Inside

The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H paired with the AMD Radeon 880M delivers a playable experience in Inside, but the data reveals a strict ceiling tied to resolution and graphics presets. The measured frame rates show a clear narrative: this is a system that excels at 1080p, struggles at 4K, and requires careful settings management to maintain smooth motion. The benchmark results indicate that the integrated GPU is the primary bottleneck, with the CPU’s considerable multi-core headroom going largely unused in this title.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and exposes the Radeon 880M’s limitations. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo averages 131 FPS, which is a fluid experience for a puzzle platformer. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same Low preset, the average falls to 94 FPS, a reduction of 37 FPS (about 28%). At 3840x2160, the Low preset yields 59 FPS, which is nearly half the 1080p figure. This scaling pattern is a classic sign of a GPU-bound workload, where the pixel count outpaces the shading units and ROPs of the integrated graphics.

The trend becomes more pronounced at higher presets. With High settings, the average drops from 66 FPS at 1080p to 47 FPS at 1440p, then to 30 FPS at 4K. That is a 55% loss from 1080p to 4K, indicating that the ROP throughput and texture rate of the 880M are overwhelmed as resolution increases. The Ultra preset shows a similar collapse: 62 FPS at 1080p, 45 FPS at 1440p, and 28 FPS at 4K. The data suggests that while the CPU’s 16 cores and 22 threads could theoretically handle more frames, the GPU’s 16 ROPs and 48 TMUs are the limiting factor, with pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s becoming the binding constraint at higher resolutions.

Notably, the Medium preset offers the only complete data set with min and max FPS. At 1080p, the average is 105 FPS with a minimum of 89 FPS and a maximum of 121 FPS. At 1440p, the average drops to 75 FPS with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 87 FPS. At 4K, the average is 47 FPS with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 55 FPS. The min FPS at 4K (40 FPS) is still above the 30 FPS threshold for playability, but the 18 FPS delta between the 1080p and 4K averages shows how quickly the experience degrades as pixel count climbs.

The scaling efficiency is poor at the top end. The jump from Medium to High at 1080p costs 39 FPS (from 105 to 66), while the jump from High to Ultra costs only 4 FPS (from 66 to 62). This indicates that the High preset is already hitting a hard performance wall, likely due to memory bandwidth constraints—the system shared memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," which is a critical weakness for an IGP that must share system DRAM. The 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth of the CPU is a theoretical ceiling, but actual performance will vary with the installed memory configuration.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 880M is the decisive component in this pairing. Its specifications—768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs—are modest for a modern integrated GPU, and its boost clock of 2900 MHz is high but insufficient to compensate for the low core count. The GPU’s FP32 performance of 4.454 TFLOPS places it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs, according to the benchmark data. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (deltaPct of 0.1) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (deltaPct of -0.3), which are both older discrete mobile parts. This tells us that the 880M competes with entry-level discrete GPUs from several years ago, not modern mid-range hardware.

In Inside, the GPU’s role is to handle the game’s 2.5D rendering, which includes dynamic lighting, shadows, and particle effects. The measured FPS data shows that the 880M’s 4.454 TFLOPS is enough for 1080p at Low (131 FPS) but not for 4K at Ultra (28 FPS). The VRAM situation is unique: the GPU uses "System Shared" memory, meaning it has no dedicated video memory. This is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it allows the GPU to access large amounts of system RAM, but on the other hand, it shares bandwidth with the CPU. The benchmark results indicate that this shared bandwidth is a bottleneck at high resolutions and settings. The 4K High preset (30 FPS) is virtually unplayable, while 4K Low (59 FPS) is borderline acceptable.

The GPU’s architecture, RDNA 3.5, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is beneficial for modern titles, but Inside was released in 2016 and does not heavily utilize such advanced features. The GPU’s Passmark G3D score of 7615 and its 43rd percentile ranking confirm its mid-to-low tier status. The data suggests that the 880M is well-matched to the CPU for 1080p gaming, but the CPU’s capabilities are largely wasted at higher resolutions where the GPU saturates. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14551 and single-core score of 1759 are strong, but the game does not seem to tax the processor, as evidenced by the FPS being solely limited by resolution and preset changes.

Settings Recommendations

The benchmark data offers clear guidance for the optimal experience. For 1080p, the Low preset (131 FPS) is overkill for a puzzle platformer, and the Medium preset (105 FPS) provides a better visual balance with a comfortable frame rate. The Medium preset’s minimum of 89 FPS ensures there are no noticeable drops, making it the recommended choice for smooth gameplay. The High preset at 66 FPS is still playable, but the 39 FPS loss from Medium suggests diminishing returns on visual quality. The Ultra preset (62 FPS) is not worth the additional GPU load, as the frame rate is only 4 FPS lower than High, but the visual uplift is likely marginal in a game with such a stark art style.

At 1440p, the Medium preset (75 FPS) is the sweet spot. The Low preset (94 FPS) is smoother but sacrifices visual fidelity, while the High preset (47 FPS) dips below the 60 FPS threshold that many players prefer. The Ultra preset (45 FPS) is too inconsistent for a game that relies on precise timing and environmental storytelling. For 4K, the data is harsh: only the Low preset (59 FPS) approaches playability. The Medium preset (47 FPS) is borderline, with a minimum of 40 FPS, but the High (30 FPS) and Ultra (28 FPS) presets are slideshows. The recommendation is to stick to 1080p Medium for the best experience, as the 105 FPS average with a 89 FPS minimum provides a stable platform. If a user insists on 1440p, Medium is the only viable option, and 4K should be avoided unless visual detail is sacrificed entirely.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of Intel Core Ultra 7 165H and AMD Radeon 880M ranks 2816 out of 2887 tested combos in Inside. That places it in the bottom 2.5% of all systems tested, which is a poor showing. The percentile data for the GPU (43rd) and CPU (84th) reveals a stark mismatch: the CPU is well above average, but the GPU drags the overall performance down. The combo rank reflects this imbalance, as the integrated GPU cannot leverage the CPU’s high multi-core throughput. The nearest rival for the GPU is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX, which has an average score of 8427 versus the 880M’s 8436, a delta of 0.1%. This means the 880M performs almost identically to a mobile GPU from 2012, which explains the low ranking.

The CPU’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H (deltaPct of 0.3) and the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X (deltaPct of -0.5), showing that the 165H is competitive with desktop parts from a few years ago. However, this CPU strength does not translate to gaming performance in Inside because the GPU is the bottleneck. The data suggests that pairing this CPU with a discrete GPU would yield far better results, but as configured, the combo is severely limited. The 2887 total combos tested means this system is in the bottom 71 positions, which is a clear indicator that it is not designed for high-end gaming at higher resolutions.

FAQ

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

A: At 4K, the Low preset averages 59 FPS, which is playable, but the Medium preset drops to 47 FPS, and High/Ultra fall to 30 FPS and 28 FPS respectively. The data shows that 4K is only viable with Low settings.

Q: What is the best resolution for this system?

A: The benchmark results show 1920x1080 is the optimal resolution. At 1080p, all presets except Ultra exceed 60 FPS, with Low hitting 131 FPS and Medium hitting 105 FPS.

Q: How does the Radeon 880M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 880M has an average benchmark score of 8436, which is 0.1% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8427) and 0.3% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8458). It performs similarly to these older discrete GPUs.

Q: Does the CPU limit performance in this game?

A: No, the CPU is not the bottleneck. The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H has a high multi-core score (14551 in Cinebench R23) and a strong single-core score (1759), but the FPS drops are directly tied to resolution and GPU settings, indicating the GPU is the limiting factor.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 131 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 62 FPS. This is a 69 FPS difference, showing a significant performance cost for maxing out settings.

Q: Are the frame times stable?

A: The data only provides min and max FPS for the Medium preset. At 1080p, the minimum is 89 FPS and the maximum is 121 FPS, indicating stable performance. At 4K, the minimum is 40 FPS and the maximum is 55 FPS, showing more variance but still within playable limits.

Measured FPS Breakdown

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: Average 59 FPS. No min/max data provided.
• Medium: Average 47 FPS, minimum 40 FPS, maximum 55 FPS.
• High: Average 30 FPS. No min/max data provided.
• Ultra: Average 28 FPS. No min/max data provided.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: Average 94 FPS. No min/max data provided.
• Medium: Average 75 FPS, minimum 64 FPS, maximum 87 FPS.
• High: Average 47 FPS. No min/max data provided.
• Ultra: Average 45 FPS. No min/max data provided.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: Average 131 FPS. No min/max data provided.
• Medium: Average 105 FPS, minimum 89 FPS, maximum 121 FPS.
• High: Average 66 FPS. No min/max data provided.
• Ultra: Average 62 FPS. No min/max data provided.

The progression is linear and predictable. At 1080p Low, the system delivers 131 FPS, which is more than double the 4K Low figure of 59 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p (105 FPS) is still higher than the Low preset at 1440p (94 FPS), emphasizing that resolution has a greater impact than settings. The Ultra preset at 1440p (45 FPS) is nearly identical to the Medium preset at 4K (47 FPS), showing that the GPU hits a similar performance wall when pixel count and quality settings combine. The data shows no anomalies; every step up in resolution or preset yields a proportional drop in average FPS, confirming the GPU’s consistent, predictable behavior under load.