Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer, and on a pairing of Intel's Core Ultra 7 265HX with NVIDIA's GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile, it behaves exactly as a game of that era should on modern mobile hardware: frame rates are enormous at every setting tier, and the interesting questions shift from "can it run" to "what is actually limiting performance at each resolution." The measured data below, drawn from real benchmark runs rather than estimates, paints a picture of a GPU that is rarely the constraint and a CPU that is comfortably overqualified for a title whose engine traces back nearly a decade.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

Start with the Ultra preset, since it represents the heaviest load in the dataset. At 1920x1080 the combo averages 184 FPS. Move to 2560x1440 and the average settles at 132 FPS. Push to 3840x2160 and it lands at 83 FPS. That is a steep, near-linear slide — each step up in pixel count costs a large slice of the frame budget, and that pattern is the classic signature of GPU-bound scaling. When a CPU is the limiter, frame rates tend to flatten as resolution climbs; here they fall hard instead, which tells us the RTX 5070 Ti Mobile's shading throughput, not the Core Ultra 7 265HX, is the ceiling at Ultra.

The Low preset tells the same story from the opposite direction. At 1080p Low the pairing posts 386 FPS — an extraordinary figure that only a very light engine and a very fast CPU together can produce. At 1440p Low that drops to 278 FPS, and at 4K Low it drops again to 175 FPS. Note what happens at the top of the range: even at 4K, the Low preset stays well above the 144 Hz refresh band that many laptop panels offer. That persistence suggests the CPU and memory subsystem — a dual-channel DDR5 configuration with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth — stop being a factor well before the GPU runs out of pixels to push.

The Medium preset is where the scaling curve gets interesting, because it is the only tier with recorded minimum and maximum frame rates. At 1080p Medium the run averages 309 FPS with a minimum of 263 and a maximum of 356. At 1440p Medium, the average is 222 FPS within a band of 189 to 256. At 4K Medium, the average is 140 FPS framed by 119 minimum and 161 maximum. In each case the spread between minimum and average is modest, and the minimum never collapses — the worst recorded dip, 119 FPS at 4K, still sits comfortably above common laptop display refresh rates. Tight frametime consistency like this, across a resolution tripling, points to a well-behaved engine that never drops a heavy simulation spike on the CPU.

So what does the scaling say about the limiting component? At Ultra and High, the data indicates the GPU is the constraint: frame rates fall steeply as pixel count rises. At Low, and possibly at 1080p Medium, the numbers flatten out at levels that suggest the CPU or the display pipeline itself becomes the practical cap. A 386 FPS average on a mobile platform is not something most panels can even show; the pairing is producing frames faster than the rest of the system can consume them.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Core Ultra 7 265HX is an Arrow Lake-HX mobile part built on TSMC's 3 nm process, with 20 cores and 20 threads, a 2.60 GHz base clock and a 5.30 GHz boost. It carries 3 MB of L2 cache per core and a 30 MB shared L3 slice, sits on the Intel BGA 2114 socket, and has a TDP of 55 W. Its integrated graphics, Arc Xe-LPG with 64 execution units, are irrelevant here with a discrete RTX GPU in the loop, though they matter for power gating on a mobile platform.

None of this firepower is remotely necessary for Inside. A puzzle platformer released in mid-2016 does not scale to 20 cores, and the benchmark data confirms the CPU is never the story in these results. But the chip's synthetic credentials help explain why frame delivery is so clean. A Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5737 and a multi-core score of 40642 put the 265HX in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database — elite territory. Its average benchmark score across the suite is 63173, which lands it within touching distance of rivals like the Intel Core i7-13790F (63080 average, a 0.1% gap), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G (63331, 0.2% ahead), the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 (62839, 0.5% behind), and Intel's own Core Ultra 7 255HX (62738, 0.7% behind). In other words, the CPU in this combo sits in a cluster of essentially interchangeable performance leaders, and any of those alternatives would produce indistinguishable Inside results.

Single-threaded throughput is the metric that matters for a game of this vintage, and the 265HX posts strong numbers there too: 578 in Cinebench R15 single-core, 2409 in R20 single-core, and 4500 in PassMark's single-thread test. The PassMark multithread score of 47985 and physics score of 2978 round out a profile of a chip with deep reserves. For Inside, those reserves mostly translate into extremely high minimum frame rates — the 263 FPS floor at 1080p Medium and the 119 FPS floor even at 4K Medium reflect a processor that never breaks a sweat feeding the engine's simulation.

One curiosity worth flagging: with frame rates like 386 FPS at 1080p Low, the practical limit may not be the CPU's raw capability at all but the memory subsystem or the frame presentation path. Dual-channel DDR5 with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth is fast, but whether the engine can sustain those frame rates in prolonged play is a question the average-only data cannot fully answer. The measured min/max rows we do have show no evidence of stutter, which is reassuring.

FAQ

Q: Can this laptop combo run Inside at 4K with max settings?

A: Yes, comfortably. At 3840x2160 on the Ultra preset the pairing averages 83 FPS, and the High preset raises that to 87 FPS — both above 60 FPS without any upscaling.

Q: Which component limits performance in Inside on this hardware?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiter at High and Ultra, since frame rates fall steeply from 1080p to 4K (e.g., Ultra drops from 184 to 83 FPS average). At Low settings, frame rates remain very high even at 4K, suggesting the GPU is no longer the constraint and the ceiling moves elsewhere — likely the CPU or display pipeline.

Q: How smooth is the frame rate — are there big dips?

A: The Medium preset rows include minimum and maximum figures, and they are tight. At 1080p the run spans 263 to 356 FPS around a 309 average; at 4K it spans 119 to 161 around a 140 average. No dramatic dips were recorded.

Q: How strong is the CPU in this pairing relative to the market?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265HX sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 63173 — within a fraction of a percent of the Intel Core i7-13790F and AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its rivals?

A: The RTX 5070 Ti Mobile sits in the 80th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35435 — essentially even with the Quadro GV100, slightly behind the NVIDIA T1000 and Radeon Pro Duo, and ahead of the NVIDIA A2.

Q: Where does this CPU-plus-GPU combination rank for Inside specifically?

A: It ranks 1182 out of 3716 tested combinations in this game — solidly in the upper portion of the field, though far from the top, since Inside's light engine lets far older and cheaper hardware run it at high frame rates too.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

All figures below are measured averages; where the dataset includes minimum and maximum values, they are listed alongside.

1920x1080:

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

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

| Low | 386 | — | — |

| Medium | 309 | 263 | 356 |

| High | 193 | — | — |

| Ultra | 184 | — | — |

2560x1440:

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

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

| Low | 278 | — | — |

| Medium | 222 | 189 | 256 |

| High | 139 | — | — |

| Ultra | 132 | — | — |

3840x2160:

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

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

| Low | 175 | — | — |

| Medium | 140 | 119 | 161 |

| High | 87 | — | — |

| Ultra | 83 | — | — |

Read vertically, the tables show how little the settings tiers matter at 1080p relative to 4K. At 1080p, dropping from Ultra to Low more than doubles the average, from 184 to 386 FPS — but both numbers are already far beyond what any common laptop display can refresh. At 4K the same drop, from 83 to 175 FPS, is arguably more meaningful, since the Ultra figure sits near the ceiling of high-refresh 4K panels while Low clears it decisively.

Read horizontally, the tables show the resolution penalty growing as settings lighten. The Ultra tier loses roughly half its 1080p frame rate by the time it reaches 4K; the Low tier loses a comparable share but from a much higher starting point, leaving 175 FPS on the table at native 4K. The Medium tier's min/max bands are worth a second look: at every resolution the maximum is only modestly above the average and the minimum only modestly below, indicating a consistent frame pace rather than a swingy one.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

Against the full field of tested hardware pairings for Inside, the Core Ultra 7 265HX plus RTX 5070 Ti Mobile lands at rank 1182 out of 3716 combinations. That places it in the upper half of the database — but not near the summit, and the reason is instructive. Inside is a light game. Its measured frame rates on this hardware are limited almost entirely by GPU pixel throughput, and any pairing with a stronger GPU and even a modest CPU will out-rank it here, regardless of the 265HX's 93rd-percentile CPU standing.

This is a recurring pattern in comparative benchmarking: a component's rank within a game reflects how that game distributes its load. For Inside, GPU strength dominates the ordering, so the RTX 5070 Ti Mobile's 80th-percentile GPU standing pulls the combo's rank down relative to its CPU's pedigree. The GPU's average benchmark score of 35435 puts it in a tight cluster with the Quadro GV100 (35520 average, the 5070 Ti Mobile 0.2% behind), the Radeon Pro Duo (35860, 1.2% ahead), the NVIDIA A2 (34690, the mobile part 2.1% ahead), and the T1000 (36289, 2.4% ahead). None of those gaps is large, and for a game like Inside none of them would change the qualitative verdict — playable at every resolution and setting with room to spare.

The ranking also raises a fair question: does a rank of 1182 understate this pairing? For Inside, arguably yes, in the sense that the measured results already show the experience is effectively flawless — 83 FPS at 4K Ultra is far beyond what the game demands for enjoyment. Rank position in a database rewards headroom, and headroom beyond the display's refresh rate has diminishing practical value.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

The measured data supports a simple recommendation: at native 4K, play on High. The High preset averages 87 FPS at 3840x2160 versus 83 FPS on Ultra — a negligible difference — and stepping down from Ultra buys almost nothing in performance while the visual trade-off of High in a stylized puzzle platformer is minimal. If the target is a high-refresh panel, Medium at 4K averages 140 FPS with a minimum of 119, which clears a high-refresh threshold with a proven floor.

At 2560x1440, the calculus is similar. Ultra averages 132 FPS and High 139 FPS; Medium raises the average to 222 FPS with a 189 FPS minimum. For a display capable of very high refresh rates, Medium at 1440p is the sweet spot — the 189 FPS minimum guarantees the frame rate never drops out of high-refresh territory. If image quality is the priority, High or Ultra both remain fluid, and the difference between 139 and 132 FPS average is unlikely to be perceptible.

At 1920x1080, every preset is overkill in pure frame-rate terms. Low posts 386 FPS, and even Ultra holds 184 FPS. There is no performance argument for lowering settings at this resolution on this hardware; the only reason to pick Low would be for competitive-style frame caps on an extreme-refresh external display. For normal play, Ultra at 1080p is free performance-wise.

One caveat the data invites: average-only rows dominate the dataset, with min/max recorded only for Medium. The recommendations above lean on Medium's proven floors; for the other presets, the averages are strong enough that dips are unlikely to matter, but the dataset cannot confirm their worst-case behavior directly.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile is a Blackwell 2.0 part on TSMC's 5 nm GB205 chip, with 31,100 million transistors packed into a 263 mm² die at a density of 118.3 million transistors per square millimeter. It runs a base clock of 847 MHz with a 1447 MHz boost, carries 5888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, 80 render outputs, 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores, and delivers 17.04 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput. Its memory subsystem is 12 GB of GDDR7 on a 192-bit bus, running at 1750 MHz with 28 Gbps effective speed for 672.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Board power is listed at 60 W, and it connects over PCIe 5.0 x16 with support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6.

For Inside, almost none of that specification is under strain. A 2016 puzzle platformer does not need 12 GB of VRAM, ray tracing hardware, or tensor cores, and the measured numbers bear that out: at 4K Low the GPU still delivers 175 FPS average, meaning the card is pushing enormous pixel throughput through a workload it barely notices. The relevant GPU metrics for this game are the raw rasterization figures — an 115.8 GPixel/s pixel fill rate and a 266.2 GTexel/s texture rate — and those explain the near-linear frame rate decline from 1080p to 4K at the higher presets. When performance scales down proportionally with pixel count, fill rate is the binding resource, and that is precisely the pattern the Ultra and High rows show.

The synthetic GPU scores reinforce the interpretation. A PassMark G3D score of 24004, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 143870, and a Vulkan score of 139213 place the card in the 80th percentile of all GPUs in the database — strong for a mobile part, and, per the rival table, essentially matched by the Quadro GV100 and bracketed by the NVIDIA A2 and T1000. None of those rivals would meaningfully change Inside's results; the game simply does not tax hardware of this class.

The lingering question is thermal behavior in a laptop chassis. The listed 60 W figure and 1447 MHz boost are nominal targets, and sustained 4K Ultra loads are the one scenario in this dataset where the GPU is genuinely working — an 83 FPS average at 3840x2160 implies the card is rendering over 300 million pixels per second in continuous play. Whether the cooling solution in any given laptop holds boost clocks there is a chassis-specific question the benchmark data cannot answer, but the tight Medium min/max bands suggest no throttling episodes disrupted the measured runs. On this evidence, the RTX 5070 Ti Mobile turns Inside into a resolution-and-settings sandbox: every combination in the table is playable, and the only real decision is which visual tier suits the display at hand.