Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer with modest visual demands, but the measured data for this combination of an Intel Core i7-14700KF and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 reveals a system that is heavily constrained by the graphics card at higher resolutions, while remaining exceptionally capable at 1080p. The benchmark results show a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, with the GPU’s limited 4 GB of VRAM and Turing-era architecture becoming the primary bottleneck, despite the CPU’s top-tier specifications.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a dramatic, non-linear drop as resolution scales from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 67 FPS at 1080p to 48 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 30 FPS at 4K. This represents a 55% reduction in performance from 1080p to 4K, indicating that the rendering load is scaling almost directly with pixel count. The transition from 1440p to 4K is particularly steep, with a 37.5% drop, suggesting the GPU is running out of raw throughput and memory bandwidth at the higher resolution.

The pattern becomes even more telling when examining Low settings. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 134 FPS, which drops to 97 FPS at 1440p and 61 FPS at 4K. The scaling here is more forgiving, with only a 54% reduction from 1080p to 4K, but the absolute numbers show that even at the lowest settings, 4K pushes the GTX 1650 to its limits. The fact that 4K Low (61 FPS) is faster than 1080p Ultra (64 FPS) by a negligible margin highlights how much the GPU struggles with higher resolutions regardless of quality settings.

This scaling behavior points directly to the GPU as the limiting component. The i7-14700KF, with its 20 cores and 28 threads, is unlikely to be a constraint in a game like Inside, which is not heavily multithreaded. The 30 FPS average at 4K High is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck, as the CPU could easily feed more frames if the graphics card were capable. The 4K Ultra result of 29 FPS further confirms this, as the drop from High to Ultra is only 3%, indicating the GPU is already saturated.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination ranks 3575 out of 3716 tested combos for Inside, placing it in the bottom 4% of all configurations. This is a surprisingly low ranking given the CPU’s performance, but it makes sense when considering the GPU’s position. The GTX 1650 sits at the 40th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7472, and its nearest rivals include the Intel UHD Graphics 750 and AMD Radeon R7 350, which are integrated or entry-level solutions. The CPU, by contrast, is at the 94th percentile, with an average score of 70163.

The disparity between the CPU and GPU rankings explains the combo’s poor placement. While the i7-14700KF is a high-end processor that benchmarks within 1% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X and Intel Core Ultra 7 265K, the GTX 1650 is a budget card that is only 0.3% faster than the AMD Radeon HD 8850M and 0.4% faster than the Intel UHD Graphics 750. This pairing creates a massive imbalance, where the CPU’s potential is largely wasted in a game that is not CPU-bound. The data suggests that for Inside, this combo is overkill on the CPU side and underpowered on the GPU side, resulting in a system that is not well-suited for 4K gaming but perfectly adequate for 1080p.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, based on the TU117 chip and Turing architecture, is the clear performance limiter in this configuration. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s, which is sufficient for 1080p but becomes a bottleneck at higher resolutions. The memory clock runs at 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective), and the GPU has a base clock of 1485 MHz with a boost of 1665 MHz. These clocks are modest by modern standards, and the FP32 performance of 2.984 TFLOPS is low for a dedicated card, explaining why 4K Ultra yields only 29 FPS.

The GPU’s VRAM capacity is particularly concerning for 4K gaming. With only 4 GB, the card likely struggles to hold textures and frame buffers at 3840x2160, leading to the sharp performance drops observed. The 4K Medium result shows a minimum of 41 FPS and a maximum of 56 FPS, with an average of 49 FPS, suggesting that the card can handle the resolution in bursts but not consistently. The GTX 1650’s pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s are also limiting factors, as these determine how quickly the GPU can fill pixels and apply textures, both of which are stressed at high resolutions.

The GPU’s benchmark scores further illustrate its position. Its best result is in Passmark G3D with a score of 7880, while its DirectX 11 score is 58 and DirectX 12 score is 35. These scores are low compared to modern cards, and the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 305 confirms that the card is not designed for high-end gaming. The GTX 1650’s percentile rank of 40 means it performs better than only 40% of all GPUs, placing it in the entry-level segment.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the GTX 1650 delivers playable frame rates across all settings. Low settings achieve 134 FPS average, which is excellent for smooth gameplay. Medium settings drop to 107 FPS, with a minimum of 91 FPS and a maximum of 124 FPS, showing a stable experience. High settings yield 67 FPS, which is still smooth, and Ultra settings produce 64 FPS, a minor drop from High. The 1080p results indicate that the card is well-suited for this resolution, with no setting falling below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth play.

At 2560x1440, the performance degrades noticeably. Low settings average 97 FPS, which is still good, but Medium drops to 77 FPS with a minimum of 66 FPS. High settings fall to 48 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target, and Ultra settings drop to 46 FPS. The 1440p results show that the card can handle the resolution at lower settings but struggles with higher quality presets. The gap between Medium and High is 29 FPS, indicating that the additional rendering work at High settings pushes the GPU past its comfort zone.

At 3840x2160, the card is clearly out of its depth. Low settings average 61 FPS, which is borderline playable, but Medium drops to 49 FPS with a minimum of 41 FPS. High settings average 30 FPS, and Ultra settings average 29 FPS, both of which are below the threshold for smooth gameplay. The 4K results show that the GTX 1650 can only handle the resolution at Low settings, and even then, the frame rate is not consistently above 60 FPS. The lack of minimum FPS data for High and Ultra settings suggests that the performance is too inconsistent to provide reliable readings.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Inside?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the optimal resolution, with all settings achieving at least 64 FPS average. At 2560x1440, only Low and Medium settings stay above 60 FPS, while 3840x2160 results in sub-60 FPS performance for all settings except Low.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472, which is 0.3% higher than the AMD Radeon HD 8850M and 0.4% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics 750, but 1% lower than the Intel Arc A310. This places it in a very tight performance band with entry-level GPUs.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this system?

A: The benchmark results clearly indicate the GPU is the bottleneck. The i7-14700KF ranks at the 94th percentile among CPUs, while the GTX 1650 ranks at the 40th percentile among GPUs. The FPS scaling with resolution and settings confirms that the GPU is the limiting component, as the CPU could easily handle higher frame rates.

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 3575 out of 3716 tested combos for Inside, placing it in the bottom 4% of all configurations. This low rank is due to the GPU’s performance, not the CPU.

Q: What settings are recommended for 4K gaming?

A: At 3840x2160, only Low settings achieve an average of 61 FPS, which is playable. Medium settings average 49 FPS, and High/Ultra settings drop to 30 FPS or below, making them unsuitable for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the CPU’s performance compare to its rivals?

A: The i7-14700KF has an average benchmark score of 70163, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F, 0.4% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, and 0.9% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X. It is 1% lower than the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K.

Settings Recommendations

For 1920x1080, the data supports using Ultra settings, as the average FPS of 64 is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. This provides the best visual quality without sacrificing performance. If a higher frame rate is preferred, Medium settings at 107 FPS offer a good balance, but Ultra is the recommended choice given the minimal cost in FPS compared to High (67 FPS).

At 2560x1440, Medium settings are the recommended choice, with an average of 77 FPS and a minimum of 66 FPS. This ensures smooth gameplay while retaining a reasonable level of visual fidelity. Low settings achieve 97 FPS but sacrifice visual quality, while High and Ultra settings fall below 60 FPS and are not recommended for a consistent experience.

For 3840x2160, Low settings are the only viable option, with an average of 61 FPS. This is barely above the 60 FPS threshold, but the minimum FPS is not provided, so there may be occasional dips. Medium settings at 49 FPS are playable but not ideal, while High and Ultra settings at 30 FPS and 29 FPS respectively are too slow for a smooth experience. Users targeting 4K should stick to Low settings or consider a GPU upgrade.

Overall, the best experience for this combo in Inside is at 1080p with Ultra settings, where the system delivers 64 FPS average without compromising visual quality. At higher resolutions, the GPU’s limitations become apparent, and users must accept lower settings to maintain playable frame rates.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-14700KF is a high-end processor with 20 cores and 28 threads, based on the Raptor Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, with a 33 MB L3 cache shared across the cores. The CPU’s TDP is 125 W, and it supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. These specifications place it at the 94th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 70163.

In Inside, the CPU’s role is minimal due to the game’s low computational demands. The game is not heavily multithreaded, so the 20 cores and 28 threads are largely underutilized. The CPU’s high single-core performance, as evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 6235, ensures that it can easily handle the game’s logic and physics without bottlenecking the GPU. However, the data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor at any resolution, as frame rates drop consistently with increased GPU load.

The CPU’s performance relative to its rivals is notable. It is 0.2% faster than the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F, 0.4% faster than the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, and 0.9% faster than the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, while being 1% slower than the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K. These margins are small, indicating that the i7-14700KF is competitive with the best CPUs on the market. However, in Inside, this CPU power is wasted, as the GTX 1650 cannot translate the CPU’s potential into higher frame rates. The benchmark results confirm that the CPU is not a bottleneck, but its high performance does not compensate for the GPU’s limitations.