diminishing returns on the highest preset. At 2560x1440, the scores are 157.4 FPS (Low), 125.7 FPS (Medium), 80.3 FPS (High), and 72.6 FPS (Ultra). The 1440p Low score is still exceptionally high, demonstrating the GPU's raw power is sufficient for the game's geometry at lower settings.

At 3840x2160, the system produces 95.5 FPS on Low, 79.9 FPS on Medium, 48.7 FPS on High, and 49.2 FPS on Ultra. The data shows an anomaly at 4K: High (48.7 FPS) is marginally slower than Ultra (49.2 FPS), a 0.5 FPS difference that is within measurement noise but suggests the settings are not linearly scaling at this resolution. The 4K Medium score of 79.9 FPS is the most playable high-resolution option, staying above the 60 FPS threshold. Across all resolutions, the Low preset always yields the highest FPS, but the gap between Low and Medium narrows as resolution increases, from a 43.3 FPS difference at 1080p to a 15.6 FPS difference at 4K.

FAQ

*Q: Can this system run Inside at 4K with playable frame rates?*

A: Yes, but only at lower settings. The data shows 95.5 FPS at 4K Low and 79.9 FPS at 4K Medium, both above the 60 FPS threshold. 4K High (48.7 FPS) and Ultra (49.2 FPS) fall below 60 FPS.

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

A: At 1080p, the system delivers 174 FPS on Medium and 217.3 FPS on Low, which are excellent for 144Hz or even 240Hz displays. At 1440p, the Low preset achieves 157.4 FPS, which is also suitable for high-refresh displays.

Q: How much performance is lost when going from 1080p to 4K at the same settings?

A: At High settings, the drop is from 110.9 FPS at 1080p to 48.7 FPS at 4K, a 62.2 FPS decrease. At Low settings, the drop is from 217.3 FPS to 95.5 FPS, a 121.8 FPS decrease.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this system?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. At 1080p Low, the system hits 217.3 FPS, suggesting the CPU can keep up. However, the steep FPS drops when increasing resolution point to the GTX 1660 SUPER's rendering limits.

Q: Are the Ultra settings worth the performance cost?

A: At 1080p, Ultra (104.3 FPS) is only 6.6 FPS slower than High (110.9 FPS), a negligible difference. At 1440p, the gap is 7.7 FPS. The data suggests Ultra is a viable option without major performance penalties at these resolutions.

Q: How does this combo compare to other tested systems?

A: This combo ranks 1459 out of 1671 tested combinations, placing it in the lower-middle tier. This ranking reflects the entry-level nature of the GPU, but the measured FPS shows it performs well for this specific game.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data points to the High preset as the optimal choice for most users. At 1080p High, the system achieves 110.9 FPS, which is smooth and visually detailed. The gap between High and Ultra is small (6.6 FPS at 1080p), but Ultra offers no significant visual benefit for the performance cost in a game with such a stark art style. At 1440p, High delivers 80.3 FPS, which is comfortably above 60 FPS and provides a good balance between clarity and smoothness. For users with 4K displays, the Medium preset at 79.9 FPS is the best option, as it stays above 60 FPS while offering more visual fidelity than Low. The Low preset is only recommended for extreme high-refresh-rate scenarios, such as 1080p at 217.3 FPS, where the game becomes extraordinarily fluid but loses the atmospheric lighting and shadow details that define Inside's mood.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-11400F + GTX 1660 SUPER combo ranks 1459 out of 1671 tested combinations for Inside, putting it in the 12th percentile of all tested systems. This low ranking might seem surprising given the high FPS numbers, but it reflects the fact that Inside is a lightweight game that many high-end systems can run at extremely high frame rates. The data shows this combo is not at the top, but its performance is still more than adequate. The CPU's 75th percentile ranking and the GPU's 55th percentile ranking combine to place this system in the lower tier of the benchmark database. However, the measured FPS data tells a more positive story: at 1080p, the system is in the top tier for playability, and at 1440p, it remains highly competitive. The ranking is a reflection of the hardware's absolute limits, not its suitability for this specific title. For a game like Inside, which does not demand modern hardware, this combo proves that a modest mid-range system from the early 2020s can still deliver a flawless experience at mainstream resolutions.