Inside

The Intel Core i7-12700KF and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT pairing delivers an exceptional experience in Inside, a 2016 Puzzle Platformer. The data shows this combo ranks in the 81st percentile among all tested combinations, placing it at rank 712 out of 3716 combos. This is a system that utterly demolishes the game's modest requirements, producing frame rates that are effectively beyond the refresh rate of any standard display, even at 4K resolution with maximum settings.

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

The Intel Core i7-12700KF is a 12-core, 20-thread processor from the Alder Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes an 80 KB L1 per core, a 1.25 MB L2 per core, and a large 25 MB shared L3 cache. The CPU's benchmark results are robust, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 28838 and a single-core score of 4071, alongside a Geekbench single-core score of 2255. It sits in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35365.

In the context of Inside, this CPU is absolute overkill. The game is a side-scrolling puzzle platformer with relatively simple physics and logic, unlike a complex simulation or strategy game. The i7-12700KF's single-thread performance is the primary driver here, and its 3DMark single-thread score of 1043 and Passmark single-thread score of 3984 indicate that it is more than capable of feeding frames to the GPU at any resolution. The multicore might is irrelevant for this title; its 3DMark max-thread score of 9983 and Passmark multithread score of 34092 will simply go unused. Even at 1080p Low settings, where the CPU is most likely to be a limiting factor, the system achieves 364 FPS, proving that the processor is not the bottleneck. The data indicates the CPU is never the constraint; instead, the GPU and the game engine's rendering path dictate the final frame rate.

The processor's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-13700T, Intel Core i5-13600T, and Intel Core 5 213PE, all within 0.2% of its average score. The i7-12700K is also a direct rival with a delta of 0.2%. This puts the 12700KF in a performance tier that is effectively identical to these chips for this kind of workload. For Inside, the difference between these CPUs would be immeasurable in terms of actual FPS, as the game is not heavily threaded. The CPU's role is simply to ensure that the GPU is never starved of draw calls, and the benchmark results confirm it performs this task flawlessly.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: The system achieves an average of 219 FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings. This is still far above the refresh rate of most high-end monitors, indicating that maximum graphical fidelity does not compromise fluidity.

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-12700KF a bottleneck for the RX 9070 XT in this game?

A: No. The benchmark data shows that at 1080p Low, the system reaches 364 FPS, while at 1080p Ultra, it drops to 219 FPS. This 145 FPS difference is due to the GPU's workload increasing with settings, not a CPU limitation. The CPU has ample headroom, as evidenced by its high single-thread scores (Geekbench 2255, Passmark 3984).

Q: How does the RX 9070 XT compare to its nearest rivals in overall benchmark score?

A: The Radeon RX 9070 XT has an average benchmark score of 13543. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon HD 7770M, scores 13536, a delta of 0.1%. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 scores 13515 (0.2% delta), and the NVIDIA P106-090 scores 13470 (0.5% delta). They are all statistically identical in this aggregate metric.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain over 200 FPS?

A: At 2560x1440 with Low settings, the system averages 327 FPS. At 3840x2160 (4K) with Low settings, it drops to 207 FPS. Therefore, 4K Low is the highest resolution that stays above the 200 FPS mark, while 1440p and 1080p are far above it.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded in the entire dataset?

A: The dataset includes a minimum FPS for Medium settings only. At 3840x2160 Medium, the minimum FPS is 141. At 2560x1440 Medium, it is 224, and at 1920x1080 Medium, it is 286. No minimum FPS data is provided for other settings.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the average FPS on Low is 207, while on Ultra it is 99. This represents a drop of 108 FPS, or roughly 52% lower performance when moving to the highest preset, showing a significant GPU workload increase.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core i7-12700KF and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT ranks 712 out of 3716 tested combos for Inside. This places it in the top 19.2% of all systems tested, a strong showing for a pair of components that are not at the absolute top of the hardware pyramid. The percentileVsAllCpus for the CPU is 85, and the GPU's percentileVsAllGpus is 55, but the combination's rank is higher than the GPU's percentile might suggest. This is because the game is not graphically demanding, so even a mid-to-high-tier GPU like the RX 9070 XT can achieve high frame rates, and the strong CPU ensures there are no frame pacing issues.

The rank of 712 means there are 711 other combos that perform better. These are likely to include top-tier CPUs like the Core i9 series and higher-end GPUs, but for a game like Inside, the difference in measurable FPS is often negligible. The data shows this combo is not struggling; it is merely placed behind those with more raw compute power. The high rank also indicates that this is a well-balanced pairing for this specific title, as the CPU is not holding the GPU back, and the GPU has enough power to deliver high frame rates at all settings. This is a "sweet spot" configuration for high-refresh-rate 1440p or smooth 4K gaming in this genre.

The performance delta to the next tier of combos is likely small, as even with a much more powerful GPU, the frame rate would be capped by the game engine's physics or the CPU's single-thread speed at lower resolutions. The data suggests that for Inside, this combo is effectively in the top tier of practical performance, where further hardware investment yields diminishing returns in playable smoothness.

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

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

At 1920x1080, the system is massively overqualified. On Low, it hits an average of 364 FPS. Medium settings see a drop to 336 FPS, with a minimum of 286 and a maximum of 387. High settings yield 230 FPS, and Ultra still produces 219 FPS. Even the lowest frame rate recorded at 1080p (286 FPS on Medium) is far beyond the refresh rate of any mainstream monitor, including 240Hz and 360Hz panels.

At 2560x1440, performance remains exceptional. Low settings average 327 FPS. Medium averages 264 FPS, with a minimum of 224 and a maximum of 304. High settings produce 165 FPS, and Ultra averages 157 FPS. This resolution is the sweet spot for this combo, as it still delivers over 150 FPS on the highest preset, which is ideal for a smooth, responsive experience on high-refresh-rate 1440p displays.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the GPU starts to show its limits, but the results are still excellent. Low settings average 207 FPS. Medium averages 166 FPS, with a minimum of 141 and a maximum of 191. High settings drop to 104 FPS, and Ultra settings average 99 FPS. This means that even at 4K with Ultra settings, the game is perfectly playable on a 60Hz or 100Hz display, and with Low settings, it can drive a 240Hz 4K monitor. The progression from Low to Ultra at 4K shows a clear and consistent scaling of GPU load.

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

The scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the classic behavior of a GPU-bound scenario. At Low settings, the frame rate drops from 364 FPS at 1080p to 327 FPS at 1440p and then to 207 FPS at 4K. This is a 43% reduction from 1080p to 4K. On Ultra settings, the drop is from 219 FPS at 1080p to 157 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 99 FPS at 4K. This is a 55% reduction. The larger percentage drop at Ultra settings indicates that the GPU is working significantly harder at higher resolutions and graphical fidelity.

This pattern confirms that the limiting component is the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT. The CPU's performance is static across resolutions; it is not the bottleneck. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the FPS would remain the same at 1080p and 4K. Instead, the FPS scales inversely with resolution and settings, which is the signature of GPU constraint. The RX 9070 XT's 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth are sufficient, but the compute units are simply tasked more heavily as pixel count increases.

The fact that 1080p Low (364 FPS) is still 76% faster than 4K Low (207 FPS) shows that the game's engine has a low render overhead, allowing the GPU to flex its muscles. The strong single-core performance of the i7-12700KF ensures that the CPU can process the game's logic and issue draw calls quickly enough to keep the GPU fed at these high frame rates. If the CPU were weak, we would see a plateau in FPS at lower resolutions, but the data shows a linear decline, attributing the performance scaling almost entirely to the GPU.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

For 4K (3840x2160), the choice depends on the display's refresh rate. The Ultra preset averages 99 FPS, which is excellent for a 60Hz or 100Hz display, offering maximum visual fidelity. If you have a 144Hz display, the High preset at 104 FPS is a marginal gain. However, the Medium preset at 166 FPS is the standout for high-refresh-rate 4K gaming, providing a massive jump in smoothness with a modest visual compromise. The data shows that Medium at 4K has a minimum FPS of 141, ensuring no dips below the 144Hz threshold. Low at 207 FPS is only for the most competitive 240Hz 4K panels.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset at 157 FPS is the recommendation for those with a 144Hz or 165Hz monitor, as it provides the best visual quality while maintaining an average above the refresh rate. For 240Hz displays, the Medium preset at 264 FPS is the better choice, as it ensures the frame rate stays well above the monitor's maximum, delivering buttery-smooth motion. The High preset at 165 FPS is a good middle ground if you want a bit more headroom than Ultra.

At 1920x1080, all presets are overkill. The Ultra preset at 219 FPS is sufficient for 144Hz displays, but for 240Hz or 360Hz monitors, the Medium preset at 336 FPS is the smart pick. The Low preset at 364 FPS offers no tangible benefit over Medium, as the minimum FPS on Medium is 286, which is still above the refresh rate of 360Hz monitors. Therefore, Medium is the optimal setting at 1080p and 1440p, while Medium is also the best balance at 4K for high-refresh-rate displays, with Ultra being the choice for 60Hz displays. The data indicates that this combo is so powerful that the Medium preset provides the best combination of visual quality and performance headroom across all tested resolutions.