Inside

Inside is a 2D puzzle-platformer from 2016, and its modest visual demands mean that even mid-range modern hardware can push frame rates far beyond what a typical monitor can display. The data for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and Intel Arc B580 combination shows a system that is heavily overqualified for this title, with performance primarily dictated by the graphics settings and resolution rather than any underlying CPU limitation. The measured results indicate that this pairing is capable of delivering a smooth experience at any setting, with the only challenge being managing the excess frame rate to avoid screen tearing on standard 60Hz displays.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound behavior, which is expected for a graphically intensive setting like Ultra. At 1080p Ultra, the system produces 129 FPS. When moving to 1440p Ultra, the average drops to 93 FPS, a 27.9% reduction. The jump to 4K Ultra further reduces the average to 58 FPS, which is a 55% decrease from the 1080p result and a 37.6% decrease from 1440p. This steep decline indicates that the Arc B580 is the limiting component at this preset, as the pixel throughput demand doubles from 1080p to 4K, and the GPU cannot maintain its high occupancy.

The scaling pattern changes significantly when looking at the Low preset. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 271 FPS. At 1440p Low, it drops to 195 FPS, a 28% reduction. The 4K Low result is 123 FPS, which is 54.6% lower than the 1080p figure. While the percentage drops are similar to Ultra, the absolute frame rates remain so high that the resolution is essentially a non-issue for playability. Even at 4K Low, the system is producing more than double the refresh rate of a standard 60Hz monitor, suggesting that the game’s simple geometry and lighting are not creating a significant bottleneck even at higher pixel counts.

The Medium preset shows the most balanced scaling, with 1080p producing 217 FPS, 1440p producing 156 FPS, and 4K producing 98 FPS. The 1080p to 1440p drop is 28.1%, and the 1440p to 4K drop is 37.2%. This is the only preset that provides a full set of min and max FPS data, allowing for a closer look at frame time consistency. At 4K Medium, the min FPS is 83 and the max is 113, giving a variance of 30 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the variance is 47 FPS, and at 1080p Medium, it is 65 FPS. The shrinking variance at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU is becoming more consistently saturated, reducing the spikes and dips that occur when the CPU can feed frames faster than the GPU can render them.

The data suggests that the limiting component shifts based on the target frame rate. For users with a 144Hz or 165Hz monitor, the CPU and GPU are both capable of exceeding that target at 1080p High, but the GPU begins to struggle to maintain those high refresh rates as resolution increases. For 60Hz displays, the system is never the bottleneck at any resolution below Ultra 4K, and even there it nearly hits the target with 58 FPS. The performance scaling is smooth and predictable, with no signs of a CPU-related stutter or frame pacing issue in the measured data.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear hierarchy of performance across the four presets, and the optimal choice depends entirely on the display’s refresh rate and the user’s preference for visual fidelity. For 1080p, the High preset at 136 FPS is the sweet spot for high-refresh-rate gaming, as it provides a significant visual upgrade over Low while still maintaining a frame rate that exceeds most 144Hz monitors’ capabilities. The Ultra preset at 129 FPS is only a 5.1% performance penalty over High, making it a viable choice for users who want maximum visual quality without sacrificing the high frame rate.

At 1440p, the High preset produces 98 FPS, which is ideal for a 100Hz or 120Hz display. The Ultra preset drops to 93 FPS, which is still playable but may cause noticeable judder on a 100Hz screen. The Medium preset at 156 FPS is overkill for most 1440p monitors, but it provides the most consistent frame times according to the min/max data, making it a strong choice for users sensitive to frame pacing. For 4K, the Medium preset at 98 FPS is the only viable option for a 60Hz display, as it offers a 60% performance uplift over Ultra while providing a substantial visual improvement over Low.

The Low preset is generally not recommended for this configuration, as the visual sacrifice is unnecessary given the high frame rates available at higher settings. At 1080p Low, the system produces 271 FPS, which is far beyond the refresh rate of any consumer monitor and indicates that the GPU is severely underutilized. The only scenario where Low makes sense is for competitive play on a 360Hz monitor, but even then, the benefit of the extra frame rate over the High preset is marginal. The Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance consistency, as evidenced by its complete min/max data, making it the default recommendation for users who do not want to manually tweak settings.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B580 is the primary driver of performance in Inside, as the game’s 2D rendering still requires substantial pixel throughput and fill rate. The GPU’s 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus provides 456.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is more than sufficient for the game’s textures and effects at 4K. The memory clock runs at 2375 MHz, and the core operates at a fixed 2670 MHz base and boost clock, indicating that the card is running at its maximum frequency during the benchmark. The 80 ROPs and 160 TMUs provide a texture and pixel fill rate of 427.2 GTexel/s and 213.6 GPixel/s, respectively, which explains why the card can handle 4K Medium at 98 FPS without breaking a sweat.

The GPU’s performance relative to its rivals is interesting, as the benchmark scores place it in a strange position. The Arc B580’s average benchmark score of 23021 is nearly identical to that of the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP, which scores 23061, a delta of -0.2%. It also trades blows with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080, which scores 22895, a delta of 0.6%, and the RTX 3080, which scores 23172, a delta of -0.7%. However, these are synthetic benchmarks, and the measured FPS in Inside shows that the card is capable of performing well above what its percentile rank of 68% would suggest, primarily because the game is not demanding enough to expose any architectural weaknesses.

The GPU’s 13.67 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 27.34 TFLOPS of FP16 compute are more than adequate for a game of this era, but the real strength lies in its modern feature set. The card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6, ensuring compatibility with the game’s rendering pipeline. The 20 ray tracing cores and 2560 shading units are largely idle in this title, but they do not negatively impact performance. The 190W TDP and dual-slot design are modest, and the card’s 272 mm length should fit in most cases. The PCIe 4.0 x8 interface is not a bottleneck at these frame rates, as the game’s data footprint is small enough to fit within the GPU’s 12 GB memory pool.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Inside at 4K 60 FPS?

A: Yes, but only at Medium settings. The measured 4K Medium average is 98 FPS, which far exceeds 60 FPS, while the 4K High average drops to 61 FPS and 4K Ultra drops to 58 FPS. For a locked 60 FPS experience, Medium is the safe choice, but High is borderline acceptable.

Q: What is the maximum frame rate this configuration can achieve?

A: The highest measured average is 271 FPS at 1080p with Low settings. This is likely the ceiling for the system, as the GPU cannot push much higher due to the game’s rendering overhead, even though the CPU is capable of more.

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

A: At lower resolutions and settings, the system is heavily GPU-bound, as evidenced by the 1080p Low result of 271 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor, as the frame rate drops to 58 FPS. The CPU’s 20 cores and 5.30 GHz boost clock are never stressed, with the game likely using only a few threads.

Q: How does the Arc B580 compare to the RTX 3080 in this game?

A: The synthetic benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the RTX 3080 scoring 23172 and the Arc B580 scoring 23021, a delta of -0.7%. In Inside, the Arc B580 is more than capable of matching the RTX 3080’s performance, as the game is not demanding enough to differentiate between the two cards’ raw compute power.

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

A: At 1080p, the High preset at 136 FPS is the best choice, as it is close to the 144Hz target and offers better visuals than Medium. At 1440p, the Medium preset at 156 FPS is the only option that exceeds 144Hz, while High at 98 FPS will not fully utilize the monitor’s refresh rate.

Q: Does the game benefit from the CPU’s high core count?

A: No, the game is a 2D platformer from 2016 and is unlikely to scale beyond a few cores. The CPU’s 20 threads are largely idle, and the performance is dictated by the GPU’s frame rendering speed, as shown by the consistent FPS drops when resolution increases.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is vastly overprovisioned for Inside, a game that does not require significant computational resources. With 20 cores and 20 threads, the CPU has more than enough parallel processing power, but the game’s single-threaded nature means that the 5.30 GHz boost clock is the most relevant specification. The base clock of 2.40 GHz is low, but the CPU’s ability to boost to 5.30 GHz on a single core ensures that the game’s main thread is never starved. The 30 MB of L3 cache is ample for the game’s small data footprint, and the 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per-core caches provide fast access to frequently used data.

The CPU’s benchmark results show that it is a high-end processor, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216 and a single-core score of 5960. These scores place it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, and its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 4464P, which scores 64823, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F, which scores 64438. The delta between these rivals is less than 1%, indicating that the CPU’s performance is well within the expected range for its class. However, in Inside, these differences are irrelevant, as the game does not stress the CPU enough to expose any performance variance.

The data shows that the CPU is never the bottleneck, as the frame rate scales almost linearly with resolution and settings, which is a hallmark of GPU-bound scenarios. The only potential issue is frame pacing at very high frame rates, but the measured Medium preset min/max data shows that the CPU can feed the GPU consistently, with the min FPS being 83 at 4K and 185 at 1080p. The CPU’s 65W TDP and 3nm process node ensure that it runs cool and efficiently, but this is of little consequence in a game that barely taxes it. For users who plan to play more demanding titles, the CPU’s headroom is a benefit, but for Inside, it is simply a very fast component that is waiting for the GPU to catch up.