Inside

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 combination delivers a remarkably smooth experience in Inside, a 2016 puzzle platformer that is far more demanding on frame pacing than on raw geometry. The dataset shows that this pairing is capable of pushing very high refresh rates, but the scaling pattern between resolutions reveals a clear transition from CPU-bound to GPU-bound behavior as pixel count increases. At 1080p, the system is almost certainly held back by the processor, while at 4K, the graphics card becomes the primary governor of performance. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS data across all four settings presets and three resolutions, contextualizes the CPU and GPU roles, and ranks the combo against the broader database.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a dramatic drop as resolution increases, which is typical for a game like Inside with its stylized, low-poly aesthetic but heavy use of post-processing effects. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces an average of 296 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops that to 213 FPS, a reduction of 28%. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls to 134 FPS, which is 55% lower than the 1080p figure. This scaling behavior suggests that at 1080p, the CPU is doing most of the heavy lifting, as the RTX 5050 has ample headroom to render frames far faster than the processor can feed it.

The High preset tells a similar story but with a gentler slope. At 1080p High, the average is 148 FPS. At 1440p High, it drops to 106 FPS (a 28% reduction), and at 4K High, it lands at 67 FPS (a 55% reduction from 1080p). The consistency of these percentage drops across Low and High presets is telling: the game’s rendering load scales almost linearly with pixel count, and the RTX 5050’s 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 128-bit bus are not causing any unexpected bottlenecks at these settings.

Ultra settings amplify the GPU load further. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 141 FPS, which is only 5% slower than High. At 1440p Ultra, it drops to 101 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it bottoms out at 64 FPS. The gap between 1440p and 4K at Ultra is 37%, which is steeper than the 28% drop seen at Low. This indicates that the Ultra preset introduces additional shading work that disproportionately taxes the GPU at higher resolutions. The data suggests that 4K Ultra is the first configuration where the RTX 5050 truly hits its limit, with the 64 FPS average hovering near the edge of what is considered smooth for a platformer.

The Medium preset is the only one with full min/max FPS data, providing a clearer picture of frame pacing. At 1080p Medium, the average is 237 FPS, with a minimum of 201 and a maximum of 272. At 1440p Medium, the average is 170 FPS, with a range of 145 to 196. At 4K Medium, the average is 107 FPS, with a range of 91 to 123. The minimum FPS at 4K Medium (91) is still well above the 60 FPS threshold, indicating that even in the most demanding scenes, this combo maintains fluid motion. The variance between min and max is roughly 15% at each resolution, which is tight and suggests consistent frame delivery without major stutters.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured results, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target display refresh rate. For 1080p users with a 144 Hz monitor, the High preset at 148 FPS is the sweet spot, as it delivers near-maximum refresh without the unnecessary overhead of Ultra, which only gains 7 FPS (141 vs 148) but likely adds visual noise. The Low preset at 296 FPS is overkill for any current display and sacrifices visual fidelity for a frame rate that no monitor can showcase. Medium at 237 FPS is also excessive, but it does offer a 60% improvement over High, which might appeal to competitive players using 240 Hz panels, though Inside is not a competitive title.

For 1440p, the High preset at 106 FPS is the most balanced choice for a 100 Hz or 120 Hz monitor. Ultra at 101 FPS is nearly identical in performance, so the choice between High and Ultra comes down to personal preference for shadow quality and post-processing. Low at 213 FPS is again unnecessary, and Medium at 170 FPS is only useful if the display supports 165 Hz or higher. The data shows that 1440p High is the most efficient configuration, offering 63% of the 1080p High frame rate while providing a significantly sharper image.

At 4K, the Medium preset at 107 FPS is the clear winner. It is the only setting that breaks the 100 FPS barrier at this resolution, and its minimum of 91 FPS ensures no dips below the 90 FPS threshold. High at 67 FPS is playable but feels sluggish compared to Medium, and Ultra at 64 FPS is only marginally worse. Low at 134 FPS is technically the fastest, but it strips away the atmospheric lighting and shadow effects that make Inside visually compelling. For a game that relies on moody lighting and subtle environmental storytelling, Medium at 4K is the recommended balance between visual fidelity and fluidity, offering 107 FPS average with a tight 91–123 FPS range.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32924 and single-core score of 4648 indicate strong all-around performance, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs tested. In Inside, which is a lightly threaded game, the single-core performance is paramount, and the 5.10 GHz boost clock ensures that the CPU is rarely the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

At 1080p, however, the CPU’s role becomes more prominent. The jump from 296 FPS at Low to 237 FPS at Medium (a 20% drop) is larger than the drop from Medium to High (148 FPS, a 38% drop from Medium). This suggests that at Low settings, the CPU is feeding frames as fast as possible, and the GPU is idle waiting for work. The 14 cores and 14 threads are more than sufficient for Inside’s physics and logic, but the lack of hyperthreading (14 threads equals 14 cores) means that the processor relies on raw clock speed rather than parallel efficiency. The 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 cache help keep frequently accessed game data close, reducing latency.

The comparison to nearest rivals shows the Ultra 5 245 is competitive but not dominant. Its average benchmark score of 48995 is 0.4% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196) and 0.5% lower than the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228). It is 0.6% higher than the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48698) and 0.8% higher than the Intel Core i5-14600K (48618). These sub-1% differences are negligible in gaming, and the Ultra 5 245’s high boost clock gives it an edge in single-threaded workloads like Inside. The 65 W TDP and 3 nm process node also mean it runs cool, allowing sustained boost clocks without thermal throttling, which is critical for maintaining those high 1080p frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of 2887 tested CPU-GPU combinations for Inside, this pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 ranks 1719th. This places it in the bottom 40% of all combos, which seems counterintuitive given the high frame rates measured. The explanation lies in the nature of the game and the database. Inside is an older title with low system requirements, so many older or lower-end GPUs can achieve high frame rates, especially at 1080p. The RTX 5050, while competent, is not a high-end card; it sits in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, and its closest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (1.6% higher score) and the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (0.6% lower). The CPU, while strong, is also not top-tier, ranking in the 90th percentile but still behind flagship processors.

The rank of 1719 out of 2887 suggests that many combos with older, cheaper CPUs and GPUs can match or exceed this system’s performance in Inside, simply because the game is not demanding. However, the measured FPS data tells a more nuanced story. At 4K Ultra, this combo achieves 64 FPS, which is likely better than many older combos that would struggle at that resolution. The rank is a reflection of the entire combo’s performance across all settings, and the high frame rates at 1080p are offset by the fact that many other CPUs can also hit 200+ FPS. The RTX 5050’s 8 GB VRAM and 320 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for Inside, but the card’s overall compute power (13.17 TFLOPS FP32) is modest, which limits its 4K Ultra performance.

FAQ

*Q: Can this combo run Inside at 4K with maximum settings?*

A: Yes, but just barely. At 3840x2160 Ultra, the average FPS is 64, which is above the 60 FPS threshold, but there is no min FPS data to confirm frame stability. The Medium preset at 4K offers a more comfortable 107 FPS average with a minimum of 91 FPS.

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

A: At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers 148 FPS, which is just above 144 Hz. The Medium preset at 237 FPS is also viable if the monitor supports higher refresh rates, but High offers better visual quality at a frame rate that matches the display.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The data indicates the CPU is the bottleneck at 1080p Low, where the average is 296 FPS. The GPU is capable of rendering faster, but the CPU’s single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4648) limits the frame delivery. At higher resolutions, the GPU becomes the limiting factor.

Q: How does this combo compare to the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 in CPU performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 has an average benchmark score of 48995, which is 0.5% lower than the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228). This difference is negligible for gaming, and the Ultra 5 245’s higher boost clock (5.10 GHz) may give it an edge in Inside’s single-threaded workload.

Q: What is the minimum FPS at 1440p Medium?

A: The minimum FPS at 2560x1440 Medium is 145, with a maximum of 196 and an average of 170. This tight range indicates stable performance without significant dips.

*Q: Is 8 GB of VRAM sufficient for Inside at 4K?*

A: Yes, the measured data shows that 4K Ultra runs at 64 FPS with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory. The game’s art style does not require large texture sets, so VRAM is not a limiting factor at any resolution tested.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table summarizes all measured average FPS values across resolutions and settings:

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

|------------|----------|---------|---------|---------|

| 1920x1080 | Low | 296 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 237 | 201 | 272 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 148 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 141 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 213 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 170 | 145 | 196 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 106 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 101 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 134 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 107 | 91 | 123 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 67 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 64 | — | — |

At 1080p, the spread from Low to Ultra is 155 FPS (296 down to 141), showing that the CPU can push very high frame rates but the GPU’s rendering load grows with each preset. At 1440p, the spread narrows to 112 FPS (213 down to 101), and at 4K, it narrows further to 70 FPS (134 down to 64). This compression of frame rates at higher resolutions confirms that the RTX 5050 is the dominant constraint at 4K, while at 1080p, the Ultra 5 245’s processing power is the primary driver of performance. The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data, and its consistency across all three resolutions (15% variance) makes it the most predictable setting for frame pacing. The 4K Medium configuration, with 107 FPS average and 91 FPS minimum, is the recommended target for users who prioritize both visual quality and smoothness on a 4K display.