Inside

Inside is a puzzle platformer that scales heavily with resolution and settings, and the measured data for the Intel Core i5-9400 with the Intel Arc B390 reveals a system that is consistently bound by the graphics processor at higher loads. The benchmark results show a clear pattern: the Arc B390’s performance collapses as pixel count rises, while the i5-9400’s six cores provide enough headroom to keep the frame rate from becoming a bottleneck at lower settings. This pairing lands at rank 2547 out of 2887 tested combos, placing it in the lower percentile of all systems, which makes the specific behavior at each resolution and preset the most useful way to understand its capabilities.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and tells a story of a GPU that is quickly overwhelmed by pixel throughput. At High settings, the average FPS falls from 78 at 1920x1080 to 56 at 2560x1440, a 28% reduction, and then down to 35 at 3840x2160, which is a 55% drop from the 1080p figure. This is not a gradual decline; it is a cliff edge, indicating that the Intel Arc B390, with its shared memory architecture and modest 1536 shading units, runs out of fillrate and bandwidth as resolution increases. The data suggests that the limiting component at 4K is unambiguously the GPU, as the CPU’s workload does not scale with pixel count.

At Low settings, the scaling is even more revealing. The average FPS at 1080p is 156, which drops to 112 at 1440p (a 28% decrease) and then to 70 at 4K (a 55% decrease from 1080p). The percentage drops are nearly identical to the High preset, which implies that the resolution scaling is independent of the graphics quality level. This is a classic sign of a GPU that is bandwidth-limited, not shader-limited. The Arc B390’s memory is designated as "System Shared" with bandwidth that is "System Dependent," meaning the dual-channel DDR4 memory of the i5-9400, running at 42.7 GB/s, is the physical ceiling for data transfer. As resolution increases, the amount of data per frame grows, and the shared memory bus becomes the choke point.

Comparing the 4K to 1440p ratio across settings shows a consistent pattern: Medium settings at 4K achieve 56 FPS, which is exactly the same as High settings at 1440p. This suggests that the GPU is not just filling pixels but is also bound by the texture and shading work. The jump from Medium to High at 4K is a 37% decrease in FPS (from 56 to 35), while the jump from Low to Medium is a 20% decrease (from 70 to 56). The non-linear scaling between presets at the same resolution indicates that certain settings, likely those affecting post-processing or shadow complexity, disproportionately impact the Arc B390’s limited compute resources. The 4K Ultra result of 34 FPS is nearly identical to the 4K High result of 35 FPS, suggesting that the GPU hits a hard wall where additional settings have no further effect because it is already saturated.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the primary driver of the measured performance variance, and its specifications explain why. With a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, the GPU has a wide dynamic range, but the benchmark results indicate that it spends most of its time at the lower end of that range under load. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 places this GPU in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (score 1463, deltaPct 1.3%) and the GeForce 800M (score 1460, deltaPct 1.5%). These are ancient, low-end parts, and the Arc B390 is essentially competing with them, which is a damning indicator for any modern gaming workload.

The GPU has 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs, which is a very small configuration for a 3nm part. The pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s are theoretically sufficient for 1080p gaming, but the measured FPS at 1080p High (78 FPS) falls short of what those rates would suggest if the GPU were fully utilized. This points to the memory subsystem as the critical weakness. The memory size, type, and bus width are all listed as "System Shared," and the bandwidth is "System Dependent." In practice, this means the Arc B390 is using the i5-9400’s dual-channel DDR4 memory, which has a theoretical bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. For comparison, a discrete GPU with dedicated GDDR6 memory would have several times that bandwidth, and the shared memory contention with the CPU is a severe penalty.

The 80 W TDP and IGP slot width confirm this is an integrated solution, not a discrete card. The fact that it is labeled "Active" and released in 2026 suggests it is a newer architectural attempt, but the benchmark data shows it is not competitive. The FP32 performance of 7.680 TFLOPS is respectable on paper, but the lack of dedicated memory bandwidth negates that compute potential. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra (34 FPS) versus 1080p Low (156 FPS) shows a 4.6x difference in performance, which is far more than the 4x pixel increase from 1080p to 4K, indicating that the system is also suffering from increased memory pressure that degrades the GPU’s ability to feed its own shaders.

FAQ

Q: Why is the frame rate at 4K High (35 FPS) so much lower than at 1080p High (78 FPS)?

A: The data shows a 55% reduction in average FPS when moving from 1080p to 4K. This is directly attributable to the Intel Arc B390’s shared memory architecture, which has no dedicated VRAM and relies on the system’s dual-channel DDR4 memory (42.7 GB/s). The increased pixel count at 4K requires more memory bandwidth per frame, and the shared bus becomes the limiting factor.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-9400 bottleneck the Arc B390 in this game?

A: The benchmark results indicate that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. The consistent FPS drops between resolutions (e.g., 78 at 1080p High to 56 at 1440p High) suggest a GPU limit. The i5-9400’s six cores and 4.10 GHz boost clock provide enough processing power to feed the GPU at 1080p Low (156 FPS), but the GPU cannot scale its output beyond that point.

Q: Is the Ultra preset worth using at any resolution?

A: No. At 1920x1080 Ultra, the average FPS is 74, which is only 4 FPS lower than High (78 FPS). However, at 2560x1440 Ultra, the FPS drops to 53, and at 4K Ultra, it falls to 34. The performance cost of Ultra is minimal at 1080p but becomes punishing at higher resolutions, offering no tangible benefit given the GPU’s limited capabilities.

Q: How does the Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals based on the data?

A: The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482 puts it just 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX and 1.5% ahead of the GeForce 800M. These are both extremely low-end parts from years ago, and the Arc B390’s performance in Inside mirrors that competitive positioning, with sub-60 FPS at 1440p High.

Q: Why does the FPS drop from Medium to High at 4K (56 to 35) seem disproportionately large?

A: The 37% decrease from Medium to High at 4K, compared to a 20% decrease from Low to Medium, suggests that High settings enable additional effects that heavily tax the Arc B390’s limited ROPs and texture units. The GPU’s 24 ROPs are a severe constraint, and the higher preset likely increases the fillrate demand beyond what the shared memory can supply.

Q: What is the best resolution to play this game with this combo?

A: Based on the measured rows, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the system consistently achieves playable frame rates across all presets. At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 125, and even at Ultra, it remains at 74. At 1440p, only Low (112 FPS) and Medium (90 FPS) are above the 60 FPS threshold, while 4K is below 60 FPS in every setting.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy for settings, and the recommendation depends heavily on the target resolution. For a smooth experience, the Medium preset is the sweet spot. At 1920x1080 Medium, the average FPS is 125, with a minimum of 106 and a maximum of 144, which provides a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold. At 2560x1440 Medium, the average FPS is 90, with a minimum of 76, which is still playable, but the frame time variance becomes more noticeable. The 4K Medium result of 56 FPS is marginal, and the minimum of 48 FPS suggests occasional stutter.

The High preset is only recommended at 1080p, where it achieves an average of 78 FPS. At 1440p High, the average drops to 56 FPS, which is below the ideal 60 FPS target, and at 4K High, the 35 FPS average is not smooth. The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution. While 1080p Ultra (74 FPS) is technically playable, the gain over High (78 FPS) is negligible, and the added GPU load does not justify the visual difference. The Low preset is a fallback for 4K, where it achieves 70 FPS, but the visual quality loss is significant, and the game’s dark, atmospheric art style benefits from higher settings.

The data implies that this system is best suited for 1080p gaming. The performance delta between Medium and High at 1080p is a 38% FPS drop (from 125 to 78), which is a large cost for a single preset step. Users should prioritize Medium settings to maintain a high and stable frame rate. If a higher resolution is mandatory, then 1440p with Low or Medium settings is the only viable option, as the GPU simply does not have the bandwidth to handle High or Ultra above 1080p.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-9400 and Intel Arc B390 combination ranks 2547 out of 2887 tested combos in Inside. This places it in the bottom 12% of all systems, which is consistent with the GPU’s low 9th percentile standing among all GPUs. The combo rank is a direct reflection of the Arc B390’s limitations, as the CPU is relatively stronger, with a 47th percentile standing among all CPUs. The i5-9400’s average benchmark score of 2254 is nearly identical to its nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (score 2259, deltaPct -0.2%) and the Intel Core i7-10710U (score 2248, deltaPct 0.3%), indicating that the CPU is not the weak link in this pairing.

The gap between the CPU’s mid-pack performance and the GPU’s bottom-tier performance is stark. The data suggests that this combo is severely imbalanced, with the GPU unable to utilize the CPU’s full potential. In a game like Inside, which is not CPU-intensive, the i5-9400’s six cores and 9 MB of shared L3 cache are more than sufficient, but the Arc B390’s 3DMark score of 1482 means it is operating in a performance class alongside the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (score 1446, deltaPct 2.5%) and the GeForce GT 710 (score 1443, deltaPct 2.7%). This rank indicates that users of this combo should expect low-end performance, and the measured FPS confirms that only 1080p gaming is a realistic expectation.

The rank also implies that the majority of tested combos (340 out of 2887) perform worse than this setup, which is a small consolation. The data shows that the combo is not the worst, but it is far from average. The percentile ranking of the GPU (9th) versus the CPU (47th) suggests that upgrading the GPU alone would dramatically improve the combo’s rank, but the shared memory architecture of the Arc B390 limits its potential in a way that a discrete GPU would not.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the system’s behavior across all twelve tested configurations. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 156 FPS, which is the highest score recorded. The Medium preset delivers an average of 125 FPS, with a minimum of 106 and a maximum of 144. The High preset drops to an average of 78 FPS, and the Ultra preset is close behind at 74 FPS. This shows that at 1080p, the system has enough headroom to run even the most demanding preset above 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops noticeably. The Low preset averages 112 FPS, which is still excellent, and the Medium preset averages 90 FPS, with a minimum of 76 and a maximum of 103. The High preset falls to an average of 56 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target, and the Ultra preset averages 53 FPS. The gap between Medium and High at 1440p is a 38% reduction (from 90 to 56), which is significant and suggests that High settings introduce a heavy rendering cost.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles. The Low preset averages 70 FPS, which is playable, and the Medium preset averages 56 FPS, with a minimum of 48 and a maximum of 65. The High preset averages 35 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 34 FPS. The 4K results show that the system is only suitable for Low or Medium settings, and even Medium has a minimum FPS below 50, which could result in noticeable hitches. The difference between the Low and Medium presets at 4K is a 20% drop (from 70 to 56), while the difference between Medium and High is a 37% drop (from 56 to 35), highlighting the non-linear scaling of the GPU’s performance under increasing load.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 plays a secondary but important role in this system. With 6 cores and 6 threads, a base clock of 2.90 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, it provides a solid foundation for gaming. The CPU’s L3 cache is 9 MB shared, and its memory bandwidth is 42.7 GB/s, which is the same figure that limits the GPU. The i5-9400’s benchmark scores are modest, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 6629 and a single-core score of 935, placing it in the 47th percentile of all CPUs. This is a mid-range result, and its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-10710U (deltaPct 0.3%) and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (deltaPct 0.4%), all of which are within a fraction of a percent of its average score.

In the context of Inside, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics calculations. The game is a puzzle platformer, not a simulation-heavy title, so the CPU load is likely minimal. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (156 FPS) suggests that the CPU can handle significantly more work than the GPU can render, as this is a frame rate that exceeds most displays’ refresh rates. The fact that the FPS drops consistently with resolution and settings, while the CPU load would remain relatively constant, confirms that the i5-9400 is not the bottleneck at 1440p or 4K.

However, the CPU’s memory bandwidth is a shared resource. The Arc B390’s "System Shared" memory means it competes with the CPU for access to the same DDR4 RAM. This is where the CPU’s 42.7 GB/s memory bandwidth becomes a limiting factor for the GPU. The CPU’s dual-channel memory bus is not fast enough to provide the GPU with the bandwidth it needs at higher resolutions, which explains why the FPS drops so steeply. The i5-9400’s 65 W TDP and Coffee Lake architecture are not the issue; rather, it is the architectural decision to pair a discrete-class GPU with system memory that creates this bottleneck. The data shows that the CPU has the compute headroom, but the shared memory subsystem prevents the GPU from leveraging it effectively.