Inside

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 paired with the Intel Arc B390 integrated graphics presents a highly specific performance profile in Inside, a 2016 puzzle platformer. The measured data shows a system where the integrated GPU is the decisive bottleneck, with the powerful 20-core processor largely waiting on graphics output. This analysis walks through the resolution scaling, component roles, and ranking data to characterize this exact configuration.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate data reveals a stark and predictable drop as resolution increases, pointing unequivocally to the graphics processor as the limiting component. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 156 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 112 FPS, a 28% reduction. At 4K Low, the average falls to 70 FPS, which is 55% below the 1080p figure. This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where the number of pixels being shaded directly dictates performance.

The trend is consistent across all settings presets. At Medium settings, the average frame rate drops from 125 FPS at 1080p, to 90 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 56 FPS at 4K. Similarly, at High settings, the progression is 78 FPS (1080p), 56 FPS (1440p), and 35 FPS (4K). The Ultra preset follows the same curve, with 74 FPS at 1080p, 53 FPS at 1440p, and 34 FPS at 4K.

The data shows that the gap between 1440p and 4K is larger than the gap between 1080p and 1440p in absolute terms for most settings. For Low settings, the drop from 1080p to 1440p is 44 FPS, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 42 FPS. This near-linear decline in performance with pixel count confirms that the system is not CPU-limited at any resolution; if the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate would be more consistent across resolutions, particularly at lower settings where the GPU has less work to do.

The fact that even at 1080p Low the system does not approach the CPU's potential frame rate ceiling suggests the integrated GPU is saturated. The 4K results, particularly the 34 FPS at Ultra and 35 FPS at High, are on the edge of playability for a slower-paced puzzle platformer. The 4K Medium preset, with an average of 56 FPS and a minimum of 48 FPS, offers the most balanced experience at that resolution, though it requires a significant sacrifice in visual quality compared to High or Ultra.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics processor based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process. Its performance class is clearly defined by its benchmark results. The GPU scores 1482 points in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, placing it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. This is a very low standing, and the nearest rivals in the database underscore its position: the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463 (1.3% slower), the GeForce 800M scores 1460 (1.5% slower), and the GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446 (2.5% slower). These are all legacy entry-level parts, indicating the Arc B390's performance is comparable to a decade-old discrete GPU.

The GPU's specifications align with this low benchmark standing. It features 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output pipelines. The boost clock is 2500 MHz, with a base clock of 300 MHz. The memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it relies on the system's DDR5 RAM rather than dedicated VRAM, with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." This shared memory architecture is a primary reason for the performance ceiling; the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth.

In Inside, the GPU's role is the primary determinant of frame rate. The measured FPS data shows that the system is incapable of maintaining high frame rates at higher resolutions, regardless of the CPU's capability. The FP32 compute throughput is 7.680 TFLOPS, which is modest, and the pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s. These figures translate directly to the observed performance: at 4K, the system struggles to hit 60 FPS even on Low settings, achieving only 70 FPS. The 1080p results are more respectable, with 156 FPS on Low, but this is still far below what modern discrete GPUs achieve.

The data suggests that the Arc B390 is best suited for 1080p gaming at lower presets. The 4K and 1440p results are playable but require significant compromises in settings. The GPU's 9th percentile ranking is a clear indicator that it is not designed for high-end gaming. Its performance in Inside is consistent with its benchmark profile: it can handle the game at 1080p, but it is the clear bottleneck at higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a high-end desktop processor with 20 cores and 20 threads. It has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. Its benchmark results place it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 64640. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD EPYC 4464P, which scores 64823 (0.3% faster), and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F, which scores 64438 (0.3% slower). This indicates the CPU is a top-tier performer in synthetic tests, far exceeding the needs of a 2016 puzzle platformer.

The CPU's performance in Inside is effectively irrelevant to the final frame rate. The measured FPS data shows no scenario where the CPU is the limiting factor. The game is a puzzle platformer with simple geometry and physics, which does not stress the CPU's 20 cores or its 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216 and single-core score of 5960 demonstrate immense processing power, but Inside does not utilize it.

The CPU's architecture, Arrow Lake-S, and its memory support for dual-channel DDR5 with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, are more than sufficient for the game's demands. However, the GPU's dependence on "System Shared" memory means the CPU's memory bandwidth is a shared resource. This could theoretically impact performance, but the data shows the GPU is the bottleneck, not the memory subsystem. The 4K results, where the GPU is most stressed, show the largest frame rate drops, which would not happen if the CPU or memory were the limiting factor.

In essence, the Core Ultra 7 265 is vastly overqualified for this workload. Its role is to feed the integrated GPU with draw calls and game logic, a task it handles with ease. The 93rd percentile CPU ranking vs. the 9th percentile GPU ranking tells the entire story: this is a pairing of extreme compute capability with minimal graphics capability. The CPU's performance is a non-factor in the measured results, as the GPU's rendering speed dictates every frame.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and Intel Arc B390 ranks 2547 out of 2887 tested combos in Inside. This places it in the bottom 12% of all tested systems, which is a remarkably low position for a system with such a powerful CPU. The ranking is driven almost entirely by the GPU's performance, as the CPU's high percentile ranking cannot compensate for the integrated graphics' low output.

The combo's rank is consistent with the GPU's 9th percentile standing. The system is effectively a weak gaming platform despite its strong CPU. In the context of the database, this combo will be outperformed by nearly any system with a discrete GPU, even older entry-level ones. The nearest GPU rivals, such as the GT 520MX and GeForce 800M, are similarly positioned, suggesting this combo sits at the very bottom of the performance spectrum alongside those legacy parts.

The data shows a massive disconnect between the components. The CPU is in the top 7% of all processors, while the GPU is in the bottom 9%. This imbalance means the system is poorly optimized for gaming. The 2547th rank out of 2887 combos reflects this reality: it is a configuration that will struggle with any graphically demanding task, but it handles Inside at 1080p with acceptable frame rates due to the game's age and simple rendering requirements.

This ranking also indicates that the system's performance is predictable based on the GPU alone. The CPU's power is wasted in this context, as it can never reach its full potential in a GPU-bound scenario. For users looking at this combo, the ranking is a clear warning that gaming performance will be poor, despite the impressive CPU specifications.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this system depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. The data shows that the system can achieve smooth, high-refresh-rate performance only at 1080p with lower settings.

For 1080p, the Low preset delivers an average of 156 FPS, which is excellent for any display. The Medium preset still provides a very playable 125 FPS, with a minimum of 106 FPS, making it the best balance of visual quality and performance at this resolution. High settings drop to 78 FPS, which is still smooth, but the Ultra preset at 74 FPS offers diminishing returns for the visual upgrade. For most players, the Medium preset at 1080p is the recommended choice, as it maintains a high frame rate while improving visual fidelity over Low.

At 1440p, the situation changes. The Low preset delivers 112 FPS, which is excellent. Medium drops to 90 FPS, still very smooth, with a minimum of 76 FPS. High settings at 56 FPS are playable but begin to feel less fluid. Ultra at 53 FPS is borderline. The Medium preset is the best choice here, offering a solid frame rate with acceptable visual enhancements. If a player prioritizes frame rate, Low is the safer option.

At 4K, the system is severely constrained. The Low preset achieves 70 FPS, which is the only way to get a smooth experience. Medium drops to 56 FPS, which is playable for a puzzle platformer but not ideal. High at 35 FPS and Ultra at 34 FPS are below the threshold for smooth gameplay. The data suggests that 4K is not a practical resolution for this system unless the player is willing to accept Low settings. The Medium preset at 4K, with a minimum of 48 FPS, is marginally acceptable, but Low is the only preset that guarantees a mostly stable experience.

The best overall experience per the measured rows is the 1080p Medium preset, which offers a high average frame rate (125 FPS) and a reasonable minimum (106 FPS) without the visual downgrade of Low. For 1440p, Medium is also the sweet spot. For 4K, Low is the only reliable option.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table details the exact measured average frame rates for each resolution and settings preset.

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

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

| 1920x1080 | Low | 156 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 125 | 106 | 144 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 78 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 74 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 112 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 90 | 76 | 103 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 56 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 53 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 70 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 56 | 48 | 65 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 35 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 34 | - | - |

The data shows a clear hierarchy. At 1080p, the system is capable of high frame rates, with Low and Medium both exceeding 120 FPS. The jump from Medium to High is a significant 47 FPS drop, indicating a heavy visual effect load. The Ultra preset offers only 4 FPS less than High, suggesting diminishing returns at the top end.

At 1440p, the Low preset is the only one that breaks the 100 FPS barrier. Medium drops to 90 FPS, and High and Ultra fall into the 50s. The minimum FPS for Medium is 76, which is still comfortable. At 4K, the system is clearly overburdened. Low is the only preset above 60 FPS, and the drop from Low to Medium is 14 FPS, followed by a further 21 FPS drop to High. This steep decline at 4K underscores the GPU's limitations.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution to play Inside with this system?*

A: The data shows that 1080p is the only resolution where the system consistently achieves high frame rates. At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 156 FPS and Medium averages 125 FPS, making it the recommended resolution for a smooth experience.

*Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Inside?*

A: Yes, but with significant compromises. At 3840x2160, the Low preset achieves an average of 70 FPS, which is playable. However, Medium drops to 56 FPS, and High and Ultra fall to 35 and 34 FPS, respectively, which are below ideal smoothness.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark, the Arc B390 scores 1482. This is 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463), 1.5% higher than the GeForce 800M (1460), and 2.5% higher than the GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446). It ranks in the 9th percentile of all GPUs.

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

A: The GPU is the definitive bottleneck. The frame rates drop significantly as resolution increases, which is a classic sign of GPU limitation. The CPU ranks in the 93rd percentile and has ample power, but it cannot compensate for the integrated GPU's low output.

Q: What is the performance delta between the CPU and its nearest rival?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score of 64640. Its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P, scores 64823, which is 0.3% faster. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F scores 64438, which is 0.3% slower.

*Q: What is the system's overall rank among all tested combos in Inside?*

A: The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and Intel Arc B390 ranks 2547 out of 2887 tested combos. This places it in the bottom 12% of all systems, reflecting the GPU's weak performance despite the strong CPU.