Inside

FAQ

Q: What is the combo rank of the Intel Core i9-14900K with the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT in Inside?

A: The combination ranks 1078th out of 1671 tested combos for this game, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database's tested configurations.

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

A: The Intel Core i9-14900K has an average benchmark score of 79824, which is 0.3% below the AMD EPYC 7413, 0.7% above the Intel Core i9-14900KF, 0.7% above the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF, and 0.9% above the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K.

Q: What is the GPU's standing relative to other graphics cards?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT sits at the 72nd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6800M, has a nearly identical average score with a 0% delta, while the Intel Arc A370M trails by 0.5% and the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH trails by 0.6%.

Q: What are the best and worst measured average FPS values for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 291.9 at 1080p Low settings, while the lowest is 62 at 4K Ultra settings. The gap between these extremes is substantial, indicating strong scaling across both resolution and quality presets.

Q: Does this CPU or GPU bottleneck the other in this game?

A: The data suggests the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions. At 1080p Low, the frame rate reaches 291.9, but at 4K Ultra it drops to 62, a pattern consistent with GPU-bound performance as pixel count increases.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the CPU and GPU?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900K has a launch MSRP of $589, and the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT has a launch MSRP of 399 USD.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i9-14900K is a 24-core, 32-thread processor from the Core 14th Gen series, built on Raptor Lake architecture with a 10 nm process node. It operates with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 6.00 GHz, with a 125 W TDP. The chip includes 36 MB of shared L3 cache, alongside 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core. Its integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770, and it supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus.

Benchmark results place this CPU at the 97th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 79824. In raw compute tests, the processor achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 49872 and a single-core score of 7040. Geekbench results show 20370 for multicore and 3064 for single-core. Passmark multithread testing yields 58674, with single-thread scoring 4697. These figures indicate a very high-end processor that should not bottleneck most gaming workloads.

In the context of Inside, a puzzle platformer, the CPU's role is likely minimal. The game's mechanics and visual style are not typically demanding on processor resources. The high single-core performance, evidenced by the 7040 Cinebench R23 single-core score, ensures that any physics or logic calculations are handled swiftly. The 24 cores and 32 threads are far more than this genre requires, meaning the CPU likely idles well below its potential during gameplay.

The nearest CPU rivals show how tightly clustered performance is at this tier. The AMD EPYC 7413 scores 80041, a mere 0.3% higher, while the Intel Core i9-14900KF and Core Ultra 7 265KF sit 0.7% behind, and the Core Ultra 7 265K trails by 0.9%. These differences are negligible in real-world gaming scenarios. For Inside specifically, any of these CPUs would deliver similar frame rates, as the game's demands are modest relative to the processing headroom available.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is built on the Navi 23 chip using RDNA 2.0 architecture and a 7 nm process from TSMC. It packs 11,060 million transistors across a 237 mm² die. The GPU operates with a base clock of 2055 MHz and a boost clock of 2635 MHz, with a game clock of 2410 MHz. Memory runs at 2190 MHz, effectively 17.5 Gbps, across an 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer on a 128-bit bus, yielding 280.3 GB/s of bandwidth.

The card has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 32 ray-tracing cores. Its compute capabilities include 10.79 TFLOPS for FP32 and 21.59 TFLOPS for FP16. The pixel rate is 168.6 GPixel/s and texture rate is 337.3 GTexel/s. With a 176 W TDP, it requires a 450 W power supply and connects via PCIe 4.0 x8.

In benchmark standings, the RX 6650 XT ranks at the 72nd percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 29024. Its nearest rivals are tightly matched: the RX 6800M scores 29011 (0% delta), the RX 470 scores 28996 (0.1% delta), the Arc A370M scores 29175 (-0.5% delta), and the RX Vega M GH scores 29197 (-0.6% delta). This clustering indicates the card's performance is well-established in its class.

For Inside, the GPU's VRAM and bandwidth are more than sufficient. The game's art style uses simple geometry and flat shading, which does not heavily tax texture memory or fill rate. The 8 GB frame buffer is ample for 4K resolutions in this title. The 280.3 GB/s bandwidth ensures that even at high resolutions, texture streaming remains fluid. The boost clock of 2635 MHz provides solid raw throughput, though the game's simplicity means the GPU is unlikely to be pushed to its thermal limits.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i9-14900K paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT achieves a combo rank of 1078 out of 1671 tested configurations in Inside. This places the setup in the 64th percentile of all tested combos, meaning roughly a third of configurations perform better. This is a notable position given the CPU's high-end status and the GPU's mid-range classification.

The ranking suggests an imbalance: the CPU is at the 97th percentile while the GPU is at the 72nd. In a game like Inside, which is not graphically intensive, this combination still underperforms relative to what the CPU alone might suggest. The bottleneck is clearly the GPU, especially at higher resolutions where pixel fill rate matters more. The 4K Ultra result of 62 FPS, compared to the 1080p Low result of 291.9 FPS, shows the GPU's limitations become pronounced as resolution scales.

Compared to other combos in the database, this pairing sits in the lower-middle range. The rank of 1078 out of 1671 indicates that many configurations with less powerful CPUs but stronger GPUs would outperform this setup in Inside. The data implies that for this specific game, investing in a more capable GPU rather than the CPU would yield better frame rates. The CPU's immense processing power is largely untapped, as the game's modest requirements do not leverage its 24 cores or high boost clock.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of resolution scaling. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 291.9 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 211.6 FPS, a reduction of 27.5%. At 4K Low, the frame rate falls to 130.4 FPS, representing a 38.4% decrease from 1440p. The scaling is consistent across all settings presets, though the absolute drops vary.

For High settings, 1080p yields 145 FPS, 1440p yields 106.4 FPS (a 26.6% drop), and 4K yields 64.9 FPS (a 39% drop from 1440p). Medium settings show 232.4 FPS at 1080p, 165.9 FPS at 1440p (28.6% drop), and 106 FPS at 4K (36.1% drop). Ultra settings start at 137.8 FPS at 1080p, drop to 98.6 FPS at 1440p (28.4% drop), and reach 62 FPS at 4K (37.1% drop).

The consistent pattern of roughly 27-29% drops from 1080p to 1440p and 36-39% drops from 1440p to 4K indicates the GPU is the primary limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the scaling between resolutions would be less pronounced, as processor load does not increase linearly with pixel count. The data shows that each resolution step imposes a significant performance penalty, which is characteristic of GPU-bound scenarios. The RX 6650 XT's 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit bus are adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the card's bandwidth and fill rate constraints become apparent.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1080p resolution, the combo delivers 291.9 FPS on Low settings, 232.4 FPS on Medium, 145 FPS on High, and 137.8 FPS on Ultra. The gap between Low and Medium is 59.5 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 7.2 FPS. This suggests diminishing returns at the higher quality presets, where additional visual fidelity costs relatively little performance.

At 1440p, the results are 211.6 FPS on Low, 165.9 FPS on Medium, 106.4 FPS on High, and 98.6 FPS on Ultra. The Low-to-Medium gap narrows to 45.7 FPS, while the High-to-Ultra gap remains tight at 7.8 FPS. The pattern holds, with Low and Medium providing headroom above 165 FPS, while High and Ultra sit below 107 FPS.

At 4K resolution, the frame rates are 130.4 FPS on Low, 106 FPS on Medium, 64.9 FPS on High, and 62 FPS on Ultra. The Low-to-Medium gap is 24.4 FPS, and the High-to-Ultra gap is just 2.9 FPS. At this resolution, the GPU is clearly stressed, with even Low settings not reaching 144 FPS. The Ultra preset at 62 FPS hovers near the 60 FPS threshold, which is playable but not ideal for high-refresh-rate displays.

Across all resolutions, the Ultra preset consistently delivers the lowest frame rates, while Low delivers the highest. The relative ordering is stable, with no crossover points where one preset outperforms another. The data shows that the combo can handle 1080p gaming at any preset with ease, 1440p gaming at Low and Medium comfortably, and 4K gaming only at Low and Medium with acceptable performance.

Settings Recommendations

For 1080p gaming, the Ultra preset at 137.8 FPS is the recommended choice. This frame rate is well above the 60 FPS threshold and provides a smooth experience on most displays. The difference between High (145 FPS) and Ultra (137.8 FPS) is only 7.2 FPS, so the visual quality gain from Ultra is worth the minor performance cost.

At 1440p, the Medium preset at 165.9 FPS offers the best balance. It delivers a high frame rate that exceeds 144 Hz, making it suitable for high-refresh-rate monitors. The Low preset at 211.6 FPS is faster but sacrifices visual fidelity, while High at 106.4 FPS and Ultra at 98.6 FPS are playable but do not reach 144 FPS. For most users, Medium provides the best experience per the measured rows.

At 4K, the Low preset at 130.4 FPS is the only option that provides a high frame rate. Medium at 106 FPS is also viable, offering a good balance of quality and performance. High at 64.9 FPS and Ultra at 62 FPS are playable but barely exceed the 60 FPS baseline. Given the small performance gap between High and Ultra (2.9 FPS), choosing Ultra at 4K is reasonable if visual quality is the priority, as the cost is minimal.

Overall, the data suggests that this combo is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it can deliver high frame rates across all presets. At 4K, users should stick to Low or Medium settings to maintain smooth gameplay. The GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions, so adjusting quality presets has a more significant impact than CPU-related settings. For the best experience across all resolutions, Medium settings offer the most consistent frame rates relative to visual quality.