Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer that, on paper, should be trivial for modern hardware. However, the measured data for the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H paired with the AMD Radeon 760M paints a more nuanced picture, revealing a configuration that is heavily constrained by its integrated graphics solution. The benchmark results indicate a system that can deliver playable frame rates at lower resolutions and settings, but which struggles to maintain smooth performance at higher visual fidelity. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS data to explain where the bottlenecks lie and what users can expect from this specific mobile combo.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all settings, clearly identifying the AMD Radeon 760M as the primary limiting factor. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 48 FPS at 1920x1080 to 34 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 14 FPS. Moving to 3840x2160, the average drops further to 22 FPS, which is a 54% decrease from the 1080p baseline. This pattern is typical of a GPU-bound scenario: as the pixel count increases, the rendering workload on the integrated GPU scales dramatically, while the CPU has ample headroom to keep feeding it data.

The scaling from 1440p to 4K is even more punishing. At Low settings, the average FPS is 69 at 2560x1440, but it plummets to 43 at 3840x2160. This 26 FPS drop for a single resolution step indicates that the 760M's shading units, texture units, and render output units are saturated. The data suggests that the 760M is not just slightly weak for 4K; it is fundamentally outclassed at that resolution, regardless of the quality preset. The gap between 1080p and 1440p is also significant, with a 21 FPS difference at Low settings (96 FPS vs. 69 FPS), showing that even a moderate resolution increase has a major impact on the integrated GPU's throughput.

The frame time consistency also degrades with resolution. At Medium settings, the 1080p run shows an average of 77 FPS with a minimum of 65 FPS and a maximum of 88 FPS, a spread of 23 FPS. At 1440p, the same settings yield an average of 55 FPS with a spread from 47 to 63 FPS. At 4K, the average falls to 35 FPS with a minimum of 29 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS. The narrowing range at higher resolutions suggests the GPU is constantly pegged at its limit, leaving little room for variance. This behavior points to a hard performance ceiling imposed by the GPU, not a dynamic bottleneck that shifts between components.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 760M is an integrated graphics processor based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on a 4 nm process. Its specifications—512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units—are the hardware foundation for the measured results. The boost clock of 2599 MHz is relatively high for an iGPU, but the sheer volume of pixel work at 4K overwhelms its 16 ROPs, which are responsible for the final pixel output. This is why the 4K results are so low; the GPU cannot physically output frames fast enough, even with a high boost clock.

The memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning the GPU uses a portion of the system's main memory instead of dedicated VRAM. The bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," which is a critical caveat. In this configuration with the Core Ultra 7 165H, the memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s. While this is sufficient for 1080p gaming, it becomes a severe bottleneck at higher resolutions where the GPU needs to access textures and frame buffers more frequently. The data supports this: the performance collapse between 1440p and 4K is characteristic of a GPU that is both compute-limited and memory-bandwidth-starved.

The GPU's benchmark scores reinforce its position. It sits in the 35th percentile of all GPUs and has an average benchmark score of 6019. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6400, scores 6001, a delta of 0.3%, which shows it is in the same performance tier as a discrete entry-level card. However, the 760M's performance is not consistent across different APIs; its Passmark DirectX 11 score of 52 is much higher than its DirectX 12 score of 25. This suggests that the driver and hardware are better optimized for older APIs, which is relevant since a 2016 title like Inside may not leverage modern API features to their full potential.

How This Combo Ranks

In the grand scheme of all tested hardware combinations for Inside, this pairing ranks at 2876 out of 2887 combos. This places it in the bottom 0.4% of all systems tested, meaning 2875 other CPU/GPU combinations deliver higher average frame rates in this specific game. This ranking is a stark indicator of the AMD Radeon 760M's limitations; it is not a mid-pack performer but is instead firmly at the bottom of the performance distribution. The fact that it is an integrated GPU competing against a field dominated by discrete graphics cards explains its low standing.

The combination's rank is driven almost entirely by the GPU. The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H is a high-end mobile processor, sitting in the 84th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 34083. Its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X, have similar average scores (34260, a delta of -0.5%), indicating the CPU is a powerful component. Yet, in this game, the CPU's strength is negated by the GPU's inability to render frames quickly enough. The combo rank of 2876 is not a reflection of the CPU's potential but a direct consequence of pairing a strong processor with a weak integrated graphics solution.

This rank is a crucial data point for context. While the absolute FPS numbers at 1080p Low (96 FPS) may sound acceptable, the rank shows that the overwhelming majority of systems can run Inside much faster. It highlights that while the experience is technically playable at low settings, it is far from a competitive or high-performance configuration. The data suggests that this system is designed for productivity and light workloads, not for gaming, and the rank is a clear warning to anyone expecting a smooth, high-fidelity experience in even a modestly demanding game.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Inside at 4K resolution?

A: Only at Low settings, where it achieves an average of 43 FPS. At Medium settings, the average drops to 35 FPS, and at High and Ultra, it falls to 22 FPS and 21 FPS, respectively. The data shows that 4K gaming is only marginally playable with reduced visual quality.

Q: What is the best resolution for a smooth experience?

A: The measured data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution that consistently delivers high frame rates. At Low settings, it reaches 96 FPS, and at Medium, it averages 77 FPS. These are the only configurations that provide a frame rate well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the CPU performance compare to its rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H has an average benchmark score of 34083, placing it in the 84th percentile. It is nearly identical in performance to the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H, which scores 33989, a delta of 0.3%. It is slightly ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X, which scores 34260, a delta of -0.5%.

Q: How does the GPU performance compare to a discrete graphics card?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M has an average benchmark score of 6019. This is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon RX 6400, which scores 6001, a delta of 0.3%. This indicates the integrated GPU performs similarly to a low-end discrete card in synthetic benchmarks.

Q: Does the GPU have its own dedicated memory?

A: No. The GPU's memory size, type, and bus width are all listed as "System Shared." Its bandwidth is "System Dependent," meaning it relies on the system's main memory and can be a limiting factor at higher resolutions.

Q: Is the performance consistent across different graphics APIs?

A: No. The GPU's Passmark DirectX 11 score is 52, while its DirectX 12 score is only 25. This significant difference suggests the hardware and drivers are better optimized for DirectX 11, which is relevant for a game released in 2016.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table details the exact average frame rates measured for the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H and AMD Radeon 760M combination in Inside:

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

| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |

| 3840x2160 | High | 22 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 43 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 35 | 29 | 40 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 21 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | High | 34 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 69 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 55 | 47 | 63 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 33 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | High | 48 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 96 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 77 | 65 | 88 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 46 | - | - |

The data reveals a clear hierarchy. At 1080p, there is a 50 FPS difference between Low (96 FPS) and Ultra (46 FPS) settings, showing that the GPU has enough headroom to allow for significant visual improvements. The step from Medium to High is a 29 FPS drop, while the step from High to Ultra is only a 2 FPS drop, suggesting that the Ultra preset is not much more demanding than High. At 1440p, the spread between Low and Ultra is 36 FPS, but the absolute numbers are lower. At 4K, the spread narrows to 22 FPS, with all settings struggling to maintain playable frame rates. The data shows that the Medium preset at 1080p is the most balanced configuration, offering an average of 77 FPS with a minimum of 65 FPS, which is still well within a smooth range.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H is a Meteor Lake processor with 16 cores and 22 threads, a base clock of 3.80 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its synthetic benchmark scores are robust, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14551 and a single-core score of 1759. This indicates a powerful processor capable of handling heavy multi-threaded workloads. However, the data for Inside shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor. The FPS scaling is almost entirely dependent on resolution, which is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck.

For a puzzle platformer like Inside, the CPU requirements are typically modest. The game's logic, physics, and entity management do not stress a high-end 16-core processor. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (96 FPS) could be higher, but the data shows that the GPU is already at its limit. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see the FPS remain relatively constant across different resolutions, as the CPU's work would be the same regardless of pixel count. Instead, the FPS drops significantly with each resolution increase, confirming that the CPU has ample spare capacity and is waiting on the GPU to deliver frames.

The processor's 24 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support provide a solid foundation for the system. Its Passmark multi-thread score of 25933 and single-thread score of 3509 are strong indicators of its capability. In this specific game, the CPU's role is to ensure the game logic runs without stutter, which it does. The bottleneck is unambiguously the AMD Radeon 760M. The data suggests that a user could pair this CPU with a much more powerful discrete GPU and see a massive improvement in frame rates, as the CPU would not hinder the GPU's performance in this title.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal configuration for this system in Inside is 1920x1080 with the Medium preset. This setting delivers an average of 77 FPS with a minimum of 65 FPS, ensuring smooth and consistent gameplay without significant frame drops. The jump from Low to Medium only costs 19 FPS (from 96 to 77), but it provides a noticeable improvement in visual quality. The High preset at 1080p, averaging 48 FPS, is playable but does not maintain a consistently smooth frame rate and may feel less responsive during fast-moving scenes.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset is the only viable option, yielding an average of 69 FPS. While this is playable, the minimum frame rate is not recorded, and the average is close to the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset at 1440p, averaging 55 FPS, is a borderline experience. The data shows that 4K resolution is not recommended for this game with this hardware. Even at Low settings, the average of 43 FPS is below the ideal smoothness threshold, and the High and Ultra presets at 21-22 FPS are not playable.

Therefore, the best experience per the measured rows is achieved by prioritizing resolution over settings. The system can handle 1080p at Medium settings with a high degree of smoothness. Users who prefer higher resolution should accept the Low preset at 1440p. The Ultra preset offers no significant benefit over High in terms of FPS (46 FPS vs. 48 FPS at 1080p) and is not a worthwhile trade-off for the performance hit it incurs at higher resolutions. The data clearly points to 1080p Medium as the sweet spot for this hardware combination.