Inside

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 combination produces a highly capable setup for Inside, a 2016 puzzle platformer that is far more dependent on raw frame throughput than modern AAA titles. The measured data shows this pairing lands at rank 2253 out of 2887 tested combos, placing it in the 22nd percentile of all configurations. That ranking might sound modest, but the actual gameplay experience tells a different story: at 1080p, this combo never drops below 122 FPS even on the most demanding preset, and it scales up to a blistering 256 FPS on Low settings. The bottleneck here is almost entirely the GPU, while the CPU sits comfortably with headroom to spare, making this an ideal match for a game that prioritizes smooth, consistent motion over raw compute.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's position at 2253 out of 2887 tested configurations reflects a mid-pack standing in the overall database, but context is critical. This ranking aggregates every game and workload tested, and Inside is a lightweight title by modern standards. The data shows the GPU holds the 58th percentile among all graphics cards, while the CPU sits much higher at the 90th percentile among all processors. That disparity explains why the combo's game-specific rank is lower than the CPU's percentile: the GPU is the limiting factor.

When examining the GPU's nearest rivals, the performance clustering is remarkably tight. The RTX 2060 averages a benchmark score of 15290, which is within 0.8% of the AMD Radeon RX 7600 and just 0.6% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM. The data shows the RTX 2060 essentially ties the legacy GeForce GTX 580 (deltaPct of 0) and sits a hair ahead of the AMD Radeon 680M integrated solution (0.1% delta). This tight grouping means that in Inside, the differences between these GPUs would be nearly imperceptible, especially given the game's relatively modest graphical demands.

On the CPU side, the Core Ultra 5 245 shows a similar pattern of close competition. Its average benchmark score of 48995 places it within 0.8% of the Intel Core i5-14600K, with deltaPct values ranging from -0.5% against the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 to +0.8% against the i5-14600K. The CPU's 90th percentile standing across all processors underscores that this chip is not the constraint in this pairing. For Inside, the combo rank is ultimately a reflection of the GPU's mid-tier positioning, not a commentary on the CPU's capability. The measured FPS data confirms that even at 4K Ultra, the combo delivers 55 FPS average, which is playable, and at 1080p it far exceeds any display's refresh rate requirements.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 brings substantial processing power to this pairing, featuring 14 cores and 14 threads running at a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. This Arrow Lake-S architecture chip, built on a TSMC 3 nm process, includes 24 MB of shared L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The CPU's benchmark results are telling: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32924 and a single-core score of 4648 indicate strong all-around performance, while the PassMark single-thread score of 4394 confirms excellent responsiveness for games that rely on a few fast cores.

For Inside, which is a side-scrolling puzzle platformer with physics-based interactions, the CPU's role is primarily about maintaining consistent frame pacing rather than breaking performance records. The game's mechanics involve moving environmental objects, manipulating water and electricity, and managing dynamic lighting — all tasks that benefit from solid single-thread performance but rarely stress more than a handful of cores. The data shows the CPU's PassMark physics score of 2569 and floating-point math score of 120548, which are moderate figures, but they are more than sufficient for this title's demands.

The Core Ultra 5 245's 90th percentile ranking among all CPUs means it outperforms the vast majority of processors in the database, and its nearest rivals — including the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 and Intel Core i5-14600K — are all within a fraction of a percent in average score. This performance headroom means the CPU will never be the limiting factor in Inside, even at 4K resolution where the GPU is clearly the bottleneck. The CPU's 65 W TDP and integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU provide additional flexibility, though the discrete RTX 2060 handles all rendering duties in this configuration.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is the workhorse in this pairing, and its specifications reveal why it lands at the 58th percentile among all GPUs. The TU106 chip, built on TSMC's 12 nm process, features 1920 shading units, 120 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs, with 30 RT cores and 240 Tensor cores for accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The GPU clocks at 1365 MHz base and 1680 MHz boost, paired with 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus delivering 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This configuration produces 6.451 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and a pixel rate of 80.64 GPixel/s.

For Inside, the GPU's role is more about raw fill rate and memory bandwidth than advanced features. The game's art style uses stark silhouettes, volumetric fog, and dynamic water physics, all of which benefit from the GPU's 201.6 GTexel/s texture rate. The 6 GB VRAM is more than adequate for this title, as the game's maximum memory footprint is modest. The GPU's benchmark scores show a PassMark G3D score of 14111 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 65014, both indicating solid mid-range performance that aligns with its percentile ranking.

The RTX 2060's nearest rivals are informative: it essentially ties the GeForce GTX 580 (0% delta), which confirms how far GPU technology has advanced since that card's era. The data also shows it sits just 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon 680M integrated graphics and 0.6% ahead of the RTX 3050 OEM, but 0.8% behind the Radeon RX 7600. These tiny deltas mean that in Inside, the RTX 2060's performance is effectively indistinguishable from these competitors. The GPU's 12 nm process node and 160 W TDP are older-generation attributes, but they don't detract from its ability to deliver excellent frame rates in this game.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rate data for this combo reveals a clear pattern: performance scales predictably with resolution and settings, with the GPU consistently being the limiting factor. At 1920x1080, the most common gaming resolution, the results are exceptional across the board. On Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 256 FPS, which drops to 205 FPS on Medium (with a minimum of 174 FPS and maximum of 236 FPS), 128 FPS on High, and 122 FPS on Ultra. These numbers indicate that even at the highest preset, the game runs well above the 60 FPS threshold, and on lower settings it approaches the refresh rate limits of most high-end monitors.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance remains strong but shows the GPU starting to work harder. Low settings deliver 184 FPS average, Medium drops to 147 FPS (min 125, max 169), High produces 92 FPS, and Ultra manages 88 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra at this resolution is minimal, suggesting diminishing returns from the highest preset. At 4K resolution (3840x2160), the scaling becomes more pronounced. Low settings still deliver a smooth 116 FPS average, Medium produces 93 FPS (min 79, max 106), but High drops to 58 FPS and Ultra falls to 55 FPS. These 4K numbers are still playable, but the difference between Low and Ultra is substantial — a 61 FPS swing that highlights the GPU's limitations at higher resolutions.

The data shows a consistent pattern: at every resolution, the jump from Low to Medium costs roughly half the frame rate, while the jump from High to Ultra costs much less. This suggests that the Ultra preset adds graphical features that are particularly demanding on the GPU's 6 GB VRAM and 192-bit memory bus. The minimum FPS figures recorded for Medium settings at all three resolutions (79 FPS at 4K, 125 FPS at 1440p, 174 FPS at 1080p) indicate that even in the most demanding scenes, the combo maintains playable frame rates without stutter.

FAQ

*Q: Can this combo run Inside at 4K resolution smoothly?*

A: Yes, but only on lower settings. The measured data shows 116 FPS average at 4K Low and 93 FPS at 4K Medium, both well above the 60 FPS threshold. However, at 4K High the average drops to 58 FPS and at Ultra it falls to 55 FPS, which are borderline for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the RTX 2060 compare to its closest rivals in this game?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 15290 is within 0.8% of the AMD Radeon RX 7600 and 0.6% of the RTX 3050 OEM. It essentially ties the GTX 580 (0% delta) and sits just 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon 680M. In Inside, these differences would be negligible.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this configuration?

A: The GPU is clearly the bottleneck. The CPU ranks at the 90th percentile among all processors, while the GPU sits at the 58th percentile. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32924 and single-core score of 4648 far exceed what Inside requires, while the GPU's 4K performance suggests it is working near its limits.

*Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Inside?*

A: The data shows 2560x1440 offers the best balance of visual quality and performance. At this resolution, the combo delivers 92 FPS on High and 88 FPS on Ultra, while 1080p pushes well above 120 FPS on all settings. 4K is playable but requires Low or Medium settings for smooth performance.

Q: Does the Ultra preset provide a meaningful improvement over High?

A: The performance difference is minimal. At 1080p, Ultra averages 122 FPS versus 128 FPS on High, a mere 6 FPS difference. At 1440p, the gap narrows to just 4 FPS (88 vs 92), and at 4K it is only 3 FPS (55 vs 58). The visual improvements from Ultra are not worth the negligible frame rate cost.

Q: How does this combo perform at 1080p with a high refresh rate monitor?

A: Exceptionally well. The measured data shows 256 FPS on Low, 205 FPS on Medium, 128 FPS on High, and 122 FPS on Ultra at 1920x1080. This means the combo can drive a 144 Hz monitor on High settings and approach 240 Hz on Medium or Low settings.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured frame rate data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and refresh rate. At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers 128 FPS average, which is ideal for 120 Hz displays, while the Ultra preset drops to 122 FPS — a negligible difference. For 144 Hz monitors, the Medium preset's 205 FPS provides sufficient headroom, and even Low at 256 FPS is viable for competitive play. The data suggests that High is the sweet spot at 1080p: it offers the best visual quality per frame rate cost, with only a 6 FPS penalty versus Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the High preset produces 92 FPS, which is excellent for 90 Hz displays but falls short of 120 Hz. The Medium preset at 147 FPS is better suited for 144 Hz monitors, offering a 55 FPS improvement over High with a noticeable but acceptable visual downgrade. The Ultra preset at 88 FPS is not recommended, as it provides no meaningful frame rate advantage over High (only 4 FPS difference) while adding graphical load. For 4K resolution, the choice is starker: Low at 116 FPS is the only setting that delivers smooth performance on 60 Hz displays, while Medium at 93 FPS offers a solid experience. High at 58 FPS and Ultra at 55 FPS are borderline and should be avoided in favor of Medium.

The aggregate data points to a clear recommendation: for the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, use the High preset at 1080p or 1440p. The Ultra preset is not worth the small frame rate penalty, and the Medium preset is the fallback option at 4K or for users with high refresh rate displays at 1440p. The measured minimum FPS figures for Medium settings (174 FPS at 1080p, 125 FPS at 1440p, and 79 FPS at 4K) confirm that this preset maintains smooth frame pacing even in demanding scenes, making it the most reliable choice across all resolutions.