Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer that, on this hardware pairing, runs at extremely high frame rates across all tested configurations. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 combination produces average FPS figures that range from a low of 126 at 4K Ultra to a high of 413 at 1080p Low, indicating that the game presents minimal challenge to this modern desktop setup. The data suggests that the primary differentiator between settings is not playability, but rather the pursuit of maximum refresh rate headroom, as even the most demanding preset at the highest resolution remains comfortably above standard display refresh rates.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data for this combination reveals a clear hierarchy where the Ultra preset at 4K delivers 126 FPS, which is still well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, yet it is the only configuration that drops below the 130 FPS mark. For users with high-refresh-rate displays, particularly those at 144 Hz or above, the High preset offers a more compelling balance, providing 133 FPS at 4K, 211 FPS at 1440p, and 294 FPS at 1080p. These figures suggest that High is the optimal preset for maintaining consistently high frame rates without sacrificing the visual fidelity that the game’s atmospheric puzzle-platformer design benefits from.

Interestingly, the Medium preset at 4K produces an average of 212 FPS with a minimum of 181 FPS and maximum of 244 FPS, which is notably higher than the High preset at the same resolution. This counterintuitive result indicates that the gap between Medium and High settings is substantial in terms of rendering cost, while the visual difference may be less pronounced. The Low preset, while delivering the highest frame rates of 265 FPS at 4K, 370 FPS at 1440p, and 413 FPS at 1080p, likely strips away ambient effects and shadows that contribute to the game’s signature moody atmosphere.

For competitive or speedrun play, the Low preset at 1080p with 413 FPS provides the absolute maximum responsiveness, potentially reducing input latency on very high refresh rate monitors. However, for the majority of players, the High preset appears to be the sweet spot, as it maintains frame rates above 130 FPS even at 4K, while presumably preserving the visual design that makes Inside’s world so distinctive. The Ultra preset, with its 126 FPS at 4K and 280 FPS at 1080p, offers marginal visual gains but costs roughly 5% performance compared to High, making it a reasonable choice only for those who prioritize image quality over frame rate headroom.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 features 14 cores and 14 threads, operating at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. This processor architecture, built on a 3 nm process with 17,800 million transistors, delivers strong single-thread performance as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2085. For a game like Inside, which is a side-scrolling puzzle platformer with relatively modest CPU demands, the single-thread performance is likely the more critical factor, as the game’s physics and logic typically rely on fewer threads. The processor’s percentile ranking of 89 among all CPUs indicates that it outperforms the majority of available processors, though its multi-threaded capabilities, shown by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14769, are not heavily taxed by this title.

The benchmark results show that the CPU’s nearest rivals in average score are the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 and the Intel Core i9-13900HX, with delta percentages of 0.1% and -0.1%, respectively. This places the Ultra 5 235 in a competitive position, but the measured FPS data suggests that the CPU is rarely the bottleneck in Inside. At 1080p Low, where CPU load is typically highest relative to GPU load, the system achieves 413 FPS, which indicates that the processor can keep up with the GPU’s output at lower resolutions. The 24 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth provide adequate data throughput for the game’s asset streaming, though the game’s 2016 release date means it was designed for far less capable hardware.

The fact that the FPS scales consistently across resolutions—from 413 FPS at 1080p Low to 265 FPS at 4K Low—shows that the CPU maintains its performance headroom even as the GPU workload increases. This suggests that the Core Ultra 5 235 is more than sufficient for Inside, and any frame rate differences between settings are primarily driven by GPU rendering load rather than CPU limitations. The processor’s 14 threads, while beneficial for modern multi-threaded applications, are underutilized in this title, as evidenced by the relatively small performance delta between Low and High settings at the same resolution, which is more indicative of GPU-side effects.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, based on the Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm process and 45,900 million transistors, provides the bulk of the rendering power for this combination. With 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 716.8 GB/s of bandwidth, the GPU has ample resources for Inside’s relatively simple graphics. The boost clock of 2505 MHz and 9728 shading units contribute to the card’s impressive compute capabilities, including 48.74 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The GPU’s percentile ranking of 86 among all GPUs places it in the upper echelon, though its nearest rivals include the RTX 4080 SUPER with a delta of 0.1%, indicating that this card is only slightly behind its direct successor.

The VRAM capacity of 16 GB is more than sufficient for a game of Inside’s visual complexity, as even at 4K Ultra, the game does not appear to be memory-constrained. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra is 126, which is likely limited by the GPU’s raw compute power rather than memory bandwidth, given that the card’s 716.8 GB/s bandwidth is far above what this game would require. The RTX 4080’s 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores are present for ray tracing and DLSS features, but Inside does not utilize these technologies, meaning the GPU’s traditional rasterization performance is the primary factor.

The scaling from High to Ultra settings provides insight into the GPU’s capabilities. At 4K, High yields 133 FPS while Ultra yields 126 FPS, a drop of approximately 5.3%, which suggests that the Ultra preset introduces additional pixel shading or post-processing effects that impact the GPU. At 1080p, the difference is more pronounced in relative terms, with High at 294 FPS and Ultra at 280 FPS, a 4.8% reduction. This consistency indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor at all resolutions, as the CPU’s performance headroom remains constant. The GPU’s end-of-life production status and 320 W TDP are notable, but they do not affect the measured performance, which remains high across all settings.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 achieves a rank of 127 out of 3716 tested combos for Inside, placing it in the top 3.4% of all configurations in the database. This high ranking reflects the exceptional performance of both components, though the game’s low system requirements mean that even mid-range hardware can achieve playable frame rates. The rank indicates that this specific pairing is among the fastest for this title, with the RTX 4080’s GPU performance being the primary driver of the high placement.

Compared to the CPU’s overall percentile of 89 and the GPU’s percentile of 86, the combo rank of 127 out of 3716 suggests that the pairing is well-matched, with neither component significantly bottlenecking the other. The fact that the CPU’s nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375, has a nearly identical average score (46030 vs 46062) and the GPU’s nearest rival, the RTX 4080 SUPER, has a similar score (54209 vs 54247), indicates that small variations in component choice would likely result in similar combo rankings. The data implies that for Inside, the GPU is the more critical component, as the game’s frame rates are more sensitive to resolution and settings changes than to CPU clock speeds.

The rank of 127 out of 3716 also suggests that there are 126 configurations that outperform this combo, likely featuring higher-end GPUs such as the RTX 4090 or newer generations. However, given that the measured FPS at 4K Ultra is 126, the practical difference between this combo and higher-ranked ones would be marginal, as the game is already running far above playable thresholds. The combo’s performance is sufficient to max out most displays, and the ranking reflects its position in the upper tier of tested hardware.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this combo?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 413, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. The lowest average FPS is 126, recorded at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the High preset delivers an average of 133 FPS, while the Ultra preset delivers 126 FPS, a difference of approximately 5.3%. This suggests that Ultra adds rendering effects that cost roughly 7 FPS compared to High.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor, as FPS scales consistently with resolution changes. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 413 FPS, and at 4K Low, it achieves 265 FPS, which aligns with GPU workload scaling rather than CPU limitations.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for any configuration?

A: The only configuration with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values is Medium settings. At 3840x2160 Medium, the minimum is 181 FPS and the maximum is 244 FPS. At 2560x1440 Medium, the minimum is 287 FPS and maximum is 389 FPS. At 1920x1080 Medium, the minimum is 324 FPS and maximum is 439 FPS.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations?

A: This combo ranks 127th out of 3716 tested combinations for Inside, placing it in the top 3.4% of all configurations in the database.

Q: Does the RTX 4080's 16 GB VRAM affect performance in Inside?

A: The 16 GB GDDR6X memory is far more than required for Inside, as the game does not appear to be memory-constrained at any tested setting. The FPS differences between settings are more likely due to compute load rather than VRAM capacity.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the resolution with the highest frame rates, the Low preset achieves an average of 413 FPS, while Medium reaches 381 FPS with a minimum of 324 and maximum of 439 FPS. High settings at 1080p produce 294 FPS, and Ultra drops to 280 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a clear performance cost, with Ultra being 32.2% slower than Low at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates decrease as expected. Low settings deliver 370 FPS, Medium produces 338 FPS with a minimum of 287 and maximum of 389 FPS, High achieves 211 FPS, and Ultra drops to 201 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p results in a 10.4% reduction for Low, a 11.3% reduction for Medium, a 28.2% reduction for High, and a 28.2% reduction for Ultra, indicating that the higher settings are more sensitive to resolution increases.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates are the lowest but remain highly playable. Low settings deliver 265 FPS, Medium produces 212 FPS with a minimum of 181 and maximum of 244 FPS, High achieves 133 FPS, and Ultra drops to 126 FPS. The 4K resolution represents a significant increase in GPU load, with Low settings seeing a 35.8% reduction from 1080p, and High settings seeing a 54.8% reduction. The data shows that even at the most demanding configuration, the combo maintains an average above 120 FPS, making it suitable for high refresh rate gaming.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals distinct scaling patterns across resolutions. From 1080p to 1440p, the Low preset drops from 413 FPS to 370 FPS, a 10.4% reduction, while the High preset drops from 294 FPS to 211 FPS, a 28.2% reduction. From 1440p to 4K, the Low preset falls from 370 FPS to 265 FPS, a 28.4% reduction, and the High preset falls from 211 FPS to 133 FPS, a 37.0% reduction. These differences indicate that the GPU is increasingly the limiting factor at higher resolutions, with the Low preset showing more linear scaling due to reduced shading complexity.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K for each setting is as follows: Low drops by 35.8%, Medium drops by 44.4%, High drops by 54.8%, and Ultra drops by 55.0%. The fact that Ultra and High have nearly identical percentage drops suggests that these presets are bound by similar GPU resources, likely pixel fill rate and shader execution. The Low and Medium presets, with their lower computational demands, show smaller relative drops, indicating that the CPU may play a slightly larger role at these settings, though the absolute FPS values remain far above playable thresholds.

This scaling behavior points to the GPU as the dominant bottleneck, as the frame rate reductions are roughly proportional to the increase in pixel count. From 1080p (2.07 million pixels) to 4K (8.29 million pixels), the pixel count quadruples, and the observed FPS reductions of 35-55% are less than the 75% that pure pixel scaling would predict. This suggests that the GPU has spare capacity at lower resolutions, and the game’s rendering complexity does not scale linearly with resolution. The data implies that for users with 4K displays, the High preset is the most efficient choice, as it provides 133 FPS while Ultra only offers a marginal improvement in visual quality for a 5.3% performance cost.