Inside

Inside is a puzzle platformer from 2016 that, on the surface, does not appear demanding. However, the measured data for the Intel Core i5-12400 and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT combination reveals a performance profile that is heavily dependent on resolution and settings, showcasing a system that is capable of extreme frame rates but also exhibits clear scaling bottlenecks. The benchmark results indicate that this pairing, which ranks 872nd out of 1671 tested combos for this game, offers a wide performance envelope, from highly playable 4K experiences to esports-level speeds at 1080p.

Resolution Scaling

The most striking observation in the data is the dramatic impact of resolution on frame rates. Scaling from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 at High settings reduces the average FPS from 167.9 to 74.5, a drop of 93.4 FPS. This represents a 55.6% decrease in performance when moving from Full HD to 4K, which clearly indicates that the rendering load is scaling heavily with pixel count. The game is not CPU-bound at these resolutions; instead, the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor.

The data suggests a non-linear scaling pattern. Moving from 1080p to 1440p (2560x1440) at High settings results in a 49.1 FPS drop (from 167.9 to 118.8), while moving from 1440p to 4K results in a 44.3 FPS drop (from 118.8 to 74.5). Although the absolute FPS decreases are similar, the percentage drop is more severe at higher resolutions, indicating that the GPU is working progressively harder. At Low settings, the pattern holds, with 1080p yielding 317.2 FPS, 1440p yielding 241.6 FPS, and 4K yielding 153.8 FPS, further confirming that pixel throughput is the dominant variable.

This scaling behavior suggests that the limiting component is the GPU. The Intel Core i5-12400, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, is more than capable of feeding the Radeon RX 6700 XT at 1080p, as evidenced by the 317.2 FPS result at Low settings. However, as resolution increases, the GPU's fillrate and memory bandwidth become the bottlenecks, causing the frame rate to plummet. The data implies that for 4K gaming, the RX 6700 XT is the primary constraint, while at 1080p, the system is likely balanced or even leaning towards a CPU limit at very high frame rates, a common scenario for games from this era.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is a RDNA 2.0 architecture GPU with 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s. The measured FPS data shows that this memory configuration is sufficient for all tested settings and resolutions, even at 4K Ultra, which averaged 72.3 FPS. The GPU's clock speeds, with a base of 2321 MHz and a boost of 2581 MHz, contribute to its raw compute power of 13.21 TFLOPS, but the resolution scaling analysis suggests that memory bandwidth and pixel fillrate (165.2 GPixel/s) are more critical for this title.

The performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 4K is telling. Low settings average 153.8 FPS, while Ultra averages 72.3 FPS. This 81.5 FPS gap shows that the visual effects and shading complexity in Ultra settings heavily tax the GPU. The GPU's 40 ray accelerators are present, but as a 2016 title, Inside does not utilize real-time ray tracing, so these cores are likely idle. The data indicates that the RX 6700 XT's strength lies in its raw rasterization performance, which is more than adequate for this game's art style, but the settings menu can still push it to its limits at 4K.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 77th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 6800, which is 0.7% faster on average. This context suggests the RX 6700 XT is a high-performing card. In this game, the 4K Ultra result of 72.3 FPS shows that it is a capable 4K GPU for less demanding titles, but the substantial drop from Low settings indicates that the game's higher preset levels are computationally expensive and not just simple texture swaps. The 12 GB VRAM buffer is never a limiting factor, as even the most demanding settings at 4K do not show any signs of memory-related stuttering or frame drops in the average FPS data.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achieved by this combo?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 317.2, which occurs at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Is this system capable of 4K gaming in Inside?

A: Yes, the data shows it is playable. At 3840x2160 with High settings, the average FPS is 74.5, and with Ultra settings, it drops to 72.3 FPS. Both are above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the CPU's single-threaded performance compare to its multi-threaded performance?

A: The Core i5-12400 scores 2249 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 15935 in multi-core. The multi-core score is 7.1 times higher, indicating strong scaling across its 6 cores and 12 threads, though this game does not appear to require that much multi-threading.

Q: What is the performance difference between High and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, High settings yield an average of 118.8 FPS, while Ultra settings yield 114.7 FPS. This is a small difference of 4.1 FPS, suggesting that the visual upgrade to Ultra comes at a minimal performance cost at this resolution.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Radeon RX 6700 XT has an average benchmark score of 33721, which is 0.7% lower than the AMD Radeon RX 6800, its nearest listed rival. It is 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA RTX A5000.

Q: Does lowering the resolution from 1440p to 1080p provide a significant performance boost?

A: Yes, at High settings, lowering the resolution from 2560x1440 (118.8 FPS) to 1920x1080 (167.9 FPS) provides a 49.1 FPS increase, which is a substantial 41.3% improvement in frame rate.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of an Intel Core i5-12400 and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT ranks 872nd out of 1671 tested combos for Inside. This places it in the middle of the pack, which is an interesting result given the high frame rates measured. The rank suggests that many other combinations, likely with more powerful GPUs, achieve even higher frame rates, particularly at 1080p where the CPU is less of a bottleneck.

The mid-pack ranking is likely influenced by the GPU's performance at 4K, where it is clearly the limiting factor. While a 74.5 FPS average at 4K High is respectable, other combos with higher-end GPUs would score much better in that specific test, pulling their overall rank up. The data implies that this combo is well-balanced for 1440p and 1080p gaming, but it is not optimized for maximum 4K performance or extreme 1080p frame rates that some high-end GPUs can achieve.

The ranking also reflects the game's age. Being from 2016, Inside is not very demanding on modern hardware. Therefore, the ranking is more about how this combo handles high-refresh-rate scenarios rather than basic playability. The 872nd rank suggests that while this system is excellent for most games, there are many other tested combos that can push this particular title to even higher limits, likely at lower resolutions or with more expensive GPUs.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400, with its 6 P-cores and 12 threads, provides a strong foundation for this game. Its boost clock of 4.40 GHz and a single-thread score of 2249 in Cinebench R23 ensure that it can handle the game's logic and physics without bottlenecking the GPU at standard resolutions. The data supports this, as the frame rates at 1080p Low (317.2 FPS) are exceptionally high, indicating that the CPU is not a limiting factor at that resolution.

However, the CPU's role becomes more apparent when analyzing the scaling from 1080p to 1440p. At High settings, the frame rate drops from 167.9 to 118.8 FPS, a 29.2% decrease. If the CPU were the bottleneck, this drop would be less severe, as the resolution increase would not affect the CPU's workload. The fact that the frame rate drops significantly suggests that the GPU is taking over as the primary limiter at higher resolutions. This is expected, as Inside is a visually simple game that does not rely heavily on CPU-intensive simulation.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 19850 places it in the 77th percentile of all CPUs, and it is nearly identical in performance to its nearest rivals, the Intel Core i7-9700 (0.1% faster) and the Intel Core i7-8700 (0.2% slower). This indicates that the i5-12400 is a very capable processor. In this game, its performance is more than sufficient, as evidenced by the fact that the frame rates are consistently high across all settings, even at 4K, where the GPU is clearly the bottleneck.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured data provides a complete matrix of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 153.8 at Low settings to 72.3 at Ultra settings. The Medium preset averages 122.9 FPS, and the High preset averages 74.5 FPS. The difference between Medium and High is 48.4 FPS, which is a significant jump, suggesting that the High preset enables particularly demanding effects.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates are substantially higher. Low settings average 241.6 FPS, Medium averages 196.6 FPS, High averages 118.8 FPS, and Ultra averages 114.7 FPS. The difference between Medium and High is 77.8 FPS, which is the largest gap between presets at this resolution, again highlighting the computational cost of the High preset.

At 1920x1080, the system is clearly not GPU-bound at lower settings. Low averages 317.2 FPS, and Medium averages 266.3 FPS. However, the High and Ultra presets bring the frame rate down to 167.9 and 159.8 FPS, respectively. The relatively small difference between High and Ultra at this resolution (8.1 FPS) suggests that the GPU is starting to become the limiting factor, even at 1080p, when these higher-quality settings are enabled.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS, the optimal settings depend on the user's display and performance goals. For a 60 Hz 4K display, the High preset (74.5 FPS) is the best choice, as it offers a significant visual upgrade over Medium (122.9 FPS) while still maintaining a frame rate well above 60. The Ultra preset (72.3 FPS) is also viable, but the 2.2 FPS difference over High makes it a less efficient choice for the potential increase in visual fidelity.

For users with a 144 Hz 1440p monitor, the Medium preset (196.6 FPS) is the recommended starting point, as it provides a high frame rate that is well above the refresh rate. The High preset (118.8 FPS) is also a solid option, but it falls slightly below the 144 FPS target. For those with a 240 Hz 1080p monitor, the Low preset (317.2 FPS) is the only way to fully utilize the display's refresh rate, though the Medium preset (266.3 FPS) still offers an excellent experience and is a better balance of quality and speed.

The data indicates that the High preset is the most demanding relative to the others, causing the largest frame rate drops. Therefore, for the best balance of visual quality and performance, the Medium preset is highly recommended for most users, as it provides a substantial performance headroom over High while still looking significantly better than Low. The Ultra preset offers no meaningful performance advantage over High and should only be used if the user prioritizes maximum visual fidelity over a few extra frames per second.