Inside

Inside pairs the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus with the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT, and the measured frame rates across three resolutions and four settings reveal a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-bound at higher quality presets, but one where the CPU's headroom becomes apparent at lower settings. The data shows a classic scaling pattern: as resolution drops, the CPU's influence grows, and the GPU's raw throughput becomes less of a constraint.

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

The measured FPS data tells a clear story about where the bottleneck lies. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 146 FPS at 1920x1080 to 105 FPS at 2560x1440, and then to 66 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 28% reduction when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and another 37% reduction when moving from 1440p to 4K. The pattern is consistent with a GPU-limited scenario: each pixel count increase demands proportionally more from the Radeon RX 6650 XT, and the frame rate responds accordingly.

At Low settings, the scaling is even more dramatic. The 1080p result of 292 FPS falls to 210 FPS at 1440p (a 28% drop) and then to 132 FPS at 4K (a 37% drop from 1440p). Interestingly, the percentage drops are nearly identical to High settings, which suggests that even at Low settings, the GPU remains the primary limiter at these resolutions. The CPU's 24 cores and 24 threads are not the constraining factor here, as the frame rates scale almost perfectly with pixel count.

Medium settings show a similar trend with 234 FPS at 1080p, 168 FPS at 1440p, and 106 FPS at 4K. The min and max FPS values for Medium settings—199–269 at 1080p, 143–193 at 1440p, and 90–121 at 4K—indicate a stable frame delivery with no severe hitches. The spread between min and max narrows as resolution increases, which reinforces the idea that the GPU is being pushed harder at higher resolutions.

Ultra settings produce the lowest frame rates across the board: 139 FPS at 1080p, 100 FPS at 1440p, and 63 FPS at 4K. The fact that Ultra at 4K lands at 63 FPS—just above the 60 FPS threshold—suggests that this combo is right at the edge of playable for demanding settings at maximum resolution. The data implies that the limiting component shifts from the GPU at higher resolutions to a more balanced state at 1080p, but even there, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus are likely doing the heavy lifting rather than the CPU.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

Within the database of tested combinations for Inside, this pairing of Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT achieves a rank of 1826 out of 2887 total combos. That puts it in the 63rd percentile of all tested systems, meaning roughly 37% of combos perform better in this specific game. The rank is not stellar, but it is not poor either—it reflects a mid-tier position that aligns with the GPU's 65th percentile ranking among all GPUs and the CPU's 96th percentile among all CPUs.

The disparity between the CPU's high percentile (96) and the GPU's moderate percentile (65) is telling. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is a top-tier processor in the database, but the Radeon RX 6650 XT is a more mainstream part. In a game like Inside, which is a puzzle platformer rather than a GPU-intensive AAA title, one might expect the CPU to dominate. Yet the combo rank of 1826 suggests that the GPU still plays a significant role in determining overall performance, likely because the game's rendering demands scale with resolution and settings in ways that stress the GPU first.

Comparing to the CPU's nearest rivals, the Intel Xeon 6520P scores 93786 on average, which is nearly identical to the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus's 93785. The AMD EPYC 4564P is 1.5% faster, the EPYC 9175F is 1.9% faster, and the EPYC 4565P is 2.1% faster. These are all server-class processors, and their marginal performance deltas indicate that the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is already near the ceiling of CPU performance in this database. The GPU's nearest rivals—NVIDIA Tesla K40m, AMD FirePro D300, AMD FirePro W7000, and NVIDIA Quadro K5200—are all older workstation parts with average scores within 0.8% of the RX 6650 XT's 19765, which underscores that the GPU is a mid-tier performer relative to the database.

The rank of 1826 out of 2887 implies that while the CPU is not holding back the system, the GPU's moderate standing prevents this combo from climbing higher. For a game that is not particularly graphics-intensive, the data suggests that the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and RDNA 2 architecture are sufficient but not exceptional, and the combo's ranking reflects that balance.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT comes with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 280.3 GB/s. For Inside, which is a 2016 puzzle platformer with relatively modest texture and geometry demands, 8 GB is more than adequate—the data shows no signs of VRAM-related stuttering or frame drops. The memory clock runs at 2190 MHz, which translates to 17.5 Gbps effective, and the base clock is 2055 MHz with a boost clock of 2635 MHz and a game clock of 2410 MHz.

The GPU's performance in this game is best understood through its frame delivery. At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 234 with a min of 199 and max of 269, which indicates that the GPU can handle the game's engine with significant headroom. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 63 FPS, which is exactly at the edge of smooth gameplay. The pixel rate of 168.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 337.3 GTexel/s are relevant here—these specs determine how quickly the GPU can fill pixels and sample textures, and the measured results align with a GPU that is capable but not overpowered for 4K Ultra.

The GPU's FP32 performance of 10.79 TFLOPS and FP16 of 21.59 TFLOPS (2:1) are modest by modern standards, but Inside does not rely on heavy compute. The RT cores (32) and DirectX 12 Ultimate support are present, but the game likely does not use ray tracing, so those features are not a factor in the measured results. The GPU's 65th percentile ranking among all GPUs (with an average benchmark score of 19765) places it solidly in the mid-range, and the measured FPS in Inside reflects that positioning—good at 1080p, adequate at 1440p, and marginal at 4K Ultra.

The closest GPU rival, the NVIDIA Tesla K40m, scores 19885 (0.6% higher), while the AMD FirePro D300 scores 19637 (0.7% lower) and the FirePro W7000 scores 19905 (0.7% higher). These are all older workstation cards, and the RX 6650 XT's performance is within a hair of theirs in aggregate benchmarks, but in Inside specifically, the measured results show the GPU delivering playable frame rates at all tested settings except potentially 4K Ultra, where 63 FPS is borderline.

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

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and the desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, all four presets deliver playable averages: Low at 292 FPS, Medium at 234 FPS, High at 146 FPS, and Ultra at 139 FPS. The jump from Medium to High is substantial (a 37% drop), while High to Ultra is a smaller 5% drop. For users with a 60 Hz or 144 Hz monitor, Medium at 1080p offers the best balance, with 234 FPS average and a min of 199 FPS ensuring no drops below refresh rate. Ultra at 1080p is also viable at 139 FPS, but the visual gains over High are likely minimal given the 7 FPS difference.

At 2560x1440, the data shows Medium at 168 FPS (min 143, max 193) as the sweet spot. High at 105 FPS is still playable, but Ultra drops to 100 FPS. Low at 210 FPS is overkill for most displays. The 4K results are more constrained: Medium at 106 FPS (min 90, max 121) is the only preset that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS, while High at 66 FPS and Ultra at 63 FPS are borderline. For 4K, Medium is the recommended preset because it provides a 40 FPS advantage over High (106 vs 66) while likely sacrificing only minor visual details.

If the goal is maximum visual fidelity at 60 FPS, then 4K High at 66 FPS is acceptable, but the margin is thin. The data indicates that Medium at each resolution provides the best combination of frame rate stability and visual quality, given that Medium has the only min/max FPS measurements that show a tight range (e.g., 90–121 at 4K). Low and Ultra lack min/max data, but the averages suggest they are either too fast (Low) or too close to the edge (Ultra) for optimal use.

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

At 3840x2160, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low delivers 132 FPS, Medium delivers 106 FPS with a min of 90 and max of 121, High delivers 66 FPS, and Ultra delivers 63 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 52% reduction in average FPS (132 to 63), with the largest single drop occurring between Medium and High (106 to 66, a 38% reduction). This suggests that the High preset introduces significant rendering costs over Medium, likely related to shadow quality or post-processing effects.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 210 FPS for Low, 168 FPS for Medium (min 143, max 193), 105 FPS for High, and 100 FPS for Ultra. The drop from Medium to High is again steep (168 to 105, a 38% reduction), while High to Ultra is a mild 5% reduction (105 to 100). Low at 210 FPS is nearly double the High result, indicating that Low removes most of the GPU workload. The min FPS for Medium at 143 is still well above 60, making 1440p Medium a highly stable experience.

At 1920x1080, the averages are 292 FPS for Low, 234 FPS for Medium (min 199, max 269), 146 FPS for High, and 139 FPS for Ultra. The scaling from Low to Medium is a 20% drop, Medium to High is a 38% drop, and High to Ultra is a 5% drop. The min FPS for Medium at 199 ensures that even in the most demanding scenes, the frame rate stays above 144 Hz, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. The 1080p results confirm that this combo is capable of extremely high frame rates at lower settings, making it suitable for competitive play if the game supported such modes.

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

Q: What is the best resolution and setting for a stable 60+ FPS experience?

A: At 3840x2160, Medium provides 106 FPS average with a min of 90 FPS, which is the only 4K preset that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS. At 2560x1440, all presets exceed 100 FPS average, with Medium at 168 FPS (min 143) being the most balanced. At 1920x1080, even Ultra hits 139 FPS average.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an average benchmark score of 93785, which is nearly identical to the Intel Xeon 6520P at 93786 (0% delta). The AMD EPYC 4564P is 1.5% faster, the EPYC 9175F is 1.9% faster, and the EPYC 4565P is 2.1% faster.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking and how does it affect gameplay?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT ranks in the 65th percentile among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 19765. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla K40m, scores 19885 (0.6% higher), indicating the GPU is a mid-tier performer that delivers playable frame rates in Inside at most settings.

Q: Is the 8 GB VRAM sufficient for Inside?

A: Yes, the 8 GB GDDR6 memory is more than adequate for Inside. The measured FPS shows no signs of VRAM-related stuttering, and the GPU's 280.3 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for the game's texture demands at all resolutions and settings tested.

Q: What is the combo's ranking among all tested systems for this game?

A: The combo ranks 1826 out of 2887 tested combinations, placing it in the 63rd percentile. This is lower than the CPU's 96th percentile but higher than the GPU's 65th percentile, reflecting a GPU-bound system.

Q: How does the frame rate scale from 1080p to 4K at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 146 at 1920x1080 to 105 at 2560x1440 (a 28% reduction) and then to 66 at 3840x2160 (a 37% reduction from 1440p). This consistent scaling indicates the GPU is the limiting factor.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with 36 MB of shared L3 cache. In Inside, a game that is not heavily multithreaded, the CPU's high single-core performance is more relevant than its core count. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2439 and multi-core score of 44253 indicate strong performance, but the game's engine likely uses only a few threads.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 96 among all CPUs (with an average benchmark score of 93785) shows that it is near the top of the database, and its nearest rivals are all server-class Xeon and EPYC processors with deltas within 2.1%. This means the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is not a bottleneck in Inside. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (292 FPS) demonstrates that the CPU can feed the GPU with enough frames to reach very high frame rates, but the GPU's limits become apparent at higher resolutions and settings.

The CPU's memory support is DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 115.2 GB/s bandwidth, which is ample for this game. The L1 cache is 192 KB per core and L2 is 3 MB per core, providing low-latency access to frequently used data. The CPU's integrated graphics (Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU) are not used in this test since the discrete GPU is active, but the CPU's PCIe Gen 5 support with 20 lanes ensures the GPU has sufficient bandwidth over its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface.

The data indicates that the CPU's role in Inside is to provide a stable foundation that does not limit the GPU. At 1080p Low, the 292 FPS average suggests the CPU can push well beyond what the GPU can render, but at 4K Ultra (63 FPS), the CPU is clearly not the constraint. The 24 cores and 24 threads are overkill for this game, but they ensure that any background tasks or future games with higher thread demands will not cause frame drops. The CPU's boost clock of 5.50 GHz is likely what drives the high single-threaded performance needed for the game's physics and logic updates, and the measured results confirm that the CPU is not a weak link in this combo.