Inside

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT delivers an exceptionally high-performance experience in Inside, a puzzle platformer that appears to be heavily optimized. The benchmark data shows a system capable of far exceeding standard display refresh rates at all tested resolutions, with the combination ranking in the top percentile of all tested configurations. This analysis breaks down the measured performance, scaling behavior, and the distinct roles played by each component in achieving these results.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a system that is clearly GPU-limited at higher resolutions, yet still maintains headroom that points to a very capable CPU. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo produces an average of 353 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 254 FPS, a 28% reduction. At 4K Low, the average is 160 FPS, which is a 55% reduction from the 1080p figure. This steep decline as resolution increases is the classic signature of a GPU that is becoming the primary bottleneck, as the rendering workload per frame scales with pixel count.

However, the absolute numbers are still staggeringly high. Even at 4K Low, the system is pushing 160 FPS, which is more than enough for any high-refresh-rate monitor. The scaling pattern for Medium settings is similar: 283 FPS at 1080p, 203 FPS at 1440p (a 28% drop), and 128 FPS at 4K (a 55% drop from 1080p). This consistent proportionality suggests that the game's rendering pipeline scales predictably with resolution, and the RX 6750 XT's 12 GB of VRAM is never a limiting factor at these settings.

The most telling data point for understanding the limiting component comes from the High settings row. At 1080p High, the average is 177 FPS. At 1440p High, it is 127 FPS (a 28% drop). At 4K High, it is 80 FPS (a 55% drop from 1080p). The identical percentage drops across Low, Medium, and High settings indicate that the scaling is purely resolution-driven and independent of the graphical preset. This is a strong indicator that the CPU is not a bottleneck even at 1080p, as a CPU-limited scenario would typically show a smaller performance penalty when moving to higher resolutions, since the GPU would be waiting on the CPU less often.

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is roughly 2.2x across all settings, which is very close to the theoretical pixel count difference of 4x (3840x2160 is exactly four times 1920x1080). This implies that the frame time is almost entirely spent on GPU work, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is providing frames faster than the GPU can render them. The data shows a system where the GPU is the firm limiting factor at 4K, but the CPU is so strong that it allows the GPU to reach its full potential at lower resolutions.

FAQ

*Q: Is this combo capable of running Inside at 4K with High settings?*

A: Yes, the data shows an average of 80 FPS at 3840x2160 with High settings. This is a playable frame rate, though it is noticeably lower than the 127 FPS average seen at 1440p High.

Q: How big is the performance gap between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset yields an average of 353 FPS, while the Ultra preset yields an average of 168 FPS. This represents a 52% reduction in average frame rate when moving from the lowest to the highest settings.

Q: What is the best resolution to use for a 144Hz monitor?

A: The data suggests 1440p is the sweet spot. At 2560x1440 with Ultra settings, the system averages 121 FPS, which is close to the 144Hz target. Dropping to High settings at 1440p raises the average to 127 FPS, while Medium settings hit 203 FPS, providing significant headroom.

Q: Does the system provide a consistent frame pacing experience?

A: The data includes minimum and maximum frame rates only for the Medium settings at each resolution. At 4K Medium, the range is 109 FPS to 147 FPS. At 1440p Medium, it is 173 FPS to 234 FPS, and at 1080p Medium, it is 240 FPS to 325 FPS. The lack of min/max data for other presets makes a full assessment difficult, but the Medium preset data shows a wide variance.

Q: How does this combo's performance rank against other tested systems?

A: The combo ranks 1151 out of 2887 total tested combinations for Inside, placing it in the 60th percentile of all tested systems. This indicates that while it is not a top-tier enthusiast setup, it significantly outperforms the majority of configurations tested.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for the high frame rates in this game?

A: The scaling data indicates the GPU is the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions. However, the CPU’s high single-thread performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2085, is sufficient to prevent a bottleneck at low resolutions, allowing the GPU to produce the very high frame rates seen at 1080p.

How This Combo Ranks

The combined Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT configuration achieves a combo rank of 1151 out of 2887 tested combinations for Inside. This places the system squarely in the upper half of the performance distribution, at the 60th percentile. This rank is a holistic measure of the pair's ability to run this specific title, and it suggests that the duo provides a balanced, high-performance experience.

Given the game's release in 2016, this ranking makes sense. Inside is a puzzle platformer with stylized, low-polygon visuals that do not stress modern hardware as much as contemporary AAA titles. The RX 6750 XT, which sits at the 71st percentile of all GPUs according to its average benchmark score, is more than adequate for this game. The CPU, which is at the 89th percentile of all CPUs, provides a massive amount of processing headroom that prevents any potential stutter or frame drops related to physics or game logic.

The rank of 1151 out of 2887 suggests that many other combos, likely with higher-end GPUs, can achieve higher frame rates. However, the absolute performance here is so high that the ranking may be more a reflection of the game's low requirements than a deficiency in this specific pair. The data shows a system that is capable of delivering a flawless experience at any resolution, with the only question being how much headroom the user wants above their display's refresh rate. The 60th percentile ranking for this specific game is a strong indicator of excellent, if not absolute, top-tier performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system's capabilities across three resolutions and four settings presets.

At 1920x1080, the system demonstrates exceptional performance. The Low preset achieves an average of 353 FPS. The Medium preset averages 283 FPS, with a minimum of 240 FPS and a maximum of 325 FPS. The High preset averages 177 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 168 FPS. The performance delta between Low and Ultra is 185 FPS, showing that the graphical settings have a significant impact on the GPU workload even at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain very high. The Low preset averages 254 FPS. The Medium preset averages 203 FPS, with a minimum of 173 FPS and a maximum of 234 FPS. The High preset averages 127 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 121 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 133 FPS, but the system still comfortably exceeds 120 FPS on the most demanding settings.

At 3840x2160, the system begins to show the strain of rendering four times the pixels of 1080p. The Low preset averages 160 FPS. The Medium preset averages 128 FPS, with a minimum of 109 FPS and a maximum of 147 FPS. The High preset averages 80 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 76 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 84 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K is the only configuration that dips below the 60 FPS threshold, but it still stays well above it with an average of 76 FPS.

The data shows a consistent pattern: each step up in resolution reduces the average frame rate by a similar percentage across all settings, confirming a GPU-bound scenario. The Medium preset is the only one with min/max data, and the spread between the minimum and maximum frames is significant, suggesting some variance in frame pacing, though the average remains high.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT plays the central role in determining the frame rate ceiling for this game at higher resolutions. The GPU's 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus provides 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is more than sufficient for the textures and assets in Inside at any resolution tested. The data shows no indication of VRAM limitations, as the performance scaling is consistent across all settings, which would not be the case if the GPU were running out of memory at 4K.

The GPU's clock speeds are a key factor in its performance. The base clock is 2150 MHz, the game clock is 2495 MHz, and the boost clock is 2600 MHz. These high clocks, combined with 2560 shading units and 160 texture mapping units, allow the card to process the game's simple geometry very quickly. The 64 ROPs are responsible for the final pixel output, and their throughput directly impacts the resolution scaling we see. The pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s is the theoretical limit, and the data shows that the card approaches this limit at lower resolutions, where the CPU can feed it frames fast enough.

The GPU's benchmark scores further contextualize its performance. The passmark G3D score of 20700 and the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2548 indicate a mid-range to upper-mid-range graphics card. Its percentile ranking of 71 against all GPUs confirms this. For a game like Inside, which does not feature heavy ray tracing or complex shader effects, the RX 6750 XT's raw rasterization power is more than enough. The 40 ray tracing cores and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate are present, but they are not a significant factor for this title's rendering style. The data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K, but it is a very capable limiter, still delivering playable frame rates on the highest settings.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the ideal settings depend entirely on the target resolution and refresh rate. For users with a 60Hz or 144Hz display, the system offers multiple paths to a perfect experience.

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset is the best choice for maximum visual fidelity. The average of 76 FPS is well above the 60 FPS target for standard displays. For those with a high-refresh-rate 4K monitor, the Medium preset is recommended, as its 128 FPS average is significantly higher and provides a smoother experience, while still looking substantially better than Low. The High preset at 80 FPS is a middle ground, but Medium offers a larger performance jump for a minimal visual difference in a game with such a stylized art direction.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset is the clear winner. The average of 121 FPS is high enough for most 120Hz or 144Hz monitors, and it provides the best image quality. The High preset at 127 FPS is nearly identical in performance, but Ultra offers the full range of effects. The Medium preset at 203 FPS is overkill for most displays and would only be necessary for a 240Hz monitor. The data suggests that users at 1440p should not compromise and should select Ultra for the best experience.

At 1920x1080, the situation is similar. The Ultra preset at 168 FPS is the best choice for 144Hz and 165Hz monitors. For 240Hz displays, the High preset at 177 FPS provides a marginal improvement, but the Medium preset at 283 FPS is the only one that can truly take advantage of such a high refresh rate. Given that the visual difference between High and Ultra is often minimal in this game, the Ultra preset is the recommended default for 1080p, as it clears the 144Hz bar with room to spare. The Low preset is only useful for competitive play at extreme refresh rates, but the performance gain over Ultra is not worth the significant visual downgrade.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is the unsung hero in this configuration. While the GPU determines the peak frame rate at high resolutions, the CPU ensures that the GPU is never starved of data, particularly at 1080p where the system achieves incredibly high frame rates. The CPU's architecture, Arrow Lake, is built on a 3 nm process and features 14 cores and 14 threads. The core configuration is a mix of performance and efficiency cores, but the lack of multi-threading means the thread count equals the core count.

The CPU's clock speeds are crucial for gaming performance. The base clock is 3.40 GHz, and the boost clock is 5.00 GHz. This high boost clock, combined with a strong single-core Cinebench R23 score of 2085, allows the CPU to handle the game's main thread and any physics calculations with ease. The PassMark single-thread score of 4516 further reinforces this, showing that the CPU's single-core performance is in the top tier. This is exactly what a game like Inside needs, as its puzzle-platformer gameplay likely relies on a single primary game thread.

The CPU's cache hierarchy, with 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core, provides low-latency access to frequently used data. This is another factor that contributes to the high frame rates at 1080p. The CPU's memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s via dual-channel DDR5 is also more than sufficient for feeding the GPU. The data shows that the CPU is not a bottleneck at any resolution, as the FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K is consistently GPU-bound. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see similar frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, but the data shows a clear 28% drop, indicating the GPU is doing the heavy lifting. The CPU's percentile ranking of 89 against all CPUs highlights its strength, and its average benchmark score of 46062 places it in the same league as high-end mobile processors like the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375. For Inside, this CPU provides an immense amount of headroom, ensuring that the system's performance is limited only by the graphics card, which is the ideal scenario for a gaming PC.