Inside

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB pairing in Inside presents a fascinating case of a high-end 2024 processor paired with an entry-level 2022 graphics card. The benchmark data shows a system where the CPU's immense computational headroom is almost entirely untapped, with the GPU serving as the definitive bottleneck across all tested configurations. This analysis breaks down the measured performance, contextualizes the components' roles, and explains why this combo ranks where it does.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is a 20-core, 20-thread desktop processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with a 125 W TDP. Its cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 30 MB of L3 cache. This CPU supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. It also integrates Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, though this benchmark data relies on the dedicated GPU.

In the context of Inside, a 2D puzzle-platformer released in 2016, the CPU's role is minimal but not negligible. The game’s physics and logic threads are light, but the Core Ultra 7 265K's single-thread performance is exceptional. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score is 7060, and its PassMark single-thread score is 4904. These scores indicate that the processor can easily handle the game's instruction stream, ensuring that no frame is ever lost due to CPU stalls. The multi-core might, reflected in a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 50009, is largely irrelevant here; the game simply does not scale to 20 threads. The CPU's 97th percentile ranking among all CPUs further confirms that its capabilities far exceed the demands of this title. The benchmark results show that even at 1080p Low, where the GPU has the least work, the average FPS of 196.1 is not constrained by the processor; rather, it is a direct result of the graphics card's output limit. The data indicates that the Core Ultra 7 265K is effectively a spectator in this test, providing a stable, unbothered foundation for the GPU to struggle against.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB is an Ampere-architecture GPU with 2048 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. It operates at a base clock of 1545 MHz and a boost clock of 1740 MHz. The 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s. This GPU holds a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs, which is a stark contrast to its CPU counterpart's near-top-tier standing. It is an end-of-life product, with its performance profile placing it squarely in the entry-level segment.

In Inside, the GPU is the sole determinant of frame rate. The game’s visual style, while stylized, still requires the GPU to render lighting, shadows, and post-processing effects at various resolutions. The measured FPS data shows a clear and consistent pattern: the RTX 3050 4 GB is the limiting factor. At 4K Ultra, the system produces an average of 41.2 FPS, which is playable but not smooth. Dropping to 1080p Low yields an average of 196.1 FPS, showing that the GPU has enough raw power to push high frame rates when the graphical load is low. The VRAM capacity of 4 GB is sufficient for a game of this era, as it does not appear to cause texture thrashing or stuttering, even at 4K High settings, where the average FPS is 45.1. The GPU's FP32 performance of 7.127 TFLOPS and its 16 ray-tracing cores are not heavily taxed here, as the game does not utilize ray tracing. The data suggests that the RTX 3050 4 GB's performance is consistent and predictable, scaling linearly with resolution and settings, but it lacks the headroom to deliver high refresh-rate experiences at higher resolutions.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the performance difference between 1080p High and 4K High settings in Inside?

A: At 1920x1080 with High settings, the average FPS is 101.4. At 3840x2160 with High settings, the average FPS drops to 45.1. This represents a 56.5% reduction in average frame rate when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same quality preset.

Q: How does the system perform at 1440p with Ultra settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 67.6. This is the lowest performance tier at 1440p, but it remains above the 60 FPS threshold, indicating a smooth experience for this puzzle-platformer.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for the frame rate at 4K Low?

A: The data shows that at 4K Low, the average FPS is 88.5. Given the CPU's 97th percentile ranking and the GPU's 50th percentile ranking, and that the FPS is not near the 1080p Low result of 196.1, it is clear the GPU is the primary bottleneck even at lower settings, as the CPU has ample headroom to handle the game's physics and logic.

Q: What is the highest average frame rate recorded in the benchmark data?

A: The highest average frame rate is 196.1 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration in the data that approaches the 200 FPS mark, highlighting the GPU's limits at higher graphical presets.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to the High preset at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the High preset yields an average of 101.4 FPS, while the Ultra preset yields an average of 92 FPS. The difference is 9.4 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset is more demanding but still maintains a high level of performance.

Q: Does the GPU's 4 GB VRAM cause performance issues at 4K?

A: The data shows that at 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 41.2, while at 4K High, it is 45.1. While these are low frame rates, there is no indication of a catastrophic drop due to VRAM overflow. The performance decrease is consistent with the increased rendering load, suggesting the 4 GB frame buffer is adequate for this game's requirements.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB is ranked 1525 out of 1671 tested combos in Inside. This places it in the bottom 9% of all systems tested, which is a direct consequence of the GPU's modest performance relative to the CPU's high-end standing. The combo rank is not a measure of absolute capability, but rather a comparison of how this pairing performs against all other pairings in the database. Since the game is not CPU-intensive, the rank is almost entirely determined by the GPU's frame output. The data shows that the RTX 3050 4 GB's performance, while playable, is not competitive with more balanced pairings that might feature a mid-range CPU and a higher-tier GPU. For context, the CPU's nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF and Intel Core i9-14900KF, have average benchmark scores that are within 0.2% of the 265K, but their in-game performance would be identical in Inside because the GPU remains the limiting factor. The rank of 1525 indicates that this system is suited for 1080p gaming at high frame rates, but it falls behind most other combinations when pushing higher resolutions or graphical fidelity.

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

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the system's performance across resolutions and settings. The data is consistent with the GPU being the primary bottleneck, showing a clear scaling pattern.

3840x2160 (4K)

• At Ultra settings, the average FPS is 41.2.
• At High settings, the average FPS is 45.1.
• At Medium settings, the average FPS is 74.7.
• At Low settings, the average FPS is 88.5.

This shows that at 4K, the system is only capable of a smooth experience at Medium or Low settings. The jump from High to Medium is significant, a 29.6 FPS improvement, indicating that the Medium preset reduces the GPU load substantially.

2560x1440 (1440p)

• At Ultra settings, the average FPS is 67.6.
• At High settings, the average FPS is 69.2.
• At Medium settings, the average FPS is 112.1.
• At Low settings, the average FPS is 140.9.

At 1440p, the system becomes more versatile. Ultra and High presets are playable, hovering near the 70 FPS mark. Medium and Low presets provide a significant boost, with Low settings reaching 140.9 FPS, which is suitable for high refresh rate monitors.

1920x1080 (1080p)

• At Ultra settings, the average FPS is 92.
• At High settings, the average FPS is 101.4.
• At Medium settings, the average FPS is 156.4.
• At Low settings, the average FPS is 196.1.

At 1080p, the system performs admirably. Even at Ultra settings, it maintains an average of 92 FPS. Medium settings provide a substantial increase to 156.4 FPS, and Low settings approach the 200 FPS mark. This resolution is clearly the sweet spot for this pairing, offering high frame rates across all presets. The data confirms that for Inside, this system is best utilized at 1080p, where it can deliver a highly responsive experience, while 1440p and 4K require compromises in settings to maintain playable frame rates.