Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer that, on paper, should not challenge modern hardware. Yet, the measured frame rates for the Intel Core i7-14700KF paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER reveal a title that scales aggressively with both resolution and preset, producing a spread from 113.8 FPS at 4K Ultra to 407.7 FPS at 1080p Low. This dataset offers a clear window into where the bottleneck shifts between the GPU and CPU as workload changes.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is dramatic and consistent across all presets, but the magnitude varies significantly. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 407.7 at 1080p to 368.2 at 1440p, then plummets to 244.8 at 4K — a total reduction of 162.9 FPS, or roughly 40% of the 1080p figure. The Medium preset shows a similar pattern: 376.8 FPS at 1080p, 309.0 at 1440p, and 195.0 at 4K, representing a 181.8 FPS drop from the lowest to highest resolution. High settings follow suit, declining from 268.4 to 196.0 to 121.5 FPS across the three resolutions. Ultra is the most punishing, starting at 258.1 FPS at 1080p, falling to 184.9 at 1440p, and reaching 113.8 at 4K — a total loss of 144.3 FPS.

These figures indicate that at 1080p, particularly with Low or Medium presets, the system is likely CPU-bound or engine-limited, as the GPU has ample headroom. The 4077 FPS at 1080p Low versus 244.8 FPS at 4K Low suggests that the GPU becomes the limiting factor only when pixel count increases substantially. The gap between 1440p and 4K is consistently larger than between 1080p and 1440p for every preset, reinforcing that the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER’s rendering throughput is what governs performance at higher resolutions. For example, at High settings, the 1080p-to-1440p drop is 72.4 FPS, while the 1440p-to-4K drop is 74.5 FPS — nearly identical, indicating a linear scaling with pixel density rather than a sudden cliff.

GPU Role

The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm process at TSMC, featuring 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die. Its 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus provides 672.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is critical for 4K textures and effects. The GPU’s boost clock of 2610 MHz, paired with 8448 shading units, delivers 44.10 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. In this game, the data shows that the GPU is the primary limiter at 4K Ultra, where the average FPS of 113.8 is the lowest measured across all rows. This is not a failure of the hardware; rather, Inside’s lighting and post-processing at Ultra settings appear to saturate the GPU’s pixel throughput.

The benchmark results for the GPU show a PassMark G3D score of 31811 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5569, placing it at the 86th percentile among all GPUs. Compared to its nearest rivals, it sits 1.6% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A2000 and 2.0% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile, while being 0.7% behind the NVIDIA CMP 50HX and 2.1% behind the Intel Arc A550M. This mid-pack positioning relative to niche professional and mobile parts does not reflect its gaming performance here; at 4K High, the 121.5 FPS average is more than sufficient for smooth gameplay on high-refresh displays. The GPU’s memory clock of 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) and 96 ROPs contribute to the 250.6 GPixel/s pixel rate, which explains why 4K Ultra still manages over 100 FPS.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-14700KF is a 20-core, 28-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. Its 33 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support for DDR4 and DDR5 give it substantial bandwidth for feeding the GPU. In this game, the CPU’s role is most evident at 1080p Low, where the 407.7 FPS average suggests the engine’s draw call and physics simulation are being handled without bottlenecking. The processor’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44557 and single-core score of 6290 indicate strong per-thread performance, which is what Inside’s single-threaded logic likely relies on.

At 1080p Medium, the FPS drops to 376.8, and at High to 268.4, showing that even at lower resolutions, the CPU is not the limiting factor — the GPU’s workload from increased effects dominates. The 14700KF’s PassMark single-thread score of 4480 and multi-thread score of 52425 place it at the 96th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 70104. Its nearest rivals show a tight cluster: it is 0.3% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9115, 0.4% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X, and 1.3% behind the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270. This indicates that the 14700KF is squarely in the top tier for gaming CPUs, and the data confirms that Inside never exposes a CPU bottleneck even at 407.7 FPS — a figure that would stress lesser processors.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this CPU-GPU combo in Inside?

A: The highest measured average is 407.7 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

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

A: 4K Ultra averages 113.8 FPS, which is 293.9 FPS lower than the 407.7 FPS seen at 1080p Low, a reduction of roughly 72%.

Q: Is the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER stronger than the RTX A2000 based on the nearest rivals data?

A: Yes, the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER’s average benchmark score is 1.6% higher than the NVIDIA RTX A2000, according to the deltaPct of 1.6.

Q: At which resolution does the CPU show any sign of limiting performance?

A: The data shows no CPU bottleneck; even at 1080p Low with 407.7 FPS, the processor maintains performance, consistent with its 96th percentile ranking.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Medium and High at 1440p?

A: Medium averages 309.0 FPS, while High averages 196.0 FPS, a difference of 113.0 FPS in favor of Medium.

Q: Does the 14700KF have a higher multi-core score than the Ryzen 9 9950X?

A: No, the 14700KF’s average benchmark score is 0.4% lower than the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X, based on the deltaPct of -0.4.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows allow for a direct comparison of presets at each resolution. At 4K, the choice is between High at 121.5 FPS and Ultra at 113.8 FPS — a difference of only 7.7 FPS, making Ultra the better option for visual fidelity since both remain above 100 FPS. Medium at 4K offers 195.0 FPS, which is 73.5 FPS higher than Ultra, but the visual trade-off is substantial for a game that relies on atmospheric lighting. At 1440p, High at 196.0 FPS is the balanced pick, as it sits above the 144 Hz threshold while Ultra at 184.9 FPS is nearly identical in smoothness. The 1440p Medium row at 309.0 FPS is excessive for most displays, so High or Ultra is recommended.

At 1080p, Low at 407.7 FPS is only useful for extreme refresh rate monitors (480 Hz+), while Medium at 376.8 FPS and High at 268.4 FPS both exceed 240 Hz. Ultra at 258.1 FPS still clears 240 Hz, so the recommendation is to use Ultra at 1080p for the best image quality without sacrificing frame rate targets. For the best experience per the measured rows, the data suggests: 4K Ultra for cinematic play, 1440p High for competitive consistency, and 1080p Ultra for maximum visual quality at high refresh rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the average FPS across presets ranges from 258.1 (Ultra) to 407.7 (Low). The specific values are: Low 407.7, Medium 376.8, High 268.4, and Ultra 258.1. The gap between Low and Medium is 30.9 FPS, while between Medium and High it is 108.4 FPS, and between High and Ultra it is 10.3 FPS. This shows that the Medium-to-High transition is the most costly in performance, likely due to shadow and texture quality increases.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 368.2, Medium 309.0, High 196.0, and Ultra 184.9. The Low-to-Medium drop is 59.2 FPS, Medium-to-High is 113.0 FPS, and High-to-Ultra is 11.1 FPS. The pattern mirrors 1080p, with the Medium-to-High step being the steepest. Notably, 1440p High (196.0 FPS) is nearly identical to 1080p High (268.4 FPS) in relative performance, showing a consistent 72.4 FPS penalty for the resolution increase.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 244.8, Medium 195.0, High 121.5, and Ultra 113.8. The Low-to-Medium drop is 49.8 FPS, Medium-to-High is 73.5 FPS, and High-to-Ultra is 7.7 FPS. The High-to-Ultra gap narrows at 4K, suggesting that Ultra’s additional effects are less demanding at this resolution than the jump from Medium to High. Across all resolutions, the Low preset always delivers more than double the FPS of Ultra, with the ratio ranging from 2.15x at 1080p (407.7 vs 258.1) to 2.15x at 4K (244.8 vs 113.8), indicating consistent scaling behavior regardless of pixel count.