Inside

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT delivers staggeringly high frame rates in Inside, a game whose minimalist 2D side-scrolling presentation is anything but demanding by modern standards. The data shows a system that is massively overqualified for this title, with performance scaling that reveals a clear shift from GPU-bound at 4K to CPU-bound at lower resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a textbook example of how resolution scaling impacts performance. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo produces an average of 456 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 330 FPS, a reduction of 126 FPS. At 4K Low, the average falls further to 207 FPS. This pattern—a roughly 27% drop from 1080p to 1440p and another 37% drop from 1440p to 4K—indicates that the limiting factor changes as resolution climbs.

At 1080p, the frame rates are so high that the Ryzen-class CPU (with its 24 cores and 24 threads) becomes the primary constraint. The GPU has ample headroom to render frames faster than the CPU can feed it, particularly at Low settings where the graphics workload is minimal. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is steep, but the system still holds above 300 FPS, which is far beyond any monitor's refresh rate.

At 4K, the picture changes. The RX 9070 XT, with its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth, now takes over as the limiting component. The transition from 1440p to 4K at Low settings shows a 123 FPS drop, a much larger absolute decline than the CPU-bound drop from 1080p to 1440p. This is the GPU working harder to fill the additional 5.4 million pixels per frame.

The High and Ultra settings reinforce this trend. At 4K High, the average is 104 FPS, while 4K Ultra drops to 99 FPS. Compare that to 1080p High at 230 FPS and 1080p Ultra at 219 FPS. The gap between 1080p and 4K widens as settings increase, confirming that the GPU is the bottleneck at higher resolutions and quality presets. The RX 9070 XT's boost clock of 2970 MHz and game clock of 2400 MHz are being pushed harder at 4K, but the sheer pixel count still limits the output.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with the Navi 48 chip, fabricated on a 4 nm process. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth, which is more than sufficient for Inside's texture and geometry demands. The GPU's 4096 shading units and 128 ROPs are tasked with rendering the game's dark, atmospheric environments, and the data shows they handle it with ease.

At 1080p, the GPU is rarely the limiting factor. The lowest average FPS recorded at 1080p is 219 FPS on Ultra settings, which means even the most demanding preset never drops below the refresh rate of most high-end monitors. The GPU's compute capabilities, rated at 48.66 TFLOPS FP32, are largely underutilized at this resolution. The pixel rate of 380.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 760.3 GTexel/s are far beyond what Inside requires.

The GPU's role becomes more pronounced at 4K. At Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 99, which is still smooth but shows the GPU working closer to its limits. The 16 GB VRAM is never in danger of being exhausted—Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer with modest texture sizes. The memory clock of 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective) and bandwidth are more than adequate.

Interestingly, the GPU's benchmark percentile tells a different story than its in-game performance. The RX 9070 XT sits at the 55th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 13543. Its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks are the AMD Radeon HD 7770M (13536 score, 0.1% delta) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 (13515 score, 0.2% delta). These are dramatically older and weaker GPUs, yet they post similar synthetic scores. This suggests that the RX 9070 XT's raw compute benchmarks don't reflect its actual gaming performance in Inside, where it delivers frame rates that are multiples of what those older cards could achieve.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows provide clear guidance for settings selection, though the ideal choice depends heavily on your display's refresh rate and resolution.

At 4K, the High preset delivers 104 FPS average, which is excellent for a smooth experience. Ultra drops to 99 FPS, a marginal 5 FPS penalty for what is likely a negligible visual improvement in a game with Inside's stark art style. Medium offers 166 FPS, which is overkill for any 4K display but provides a massive headroom buffer. Low at 4K hits 207 FPS, proving the GPU has far more to give.

For 1440p, High runs at 165 FPS, which aligns perfectly with 144Hz and 165Hz monitors. Ultra drops to 157 FPS, still comfortably above 144Hz. Medium at 264 FPS and Low at 330 FPS are excessive for most displays but would be ideal for competitive play or future-proofing. The minimum FPS recorded at 1440p Medium is 224 FPS, meaning even the worst-case frame times stay well above 200 FPS.

At 1080p, every preset exceeds 200 FPS. Low hits 456 FPS, Medium 367 FPS, High 230 FPS, and Ultra 219 FPS. The minimum at 1080p Medium is 312 FPS. This is a case where the settings choice barely matters for playability—any preset will feel identical on a standard 60Hz or 144Hz monitor. The recommendation is to max out to Ultra at 1080p, as the 237 FPS difference between Low and Ultra is imperceptible on virtually all displays.

The best experience per the measured rows is the High preset at 1440p. It offers 165 FPS average, which matches high-refresh monitors, and the visual quality is only slightly below Ultra. At 4K, High is the sweet spot—104 FPS is smoother than Ultra's 99 FPS, and the visual difference is minimal.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 368th out of 2887 tested combinations in Inside, placing it in the top 13% of all systems tested. This is a strong showing, though not exceptional given the hardware's capabilities. The rank reflects that many other CPU-GPU pairings can achieve similar frame rates in this undemanding game, as Inside is not a title that heavily stresses either component.

The CPU itself ranks in the 96th percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 93785. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Xeon 6520P (93786 score, 0% delta), AMD EPYC 4564P (95183 score, -1.5% delta), AMD EPYC 9175F (95615 score, -1.9% delta), and AMD EPYC 4565P (95764 score, -2.1% delta). These are all server-class processors, indicating the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus delivers workstation-level multi-threaded performance.

The GPU's 55th percentile ranking is misleading in this context. While its synthetic benchmark score of 13543 places it near much older GPUs, the in-game performance at 4K Ultra (99 FPS) shows it is far more capable than those rivals in real-world gaming. The combo's 368th rank out of 2887 is likely held back by the GPU's modest synthetic scores, not its actual gaming throughput.

The data indicates this combo is more than sufficient for Inside at any resolution or settings. The rank would be higher in a more demanding title where the GPU's full capabilities are utilized. In this game, the system's performance is limited more by the game engine and CPU overhead than by the GPU's raw power.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming in Inside?

A: Yes. The measured data shows 4K High at 104 FPS and 4K Ultra at 99 FPS, both well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. Even 4K Medium runs at 166 FPS.

Q: Is the RX 9070 XT overkill for this game?

A: At 1080p, yes. The lowest recorded average is 219 FPS on Ultra settings. At 4K, the GPU is more meaningfully utilized, but it still has significant headroom—the difference between 4K Low (207 FPS) and 4K Ultra (99 FPS) shows the GPU is not fully taxed even at the highest settings.

Q: What is the best settings preset for a 144Hz monitor at 1440p?

A: The High preset at 1440p delivers 165 FPS average, which exceeds 144Hz. Ultra runs at 157 FPS, also above 144Hz. Both are viable, but High leaves more headroom for frame time spikes.

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

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

Q: Does the GPU's 16 GB VRAM matter for Inside?

A: No. The game's modest texture and geometry demands are far below 16 GB. The VRAM capacity has no measurable impact on the recorded FPS, as the game would run fine on a fraction of the available memory.

Q: Is there any setting where the frame rate drops below 100 FPS?

A: Yes. At 4K Ultra, the average is 99 FPS. This is the only measured configuration below 100 FPS. All other settings and resolutions remain above 104 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080

• Low: 456 FPS average
• Medium: 367 FPS average, 312 FPS minimum, 422 FPS maximum
• High: 230 FPS average
• Ultra: 219 FPS average

2560x1440

• Low: 330 FPS average
• Medium: 264 FPS average, 224 FPS minimum, 304 FPS maximum
• High: 165 FPS average
• Ultra: 157 FPS average

3840x2160

• Low: 207 FPS average
• Medium: 166 FPS average, 141 FPS minimum, 191 FPS maximum
• High: 104 FPS average
• Ultra: 99 FPS average

The data shows a consistent pattern: each step up in resolution costs roughly 30-40% of the frame rate, while each step up in settings costs 10-20%. The Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values, showing a frame time variance of 50 FPS at 1080p, 80 FPS at 1440p, and 50 FPS at 4K. This variance is minor in absolute terms but indicates that Medium settings introduce more frame pacing variability than the other presets, which lack recorded minimums and maximums.

The overall performance envelope for this combo in Inside spans from 99 FPS (4K Ultra) to 456 FPS (1080p Low). This is a system that will never struggle with this game, regardless of how you configure it. The limiting factor at lower resolutions is the CPU's ability to process draw calls and game logic, while at 4K the GPU's pixel throughput becomes the constraint. For a puzzle platformer, this level of performance is far beyond any practical requirement.