Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer that, on the surface, appears modest in its graphical demands, yet the measured frame rates for the Intel Core i5-13400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 combination tell a more nuanced story about where the performance ceiling lies. The data reveals a configuration that is overwhelmingly capable at standard resolutions, but which begins to show its limitations when pushed to 4K with maximum quality settings. This analysis walks through the measured FPS data step by step, examining how the game scales across resolutions, what the GPU's specifications contribute, and how this specific pairing ranks against other tested configurations.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, but the rate of that degradation is not uniform across all quality settings. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 296 FPS, which drops to 213 FPS at 1440p and further to 134 FPS at 4K. This represents a 55% reduction in frame rate from 1080p to 4K at Low settings, indicating that the rendering pipeline is becoming increasingly stressed as pixel count multiplies.

Moving to Medium settings, the scaling pattern shifts slightly. At 1080p Medium, the average is 237 FPS, falling to 170 FPS at 1440p and 107 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K here is 55%, nearly identical to Low settings, but the absolute frame rates are lower across the board due to the increased graphical workload. The presence of minimum and maximum FPS data for Medium settings (201-272 at 1080p, 145-196 at 1440p, 91-123 at 4K) provides insight into frame time consistency, with the spread between min and max remaining proportionally similar across resolutions.

High settings show a similar trajectory: 148 FPS at 1080p, 106 FPS at 1440p, and 67 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 28%, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 37%, suggesting that the 4K resolution imposes a disproportionately higher load relative to the step from 1080p to 1440p. Ultra settings follow the same pattern with 141 FPS at 1080p, 101 FPS at 1440p, and 64 FPS at 4K. The gap between High and Ultra at each resolution is relatively small (7 FPS at 1080p, 5 FPS at 1440p, and 3 FPS at 4K), indicating that Ultra is only marginally more demanding than High for this title.

The limiting component becomes evident when analyzing the scaling efficiency. At 1080p, the frame rates are exceptionally high, exceeding 140 FPS even at Ultra settings. This suggests that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU sufficiently at this resolution. However, the dramatic drops at 4K—where even Low settings only achieve 134 FPS—point to the GPU becoming the primary bottleneck. The RTX 5050, with its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 128-bit bus, must process over four times the pixels at 4K compared to 1080p, and the data shows it struggles to maintain high frame rates under that load.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture using a 5 nm process at TSMC, featuring 16,900 million transistors on a 149 mm² die. Its memory configuration consists of 8 GB of GDDR6 running at 2500 MHz with an effective data rate of 20 Gbps, across a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 320.0 GB/s. This memory subsystem is a critical factor for Inside's performance at higher resolutions, as the game's visual style with its distinctive lighting and shadow effects can place significant demands on memory bandwidth.

The GPU's compute capabilities are defined by 2,560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output pipelines. The texture rate of 205.8 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 82.30 GPixel/s provide theoretical limits that align with the measured FPS data. At 4K Ultra, the average of 64 FPS translates to roughly 330 million pixels per second (3840 × 2160 × 64), which is well below the GPU's pixel rate capability, suggesting that other factors such as shader complexity or memory bandwidth are the actual constraints.

The RTX 5050's clock speeds are modest for a modern GPU, with a base clock of 2317 MHz and a boost clock of 2572 MHz. These clocks, combined with the 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores, enable DirectX 12 Ultimate support with features like ray tracing, though Inside does not heavily utilize such effects. The GPU's FP32 performance of 13.17 TFLOPS is respectable but not exceptional, and the benchmark results show it ranking in the 66th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 21035.

The nearest rival data places the RTX 5050 in close competition with the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (average score 21153, deltaPct -0.6), AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21237, deltaPct -1), and AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20713, deltaPct 1.6). This positioning suggests the RTX 5050 is a mid-range performer, which explains why it struggles to maintain high frame rates at 4K in Inside despite the game's relatively simple visuals. The GPU's 130 W TDP and dual-slot design indicate it is not a high-end part, and the measured FPS data confirms this assessment.

FAQ

Q: What is the maximum average FPS achievable at 1080p with this combo?

A: The highest average FPS at 1080p is 296 FPS, achieved with Low settings. Medium settings deliver 237 FPS, High delivers 148 FPS, and Ultra delivers 141 FPS.

Q: How does the 4K performance compare to 1080p performance?

A: At 4K, the average FPS drops to 134 at Low, 107 at Medium, 67 at High, and 64 at Ultra. This represents a 55% reduction from 1080p for Low settings, and similar proportional drops for other settings.

Q: Is the RTX 5050 capable of running Inside at 4K smoothly?

A: At 4K, only Low settings (134 FPS) and Medium settings (107 FPS) exceed 60 FPS. High settings (67 FPS) are just above 60 FPS, while Ultra settings (64 FPS) fall to the borderline of smooth gameplay.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS for Medium settings at each resolution?

A: At 1080p Medium, min FPS is 201 and max is 272. At 1440p Medium, min is 145 and max is 196. At 4K Medium, min is 91 and max is 123.

Q: How does the CPU's benchmark performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core i5-13400F has an average benchmark score of 25292, placing it in the 77th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS, has a nearly identical score of 25284 with a deltaPct of 0, indicating essentially equal performance.

Q: Does increasing settings from High to Ultra have a significant impact on FPS?

A: The difference between High and Ultra is minimal. At 1080p, the drop is only 7 FPS (148 to 141). At 1440p, the drop is 5 FPS (106 to 101). At 4K, the drop is 3 FPS (67 to 64).

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four quality settings. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers exceptional performance across all settings. Low settings achieve 296 FPS average, which is more than sufficient for any display refresh rate currently available. Medium settings provide 237 FPS with a minimum of 201 FPS and maximum of 272 FPS, ensuring no frame drops below 200 FPS. High settings deliver 148 FPS average, still well above the 144 Hz threshold for high-refresh-rate monitors. Ultra settings achieve 141 FPS, only a 5% reduction from High, making it a viable option for competitive play.

At 2560x1440, performance remains strong but shows the expected decline. Low settings achieve 213 FPS, which is still excellent for 1440p gaming. Medium settings average 170 FPS with a range of 145 to 196 FPS, providing smooth gameplay with no significant stuttering. High settings deliver 106 FPS, which is suitable for 60 Hz or 100 Hz displays but may show limitations on 144 Hz monitors. Ultra settings average 101 FPS, again only marginally lower than High. The consistency between High and Ultra at this resolution suggests that the visual quality difference does not warrant the minor FPS penalty.

At 3840x2160, the GPU begins to show its constraints. Low settings achieve 134 FPS, which is playable but no longer in the high-refresh-rate territory. Medium settings average 107 FPS with a minimum of 91 FPS and maximum of 123 FPS, providing a playable experience but with noticeable frame time variance. High settings deliver 67 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. Ultra settings average 64 FPS, which is borderline for 60 Hz displays and may result in occasional perceptible stutters. The data shows that 4K Ultra is the only configuration that dips below the 60 FPS threshold, and even then only marginally.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution and refresh rate. For 1080p displays, any setting is viable, but Ultra settings (141 FPS) provide the best visual experience while still maintaining frame rates well above 60 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra is minimal in terms of FPS impact, so there is no reason to choose High over Ultra at this resolution.

For 1440p displays, the choice becomes more nuanced. Ultra settings (101 FPS) and High settings (106 FPS) both provide excellent performance, with the 5 FPS difference being negligible. Medium settings (170 FPS) are the best choice for players with 144 Hz or 165 Hz monitors, as they allow the display's refresh rate to be fully utilized. Low settings (213 FPS) are only recommended for competitive play where maximum frame rate is prioritized over visual quality.

For 4K displays, the recommendations shift toward lower settings to ensure smooth gameplay. Medium settings (107 FPS) provide the best balance of visual quality and performance, with the measured minimum of 91 FPS ensuring no significant drops below 90 FPS. High settings (67 FPS) are playable but may present occasional frame pacing issues on 60 Hz displays. Ultra settings (64 FPS) are not recommended, as the marginal visual improvement over High does not justify the risk of dropping below 60 FPS. Low settings (134 FPS) are the safest option for maintaining high frame rates at 4K, though the visual compromise is significant.

The data indicates that Medium settings offer the most consistent performance across all resolutions, with the tightest min-max FPS ranges. This suggests that the game engine is well-optimized at this preset, providing stable frame delivery regardless of resolution.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor from the Raptor Lake architecture, manufactured on a 10 nm process. Its configuration includes 6 performance cores and 4 efficiency cores, with base clocks of 2.50 GHz and boost clocks up to 4.60 GHz. The CPU has a 65 W TDP and supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, with a dual-channel memory bus. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache.

In terms of benchmark performance, the i5-13400F demonstrates strong multi-threaded capabilities. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22604 and Geekbench multicore score of 11068 place it in the 77th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 25292. The single-thread performance is also respectable, with Cinebench R23 single-core scoring 3191 and Geekbench single-core scoring 1996. These results indicate that the CPU is more than capable of handling the demands of Inside, which is not particularly CPU-intensive.

The nearest rival data shows the i5-13400F performing essentially at parity with the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (25284 vs 25292, deltaPct 0), Intel Core 5 120 (25362, deltaPct -0.3), and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (25365, deltaPct -0.3). This level of performance ensures that the CPU is not a bottleneck in Inside's gameplay. The measured FPS data supports this conclusion, as the frame rates scale consistently with GPU load across resolutions, with no signs of CPU-induced frame drops or stuttering.

For Inside specifically, the CPU's role is primarily to maintain consistent frame pacing and handle the game's physics and logic calculations. The 16 threads provide ample headroom for background processes, and the high boost clock of 4.60 GHz ensures responsive single-threaded performance. The PassMark single-thread score of 3634 and multi-thread score of 25032 further confirm that the CPU is well-suited for gaming workloads, with the multi-threaded score being particularly strong for a mid-range desktop processor.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-13400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 achieves a rank of 1719 out of 2887 tested combos for Inside, placing it in the 40th percentile of all configurations. This ranking reflects the balance between the CPU's strong performance and the GPU's mid-range capabilities. The CPU ranks in the 77th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 66th percentile among all GPUs, yet the combined system ranks lower than either component individually, indicating that the GPU's limitations are the primary constraint on overall gaming performance.

The combo's ranking is likely influenced by the fact that Inside, despite its 2016 release date, can be demanding at high resolutions due to its distinctive art style and lighting effects. The RTX 5050's 8 GB of VRAM and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but the 4K data shows clear limitations. The rank of 1719 out of 2887 suggests that many other combos, particularly those with higher-end GPUs, can achieve better performance in this title.

However, the ranking should be interpreted in context. For a puzzle platformer like Inside, the performance requirements are generally lower than for AAA action games. The measured FPS data shows that this combo can achieve 60+ FPS at 4K with medium settings, which is a solid result for a mid-range GPU. The CPU's strong multi-threaded performance ensures that the system is well-balanced for gaming, even if the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. Overall, this combo provides a capable experience for Inside across most settings and resolutions, with the 4K Ultra being the only configuration that falls below the 60 FPS threshold.