Inside

The AMD Radeon 890M integrated GPU paired with the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H in Inside demonstrates a clear case of graphics-limited scaling, where the iGPU’s performance ceiling dictates playability across resolutions. The measured data shows a predictable decline in frame rates as pixel count increases, but the magnitude of that decline reveals how close the 890M operates to its limits even at 1080p. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS, the roles of both components, and how this specific combination ranks against the broader test pool.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent, indicating that the AMD Radeon 890M is the primary bottleneck at every resolution tested. At 1080p with High settings, the combo delivers 69 FPS, but moving to 1440p High drops that to 50 FPS—a 27.5% reduction. Pushing further to 4K High yields only 31 FPS, which is a 55.1% decline from the 1080p baseline. This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario: the CPU has ample headroom, but the iGPU’s shading units and memory bandwidth are overwhelmed by the increasing pixel workload.

The data confirms this trend across all settings presets. At Low settings, 1080p produces 139 FPS, which falls to 100 FPS at 1440p (a 28.1% drop) and further to 63 FPS at 4K (a 54.7% drop from 1080p). The consistency of these percentage drops—roughly 28% from 1080p to 1440p and another 37% from 1440p to 4K—suggests a linear scaling penalty tied directly to pixel count, not a sudden shift in bottleneck. For a game like Inside, which is a 2D puzzle platformer with relatively simple geometry, this behavior points to the iGPU’s raw fillrate and pixel throughput as the limiting factors.

At Medium settings, the only preset with min/max FPS data, the trend holds. 1080p Medium averages 111 FPS (min 94, max 127), 1440p Medium averages 80 FPS (min 68, max 92), and 4K Medium averages 50 FPS (min 43, max 58). The frame time consistency degrades with resolution, as the delta between min and max FPS widens from 33 FPS at 1080p to 24 FPS at 1440p and 15 FPS at 4K, indicating that higher resolutions introduce more variance. The 4K Medium result of 50 FPS is notable—it is the only 4K preset that stays above 30 FPS, but it still falls short of the 60 FPS target that most gamers consider smooth.

FAQ

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

A: Based on the measured data, 1080p is the only resolution where all settings presets exceed 60 FPS on average. The Low preset hits 139 FPS, Medium 111 FPS, High 69 FPS, and Ultra 66 FPS. At 1440p, only Low (100 FPS) and Medium (80 FPS) average above 60 FPS, while High (50 FPS) and Ultra (47 FPS) fall below. At 4K, no preset reaches 60 FPS; the best is Low at 63 FPS.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High at each resolution?

A: The Ultra preset is consistently 2-3 FPS slower than High. At 1080p, Ultra averages 66 FPS versus 69 FPS for High. At 1440p, Ultra averages 47 FPS versus 50 FPS for High. At 4K, Ultra averages 30 FPS versus 31 FPS for High. The difference is minimal, suggesting Ultra adds little visual benefit for a measurable performance cost.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck at any resolution or setting?

A: No. The data shows that FPS scales almost entirely with resolution and GPU workload. The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H, with 16 cores and 22 threads boosting to 5.00 GHz, has more than enough headroom for this game. The consistent percentage drops from 1080p to 4K across all settings indicate the GPU is the limiting factor, not the CPU.

Q: What is the best 4K preset for maintaining playability?

A: Low settings at 4K is the only preset that achieves an average above 60 FPS, hitting 63 FPS. Medium settings at 4K averages 50 FPS, which is playable but not smooth. High (31 FPS) and Ultra (30 FPS) are borderline unplayable for a game that benefits from consistent frame pacing.

Q: How does the 890M's performance compare to its nearest rivals in general benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon 890M has an average benchmark score of 9210, which places it at the 45th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Vega 8 with a score of 9221, a delta of -0.1%. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 scores 9273 (delta -0.7%), and the GTX 465 scores 9294 (delta -0.9%). This puts the 890M in the same performance class as these older discrete GPUs.

Q: Is the 890M better than the integrated graphics in the CPU?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H has its own integrated graphics (Arc Xe-LPG 128EU), but the measured FPS data in this page is for the discrete AMD Radeon 890M. The 890M is a separate GPU with its own benchmarks, such as a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 590 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 40808.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 890M is the decisive component in this combo for Inside. It is an integrated GPU based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on a 4 nm process with 34,000 million transistors. Its 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs provide the raw computational power, while the boost clock of 2900 MHz and base clock of 400 MHz determine how fast those units operate. The GPU’s FP32 performance is 5.939 TFLOPS, which is substantial for an iGPU but still far below dedicated desktop parts.

The memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning the GPU uses the system RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. The memory bus width is also "System Shared," and bandwidth is "System Dependent," which is a critical caveat. In Inside, the game’s texture and framebuffer demands are modest, but the shared memory architecture introduces latency and bandwidth constraints that become more pronounced at higher resolutions. This is reflected in the measured FPS: at 4K Ultra, the combo only manages 30 FPS, indicating that the memory subsystem cannot keep up with the pixel throughput demands.

The GPU’s raw benchmark scores paint a picture of a mid-range performer. It scores 8076 in Passmark G3D, which places it at the 45th percentile of all GPUs. Its closest rival is the AMD Radeon Vega 8 (score 9221, delta -0.1%), followed by the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 (score 9273, delta -0.7%). This means the 890M performs nearly identically to a GTX 960, a card from 2015, which is a strong result for an integrated solution but explains why 4K gaming is a stretch. The GPU’s DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) ensures modern API compatibility, but the Passmark DirectX 12 score of 37 is low, indicating that the hardware is not optimized for heavy D3D12 workloads, which Inside does not heavily exploit.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1080p, the combo delivers playable frame rates across all presets. Low settings average 139 FPS, which is more than double the 60 FPS target. Medium settings average 111 FPS (min 94, max 127), providing a smooth experience with tight frame pacing. High settings average 69 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra settings average 66 FPS, making it the most demanding preset but still playable. The delta between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 73 FPS, showing that the game scales significantly with graphical fidelity.

At 1440p, the performance drops are more pronounced. Low settings still deliver 100 FPS, which is excellent. Medium settings average 80 FPS (min 68, max 92), maintaining smooth gameplay. High settings fall to 50 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target and may introduce noticeable stutter in fast-moving scenes. Ultra settings average 47 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. The delta between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 53 FPS, indicating that the GPU is starting to struggle with the higher pixel count.

At 4K, the combo is clearly GPU-limited. Low settings average 63 FPS, which is the only preset above 60 FPS. Medium settings average 50 FPS (min 43, max 58), which is playable but with occasional dips below 45 FPS. High settings average 31 FPS, which is borderline for a puzzle platformer that requires precise timing. Ultra settings average 30 FPS, making it the worst-performing configuration. The delta between Low and Ultra at 4K is 33 FPS, showing that the GPU’s performance ceiling is reached quickly as settings increase.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H + AMD Radeon 890M combination ranks 2714 out of 2887 tested combos in Inside, placing it in the bottom 6% of all systems. This low ranking is primarily due to the GPU’s performance ceiling, not the CPU. The 890M’s average benchmark score of 9210 puts it at the 45th percentile of all GPUs, but in this specific game, the integrated nature of the GPU and its shared memory architecture limit its effectiveness.

Compared to other tested combos, this system is outclassed by any configuration with a discrete mid-range GPU. However, the ranking is not a reflection of the CPU’s capability. The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H has an average benchmark score of 34083, placing it at the 84th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals, the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H (score 33989, delta 0.3%) and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 (score 34222, delta -0.4%), show that the CPU is competitive with other mobile processors. The bottleneck in Inside is clearly the GPU, as the CPU has ample headroom to feed the 890M.

The combo’s low rank (2714 of 2887) suggests that for this specific game, the 890M is not a suitable choice for high-resolution gaming. At 1080p, the system performs admirably, but the rank is dragged down by the inability to maintain playable frame rates at 1440p and 4K with higher settings. This is a classic case of an iGPU being adequate for esports or indie titles at 1080p but failing at higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H is a 16-core, 22-thread processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture, built on Intel’s 7 nm process. Its base clock is 3.80 GHz, which boosts to 5.00 GHz, providing excellent single-thread performance for gaming. The CPU has a 24 MB shared L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory via a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. In Inside, a game that is not known for heavy CPU demands, this processor is more than sufficient.

The CPU’s benchmark scores confirm its strength. It scores 14551 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 1759 in single-core, which are strong results for a mobile processor. Its Passmark single-thread score is 3509, and the multithread score is 25933, placing it at the 84th percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H, has an average score of 33989 with a delta of 0.3%, showing that the 165H is slightly faster in general compute tasks.

In Inside, the CPU role is to maintain a stable frame delivery, which it does effortlessly. The measured FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are almost entirely due to GPU load, not CPU limitations. The CPU’s high boost clock of 5.00 GHz ensures that frame times are consistent, and the 16 cores handle any background tasks without interfering with game performance. The data shows no evidence of CPU bottlenecks, as even at 1080p Low (139 FPS), the CPU is not limiting the frame rate—the GPU is still the primary constraint.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience with this combo, the data suggests a clear hierarchy based on resolution. At 1080p, the High preset (69 FPS) offers a good balance between visual quality and performance, but the Ultra preset (66 FPS) is nearly identical in cost. Given the minimal difference, High is recommended to maintain a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. For players seeking maximum smoothness, the Medium preset (111 FPS) provides a 60% performance boost over High with only a slight visual reduction.

At 1440p, the Medium preset (80 FPS) is the optimal choice, as it stays well above 60 FPS while providing better visuals than Low (100 FPS). The High preset (50 FPS) is below the 60 FPS target and may cause noticeable frame pacing issues. Ultra (47 FPS) is not recommended, as the visual gain over High is negligible but the performance hit is significant.

At 4K, the Low preset (63 FPS) is the only configuration that achieves a playable frame rate. Medium (50 FPS) is playable but may have occasional dips below 45 FPS, which could affect gameplay precision. High (31 FPS) and Ultra (30 FPS) are not recommended, as they fall below the 30 FPS floor that most players consider acceptable. For a puzzle platformer like Inside, where timing is crucial, the Low preset at 4K is the only viable option.

In summary, the best experience per the measured rows is:

• 1080p High (69 FPS) for balanced quality, or 1080p Medium (111 FPS) for extra headroom.
• 1440p Medium (80 FPS) for smooth gameplay without sacrificing too much detail.
• 4K Low (63 FPS) for the only playable 4K experience.

The data indicates that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming, with 1440p requiring a compromise on settings, and 4K being viable only at the lowest settings.