Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer that, by its nature, places specific demands on a system. The benchmark data for the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT reveals a configuration that is heavily skewed toward CPU performance, with the GPU acting as the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. The measured FPS across all settings and resolutions indicates a system capable of delivering smooth gameplay, though the margin of performance varies significantly depending on the graphical load.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, which are the key figures for understanding its performance in a game like Inside. The game’s puzzle-platformer design relies heavily on a consistent frame rate for precise timing and physics, making the CPU’s single-thread performance critical for maintaining the game’s logic and collision detection at high speeds.

Benchmark results place this CPU in the 89th percentile of all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 46062. Its nearest rivals in the data set are the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375, the Intel Core i9-13900HX, the AMD EPYC 4364P, and the AMD EPYC 7303. The performance deltas are incredibly tight, with the Ultra 5 235 trailing the Core i9-13900HX by only 0.1% and leading the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 by the same margin. This places the CPU in a performance tier where, for most gaming workloads, differences are negligible.

In the context of Inside’s measured results, the CPU’s strength becomes apparent at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low settings, the system achieves an average of 281 FPS. This high frame rate is only possible if the CPU can feed the GPU with enough draw calls and physics updates to saturate the rendering pipeline. The 5.00 GHz boost clock is the primary driver here, allowing the game’s single-threaded logic to execute rapidly. The L3 cache is a 24 MB shared pool, which helps keep frequently accessed game data close to the cores, reducing latency that could otherwise cause frame hitches. The memory bandwidth is rated at 102.4 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5 interface, which is sufficient for a game of this scope.

However, the CPU is not the limiting factor in most of the measured scenarios. The data shows that as resolution increases, the frame rate drops, indicating that the CPU has headroom left on the table. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS falls to 60, a stark contrast to the 281 FPS seen at 1080p Low. This pattern is the classic signature of a GPU bottleneck, where the processor is waiting on the graphics card to finish rendering each frame. The CPU’s 14 threads are largely idle in this scenario, as Inside does not appear to be a heavily multithreaded workload; the Passmark multi-thread score of 37816 is high, but the single-thread score of 4516 is more indicative of its gaming performance in this title.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is the limiting component in this configuration for most settings. It is based on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 23 chip, built on a 7 nm process. The GPU has a base clock of 1968 MHz and a boost clock of 2589 MHz, with a game clock rated at 2359 MHz. It is equipped with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The GPU’s compute capabilities are rated at 10.60 TFLOPS for FP32 operations.

The GPU’s benchmark percentile is 70, with an average score of 24442. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630, the Intel Arc A350M, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER. The performance deltas here are small, with the RX 6600 XT leading the GTX 1630 by 0.7% and trailing the Arc A350M by 0.8%. Interestingly, it is only 1.1% ahead of the RTX 2080 SUPER in the average benchmark score, which suggests that while the card is competent, it is not a high-end part.

The 8 GB VRAM capacity is a critical factor at higher resolutions. At 4K, the game requires more memory for textures and framebuffers. The measured results show that the GPU can handle the load, but the frame rates indicate it is working near its limits. The boost clock of 2589 MHz is what allows the card to push 63 FPS average at 4K High settings. The memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s is likely the limiting factor at this resolution, as the 128-bit bus is narrow compared to higher-tier cards. The pixel rate of 165.7 GPixel/s and texture rate of 331.4 GTexel/s are the theoretical limits that the game’s rendering engine can utilize.

The GPU’s role is best illustrated by the scaling from 1080p to 1440p. At 1080p High, the average FPS is 140. At 1440p High, it drops to 101 FPS. This 28% reduction in frame rate for a 78% increase in pixel count shows that the GPU is already the primary bottleneck at 1080p. The CPU is capable of producing far higher frame rates, as evidenced by the 281 FPS at 1080p Low, but the GPU cannot keep pace once the settings are raised. The card’s RDNA 2.0 architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, but Inside is a 2016 title that likely does not utilize these modern features, so the GPU is being judged on raw rasterization performance.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and predictable pattern of scaling across the three resolutions. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 281 FPS average. Moving to 1440p Low, the average drops to 202 FPS, and at 4K Low, it falls to 127 FPS. This progression shows that even at the lowest settings, the GPU is struggling to keep up with the increasing pixel count. The frame rate at 4K Low is less than half of the 1080p Low figure, which is a significant drop.

For Medium settings, the scaling is similar but with a larger absolute drop. At 1080p Medium, the average is 225 FPS with a minimum of 191 FPS and a maximum of 258 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average is 161 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it is 101 FPS. The minimum FPS figures are only provided for Medium settings, showing 191 FPS at 1080p, 137 FPS at 1440p, and 86 FPS at 4K. This suggests that the game maintains a stable frame rate without major hitches, but the overall performance headroom shrinks as resolution increases.

The High settings show a similar relative drop. From 140 FPS at 1080p to 101 FPS at 1440p, and down to 63 FPS at 4K. The 4K High result is particularly notable because it falls just below the 60 FPS threshold that many consider the minimum for smooth gameplay. The Ultra settings follow the same pattern: 134 FPS at 1080p, 96 FPS at 1440p, and 60 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is the lowest measured FPS in the entire data set, indicating that this configuration is not suited for maximum quality at 4K.

This scaling behavior points to the GPU as the limiting component. The CPU’s performance is consistent across resolutions, as it is not affected by pixel count. The fact that the frame rate drops by roughly half when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same settings is a strong indicator that the RX 6600 XT is the bottleneck. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the frame rates would remain similar regardless of resolution, which is clearly not the case. The data suggests that for a game like Inside, this configuration is best suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming, where the GPU can maintain high frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT ranks 1998 out of 2887 tested combos for Inside. This places it in the lower half of all configurations tested, which is a surprising result given the individual component benchmarks. The CPU ranks in the 89th percentile, and the GPU in the 70th percentile, so one might expect a higher combined ranking. The low combo rank suggests that there are many other pairings that perform better in this specific game.

The rank of 1998 out of 2887 means that approximately 69% of tested combos outperform this one. This is likely due to the GPU being a mid-range part that is outclassed by many other cards in the database. The nearest rivals for the GPU include the RTX 2080 SUPER, which is a much older card but performs similarly in synthetic benchmarks. This indicates that the RX 6600 XT is not a top-tier performer, and its pairing with a high-end CPU does not boost its standing in the game.

The delta between this combo and others is not directly provided, but the individual component deltas give some insight. The CPU is virtually tied with its nearest rivals, so the GPU is the differentiating factor. The fact that the GPU is only 0.7% faster than the GTX 1630, which is a much lower-tier card, highlights the RX 6600 XT’s position in the market. In a game like Inside, which is not graphically demanding, the GPU’s raw power is the deciding factor, and the RX 6600 XT is merely adequate.

The combo rank of 1998 also suggests that pairing this CPU with a stronger GPU would yield much better results. The CPU has significant headroom, as shown by the high frame rates at low settings, but the GPU limits the overall performance. For a benchmark database, this combo serves as an example of a CPU-heavy configuration that is held back by its graphics card. The data indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor in any of the measured scenarios, reinforcing the notion that the GPU is the weak link.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system’s performance across all combinations of resolution and settings. At 1080p, the highest average FPS is achieved at Low settings with 281 FPS. Medium settings produce 225 FPS average, with a minimum of 191 FPS and a maximum of 258 FPS. High settings drop to 140 FPS average, and Ultra settings produce 134 FPS average. The difference between High and Ultra at 1080p is only 6 FPS, suggesting that the game’s Ultra preset does not add much additional load over High.

At 1440p, the frame rates are lower but still respectable. Low settings produce 202 FPS average, which is a 28% drop from 1080p. Medium settings produce 161 FPS average, with a minimum of 137 FPS and a maximum of 186 FPS. High settings produce 101 FPS average, and Ultra settings produce 96 FPS average. The gap between High and Ultra at 1440p is 5 FPS, similar to the 1080p delta. This consistency suggests that the Ultra preset is only marginally more demanding than High.

At 4K, the GPU is clearly stressed. Low settings produce 127 FPS average, which is still playable. Medium settings produce 101 FPS average, with a minimum of 86 FPS and a maximum of 117 FPS. High settings drop to 63 FPS average, and Ultra settings produce 60 FPS average. The 4K High and Ultra results are both near the 60 FPS threshold, indicating that the system is barely able to maintain smooth gameplay at these settings. The minimum FPS of 86 at 4K Medium shows that there is some variance in frame times, but it is not severe.

The data also shows that the frame rate scaling is not linear. From 1080p Low to 1080p Medium, the drop is 56 FPS (281 to 225). From Medium to High, the drop is 85 FPS (225 to 140). From High to Ultra, the drop is only 6 FPS (140 to 134). This non-linear scaling indicates that the Medium to High transition is the most demanding step, while the High to Ultra step is negligible. At 1440p, the drops are 41 FPS (202 to 161), 60 FPS (161 to 101), and 5 FPS (101 to 96). At 4K, the drops are 26 FPS (127 to 101), 38 FPS (101 to 63), and 3 FPS (63 to 60). This pattern holds across resolutions, suggesting that the High preset is the point where the GPU starts to significantly struggle.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this configuration depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1080p, the system can handle Ultra settings with an average of 134 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold. The High preset at 140 FPS is only marginally faster, so Ultra is the recommended choice for 1080p if visual quality is a priority. The difference between High and Ultra is minimal in terms of performance, so there is no reason to sacrifice the extra visual fidelity.

For 1440p, the Ultra preset produces an average of 96 FPS, which is still smooth. The High preset at 101 FPS is slightly faster, but the difference is within the margin of error. The Medium preset at 161 FPS offers a significant frame rate boost, but the visual quality reduction may not be worth it. The data suggests that High is the sweet spot for 1440p, providing a balance between visual quality and performance. The 101 FPS average is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold, and the game will feel responsive.

For 4K, the situation is more complex. The Ultra preset at 60 FPS is exactly at the threshold, but it is likely to have occasional drops below that. The High preset at 63 FPS is marginally better, but still leaves little headroom. The Medium preset at 101 FPS is the best option for 4K, providing a comfortable frame rate that will not dip below 86 FPS. The Low preset at 127 FPS is even faster, but the visual quality is likely to be noticeably worse. For a game like Inside, which relies on atmosphere and lighting, the Medium preset is the recommended choice for 4K.

The data indicates that the High preset is the most demanding step in terms of performance cost. Moving from Medium to High results in a significant frame rate drop at all resolutions. Therefore, if the target is 60 FPS, the Medium preset is the safest choice for 4K, while High is viable for 1440p and Ultra is viable for 1080p. The measured minimum FPS values for Medium settings show that the game is stable, with no severe frame time spikes, making it the most reliable preset for consistent performance.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo can achieve at 1080p?

A: The highest average FPS at 1080p is 281, achieved at Low settings. The Ultra preset produces 134 FPS average, which is still well above the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is this configuration capable of 4K gaming?

A: Yes, but with limitations. At 4K Medium settings, the average FPS is 101, which is smooth. At 4K High and Ultra, the average FPS drops to 63 and 60 respectively, which is near the minimum for comfortable gameplay.

Q: Which component is the bottleneck in this system for Inside?

A: The data indicates the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is the bottleneck. The frame rate drops significantly as resolution increases, while the CPU shows no signs of being the limiting factor, as evidenced by the high FPS at low settings.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is virtually tied with its nearest rivals. It is 0.1% faster than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 and 0.1% slower than the Intel Core i9-13900HX. It leads the AMD EPYC 4364P by 0.2%.

Q: What is the average FPS difference between High and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 1440p, the High preset produces an average of 101 FPS, while the Ultra preset produces 96 FPS. The difference is only 5 FPS, making the Ultra preset a reasonable choice if desired.

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested configurations for this game?

A: The combo ranks 1998 out of 2887 tested configurations. This places it in the lower half of all tested combos, indicating that many other pairings deliver better performance in Inside.