Inside

The Intel Core i5-9400 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 delivers a benchmark profile in Inside that is defined by a substantial GPU advantage, with the processor acting as a secondary consideration in a title that is not heavily threaded. The measured frame rates across all tested settings and resolutions are exceptionally high, consistently exceeding 90 FPS even at 4K Ultra, indicating that this combination is far more than sufficient for the game’s demands. The data places this specific pairing at rank 1962 out of 3716 tested combos, a position that reflects the CPU’s middling standing relative to all processors rather than any weakness in the graphics subsystem.

FAQ

Q: What is the average frame rate at 1080p Ultra settings?

A: The measured average frame rate at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 168 FPS. This is the lowest average at 1080p, but it remains far above the 60 FPS threshold and represents a smooth experience.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in general benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, scores 2259, which is a delta of -0.2%, meaning the i5-9400 is essentially on par. Another rival, the Intel Core i7-10710U, scores 2248, placing the i5-9400 0.3% higher.

Q: What is the GPU’s standing among all tested graphics cards?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9070 sits in the 69th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 23877, which places it 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z and 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile.

Q: What is the maximum frame rate recorded for this combo?

A: The highest maximum frame rate recorded is 235 FPS, which occurs at 1920x1080 with Medium settings. The minimum FPS at this setting is 174, showing a very high floor even during demanding scenes.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the more limiting component at 4K resolution?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary scaling factor. At 3840x2160, the average FPS drops from 170 on Low settings to 93 on Ultra settings, a 45% reduction. This scaling is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario, as the CPU load remains relatively constant while the GPU work increases significantly.

Q: Does the game show a significant performance difference between High and Ultra settings?

A: Yes, the difference is notable. At 2560x1440, High settings produce an average of 153 FPS, while Ultra produces 148 FPS, a 3% reduction. At 1920x1080, the difference is similar, with High at 171 FPS and Ultra at 168 FPS. The performance hit is more pronounced at 4K, where High yields 98 FPS and Ultra yields 93 FPS.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor based on the Coffee Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. In Inside, a puzzle platformer that does not rely heavily on multi-threaded processing, the CPU’s role is to maintain a consistent frame delivery without becoming a bottleneck. The benchmark results indicate that the processor is more than capable of this task, as the frame rates are consistently high across all resolutions.

The i5-9400’s benchmark scores show it is a mid-range performer. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 6629, and its single-core score is 935. In Geekbench, it scores 5141 multi-core and 1389 single-core. These results place the CPU in the 47th percentile of all CPUs, which is a modest standing. However, in a game like Inside, which is not CPU-intensive, this level of performance is sufficient. The fact that the CPU is not the limiting factor is evident when comparing the frame rates at 1080p versus 4K; the average FPS at 1080p Low is 222, while at 4K Low it is 170. If the CPU were the bottleneck, these numbers would be much closer, as the CPU load would be similar regardless of resolution.

The processor’s 9 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support are adequate for the game’s needs. The data does not show any signs of CPU-induced frame drops, as the minimum FPS values recorded (e.g., 133 FPS at 4K Medium) are still very high. The i5-9400’s nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks, such as the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 and AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500, show very similar average scores, confirming that the processor is a solid, if unspectacular, choice for this title. The i5-9400’s performance in Inside is best described as sufficient headroom, ensuring the GPU is never starved of data.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 is the dominant component in this pairing. Based on the RDNA 4.0 architecture and built on a 4 nm process, it features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s. Its boost clock is 2520 MHz, and it has a game clock of 2070 MHz. The sheer compute capability, with 36.13 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, is far beyond what Inside requires, which is reflected in the extremely high frame rates.

The GPU’s benchmark scores are strong, placing it in the 69th percentile of all GPUs. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 6290, and its Passmark G3D score is 25381. These numbers place it just ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER, which has an average score of 24170, a delta of -1.2% relative to the RX 9070. The GPU’s performance in Inside is characterized by its ability to maintain high frame rates even at 4K. At 3840x2160 Ultra, the average is 93 FPS, which is a playable level, but the GPU’s headroom is best showcased at lower settings.

The VRAM capacity of 16 GB is not a concern for this game, as it is not a VRAM-intensive title. The GPU’s memory clock of 2518 MHz and 20.1 Gbps effective speed ensure that data transfer is not a bottleneck. The data shows that the GPU is the primary scaling factor when moving between settings presets. For instance, at 2560x1440, going from Low to Ultra reduces the average FPS from 199 to 148, a 26% drop. This is a clear indication that the GPU is doing the heavy lifting, and the CPU is not interfering with its output. The RX 9070’s performance here is consistent with a high-end card that is being tested in a light workload, resulting in frame rates that are limited more by the game engine’s frame pacing than by raw hardware capability.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and AMD Radeon RX 9070 is ranked 1962 out of 3716 tested combos in Inside. This rank places the combo in the lower-middle portion of the database, which is a surprising result given the high frame rates achieved. The explanation lies in the ranking methodology, which appears to weigh the CPU’s overall benchmark percentile heavily. The CPU’s 47th percentile standing drags down the combo’s rank, despite the GPU’s 69th percentile performance.

When compared to other potential pairings, the data suggests that the CPU is the weak link in this specific combo’s ranking. If a stronger CPU were paired with the RX 9070, the combo rank would likely be much higher, as the GPU’s performance is already excellent. However, in terms of actual gameplay experience, the rank does not reflect any inadequacy. The frame rates are uniformly high, and there is no scenario in the measured data where the combo fails to deliver a smooth experience. For context, the rank of 1962 out of 3716 means that 53% of tested combos rank higher, but many of those combos likely feature more balanced or higher-end CPUs.

The delta between the CPU’s performance and its nearest rivals is negligible, with all deltas being less than 1%. This indicates that swapping the i5-9400 for a slightly different CPU would have almost no impact on the frame rates in Inside. The combo rank is therefore more of a reflection of the CPU’s standing in the broader benchmark suite rather than its performance in this specific game. In practical terms, the user should not be concerned about the rank, as the measured FPS data is the definitive proof of capability.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the user’s priority between maximum visual fidelity and maximum frame rate. At 1920x1080, all presets deliver an average FPS above 168, which is well above the 144 Hz refresh rate of many monitors. The Low preset provides the highest average at 222 FPS, while Ultra provides 168 FPS. For users with a 144 Hz monitor, the High preset at 171 FPS is the best balance, as it offers higher visual quality than Low with no risk of dropping below the refresh rate.

At 2560x1440, the situation is similar. High settings yield 153 FPS, which is still above 144 Hz, while Ultra yields 148 FPS. The Medium preset provides a middle ground at 183 FPS with a minimum of 156 FPS. For a 1440p 144 Hz display, the High preset is recommended, as it offers the best visual quality while maintaining a frame rate that exceeds the display’s refresh rate. The Ultra preset is also viable, with a 148 FPS average, but the small performance cost of 3% over High may not justify the visual gains.

At 3840x2160, the choice becomes more nuanced. The High preset delivers 98 FPS, which is below 144 Hz but above 60 Hz. For a 60 Hz 4K display, the Ultra preset at 93 FPS is the best choice, as it provides the maximum visual quality while still exceeding the 60 FPS threshold. If the user has a 120 Hz 4K display, the Medium preset at 157 FPS with a minimum of 133 FPS is the recommended option, as it is the only preset that consistently stays above 120 FPS. The Low preset at 170 FPS is also an option, but it sacrifices significant visual quality for a frame rate that most 4K displays cannot fully utilize.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for this combo shows a clear hierarchy across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 222 on Low to 168 on Ultra. The Medium preset records an average of 205 FPS with a minimum of 174 FPS and a maximum of 235 FPS. The High preset averages 171 FPS. At 2560x1440, the range is from 199 FPS on Low to 148 FPS on Ultra. Medium averages 183 FPS, with a minimum of 156 FPS and a maximum of 211 FPS. High averages 153 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the data shows the largest spread. Low averages 170 FPS, Medium averages 157 FPS (with a minimum of 133 FPS and maximum of 180 FPS), High averages 98 FPS, and Ultra averages 93 FPS. The most significant drop occurs between Medium and High at 4K, where the average falls by 59 FPS. This suggests that the High preset introduces a rendering feature that is particularly demanding on the GPU.

The minimum FPS values are only provided for the Medium preset at each resolution, but they are all above 133 FPS, indicating that the frame pacing is consistent. The absence of minimum FPS data for other presets does not imply instability, but rather that the measurement was not recorded. The maximum FPS values show that the combo can reach up to 235 FPS at 1080p Medium, which represents the peak performance of the hardware. The data is consistent and shows that the combo is capable of delivering frame rates that are significantly higher than the game’s requirements.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling data reveals how the workload shifts from the CPU to the GPU as resolution increases. From 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, the average FPS drops by a predictable amount. For example, on High settings, the average drops from 171 FPS to 153 FPS, a reduction of 10.5%. On Ultra settings, the drop is from 168 FPS to 148 FPS, a reduction of 11.9%. This is a moderate decrease that is typical of a GPU-bound scenario, where the additional pixel count increases the GPU load.

From 2560x1440 to 3840x2160, the scaling becomes more pronounced. On High settings, the average drops from 153 FPS to 98 FPS, a reduction of 35.9%. On Ultra settings, the drop is from 148 FPS to 93 FPS, a reduction of 37.2%. This significant drop indicates that at 4K, the GPU is being pushed much harder, and the pixel count is becoming the dominant factor. The Low and Medium presets show a smaller relative drop, with Low going from 199 FPS to 170 FPS (a 14.6% drop) and Medium going from 183 FPS to 157 FPS (a 14.2% drop).

This scaling behavior confirms that the GPU is the limiting component at higher resolutions. The CPU’s workload does not increase with resolution, so the consistent frame rates at 1080p and 1440p suggest that the CPU is providing sufficient data to the GPU. The steep drop at 4K is purely due to the GPU’s fill rate and shading capabilities being taxed by the increased pixel count. The RX 9070’s performance at 4K is still very good, with all presets exceeding 90 FPS, but the data shows that the GPU is working significantly harder at this resolution. The scaling pattern is a textbook example of a GPU-bound scenario, and it underscores that the i5-9400 is not a bottleneck in this game.