Inside

Inside is a 2D puzzle-platformer from 2016, and this benchmark pairing of an Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus with an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 produces results that are overwhelmingly GPU-bound, yet the data reveals a surprising headroom in the CPU that allows for extreme frame rates at lower settings. The measured FPS across all resolutions and presets indicates that while the processor is among the top percentile of all CPUs, the graphics card is the primary limiter for this specific title, especially as resolution and detail levels increase.

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 desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture and manufactured on a 3 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, and it carries a 36 MB shared L3 cache alongside a per-core L2 cache of 3 MB. In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44253 and a single-core score of 2439, which places it in the 96th percentile versus all CPUs.

For a game like Inside, which is not heavily threaded, the single-core performance is often the more relevant metric. However, the measured FPS data shows that even at 1080p Low, where the CPU would typically be the bottleneck, the system achieves 231 FPS. This is far beyond the refresh rate of most displays and indicates that the CPU is not a limiting factor at any tested setting. The core count of 24 is overkill for this title; the game simply does not scale to utilize such a high thread count, so the processor's massive multi-threaded throughput (as evidenced by a Passmark multi-thread score of 68574) remains largely untapped.

The CPU's memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s and support for DDR5 memory are also not stressors for this game. The benchmark results show that the limiting component shifts based on settings and resolution. At 1080p Low, the system is likely still GPU-limited, but the GPU is so fast relative to the game's demands that it produces 231 FPS. The CPU's boost clock of 5.50 GHz provides ample single-thread speed to feed the GPU, and the data shows no scenario where the CPU's performance ceiling prevents the GPU from reaching its maximum output. In essence, this processor provides a massive performance buffer, ensuring that the GTX 1070 is the sole determinant of frame rate in every measured configuration.

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

Analyzing the measured FPS rows, the optimal balance between visual quality and performance is achieved at the Medium preset. At 1920x1080, the Medium setting yields an average of 184 FPS, which is only marginally lower than the 231 FPS seen at Low but provides significantly better visual fidelity. The jump from Medium to High at 1080p results in a substantial drop to 115 FPS, a 37.5% reduction, which is a steep price for the incremental visual gains. The Ultra preset at 1080p performs nearly identically to High, at 110 FPS, indicating diminishing returns at the top end.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset delivers 133 FPS, which remains above the 120 FPS threshold often considered ideal for high-refresh-rate gaming. This is a strong choice for users with 1440p displays. Moving to High at this resolution drops the average to 83 FPS, which is still playable but loses the fluidity of the Medium setting. For 3840x2160, the Medium preset provides 83 FPS, which is the highest average at that resolution besides the Low preset's 104 FPS. The High and Ultra presets at 4K fall to 52 FPS and 50 FPS, respectively, which are below the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay.

Therefore, the data strongly supports the Medium preset as the "sweet spot" for this combination. It provides a 184 FPS average at 1080p, a 133 FPS average at 1440p, and a respectable 83 FPS at 4K. The min FPS recorded for Medium at 1080p is 157 FPS, and at 1440p it is 113 FPS, indicating that even the worst-case frame times are well within playable ranges. Choosing Low does increase FPS, but the jump from Medium to Low is not as significant as the jump from Medium to High, making Low an unnecessary compromise for most users. The Ultra preset offers no measurable benefit over High in this game, as the average FPS difference is only 5 FPS at 1080p, making it the least efficient setting.

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

The data shows a clear and predictable scaling of FPS as resolution increases, which definitively identifies the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 as the bottleneck. At the Medium preset, the average FPS scales from 184 at 1920x1080, down to 133 at 2560x1440, and finally to 83 at 3840x2160. This represents a 27.7% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 54.9% drop from 1080p to 4K. This pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where the number of pixels to render increases, and the GPU's fixed processing capacity is spread thinner.

The GTX 1070, with its 8 GB of GDDR5 memory and 256-bit memory bus (providing 256.3 GB/s of bandwidth), is a mid-range card from the Pascal generation. Its 1920 shading units and 64 ROPs are taxed heavily at higher resolutions. This is evident in the 4K results, where even the Low preset (104 FPS) is significantly lower than the 1080p Low result (231 FPS). If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect the FPS to remain relatively constant across resolutions, as the CPU's workload (game logic, physics) does not scale with pixel count. Instead, we see FPS drop by more than half from 1080p to 4K at every preset level, confirming the GPU is the primary constraint.

Furthermore, the performance gap between the Low and Ultra presets widens as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low (231 FPS) and Ultra (110 FPS) is 121 FPS. At 4K, the difference between Low (104 FPS) and Ultra (50 FPS) is 54 FPS. This suggests that at lower resolutions, the GPU has spare cycles to render additional effects, while at 4K, it is so saturated that the visual settings have a proportionally smaller impact on the final frame rate. This behavior is entirely consistent with a GPU that is running at full utilization in all scenarios.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the database of tested combinations, this pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 ranks 2370 out of 2887 combos for Inside. This places it in the bottom 18% of all tested systems, which is a direct reflection of the GPU's age and performance tier relative to the processor. The CPU itself is a top-tier performer, ranking in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, but the combo's ranking is dragged down by the GPU's 47th percentile standing.

This disparity highlights a significant imbalance in the system. The data suggests that the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is capable of far higher frame rates than the GTX 1070 can deliver. Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals, it is virtually tied with the Intel Xeon 6520P (deltaPct 0%) and only 1.5% behind the AMD EPYC 4564P, indicating that the processor is in a performance class of its own. However, the GPU's nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro W5000 (deltaPct -0.2%) and NVIDIA Quadro M2000M (deltaPct -0.5%), which are professional or mobile parts that are not designed for high-end gaming.

The combo rank of 2370 out of 2887 indicates that while this system can play Inside, it does so at frame rates that are significantly lower than what the top 2370 other combinations achieve. This is not a criticism of the CPU, but rather a clear indication that the GTX 1070 is the limiting factor. For a game released in 2016, the GTX 1070 is a contemporary part, but when paired with a 2026 processor like the Core Ultra 7, the system's overall performance is capped by the graphics card. The measured FPS data shows that the system is capable of exceeding 200 FPS at 1080p Low, which means it is not a poor performer in absolute terms, but in the context of all tested combos, many of which likely feature more powerful modern GPUs, this pairing falls to the lower end of the spectrum.

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

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this system to achieve a 60 FPS average?

A: To achieve a 60 FPS average, the system must use the Medium preset at 3840x2160, which yields 83 FPS. At 2560x1440, the High preset provides 83 FPS, and the Ultra preset provides 79 FPS, both exceeding the 60 FPS target. At 1920x1080, all presets except Ultra (110 FPS) exceed 60 FPS, with the lowest being High at 115 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU's single-core performance compare to its multi-core performance in the context of this game?

A: The CPU's single-core performance is exceptional, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2439, but this game does not heavily utilize multi-threading. The multi-core score is 44253, but the 24-core processor is not fully utilized by Inside. The data shows that even at 1080p Low (231 FPS), the CPU is not the bottleneck, as the frame rate is still limited by the GPU.

Q: Is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 a significant bottleneck for the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus in this game?

A: Yes, the data indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor. The FPS drops significantly as resolution increases, from 231 FPS at 1080p Low to 104 FPS at 4K Low. This resolution-dependent scaling is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck, as the CPU's workload does not change with resolution.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for the Medium preset at 2560x1440?

A: The minimum FPS recorded for the Medium preset at 2560x1440 is 113 FPS, with an average of 133 FPS and a maximum of 153 FPS. This indicates that the frame rate remains stable and well above 60 FPS even during demanding scenes.

Q: How does this system's performance rank compared to other tested combinations?

A: This combo ranks 2370 out of 2887 tested combinations for Inside. This places it in the lower 18% of all systems, which is primarily due to the GTX 1070's age and performance tier, despite the CPU being in the 96th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: What is the difference in average FPS between the Low and Ultra presets at 1920x1080?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 231 FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves an average of 110 FPS. This represents a difference of 121 FPS, or a 52.4% reduction in performance when moving from the lowest to the highest settings.

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

The following data is derived directly from the measured FPS rows for the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 combination.

1920x1080:

• Low: Average FPS is 231.
• Medium: Average FPS is 184, with a minimum of 157 and a maximum of 212.
• High: Average FPS is 115.
• Ultra: Average FPS is 110.

At this resolution, the system is capable of very high frame rates. The jump from Low to Medium results in a 47 FPS drop (231 to 184), but the drop from Medium to High is a more severe 69 FPS (184 to 115). The difference between High and Ultra is minimal, only 5 FPS (115 to 110), suggesting that the Ultra setting offers negligible visual improvements over High for this game.

2560x1440:

• Low: Average FPS is 166.
• Medium: Average FPS is 133, with a minimum of 113 and a maximum of 153.
• High: Average FPS is 83.
• Ultra: Average FPS is 79.

At 1440p, the frame rates remain respectable. The Medium preset provides a 133 FPS average, which is still suitable for high-refresh-rate displays. The High preset drops to 83 FPS, which is a significant decrease from Medium, and the Ultra preset provides only 4 FPS less than High, at 79 FPS. The Low preset at 166 FPS is the only setting that exceeds the 144 Hz refresh rate.

3840x2160:

• Low: Average FPS is 104.
• Medium: Average FPS is 83, with a minimum of 71 and a maximum of 96.
• High: Average FPS is 52.
• Ultra: Average FPS is 50.

At 4K, the GPU is heavily taxed. Only the Low and Medium presets manage to stay above the 60 FPS threshold, with 104 FPS and 83 FPS, respectively. The High and Ultra presets fall to 52 FPS and 50 FPS, respectively, which are below the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay. The minimum FPS for Medium at 4K is 71 FPS, indicating that even the worst frame times are playable.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 is a Pascal-architecture GPU built on a 16 nm process, featuring 1920 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. It operates at a base clock of 1506 MHz and a boost clock of 1683 MHz. The card comes with 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 256.3 GB/s. This specification set is the primary driver of the measured performance in Inside.

The 8 GB of VRAM is more than sufficient for a game like Inside, which does not require large texture pools. The memory bandwidth of 256.3 GB/s is also adequate, as the data does not show any signs of memory-related stuttering. The GPU's compute capability is the limiting factor, as evidenced by the FPS scaling with resolution. The 6.463 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is what determines how quickly the GPU can process the pixel and vertex data. As resolution increases, the number of pixels that need to be processed increases, and the GPU's fixed throughput becomes the bottleneck.

The GTX 1070's benchmarks show a Passmark G3D score of 13498 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1082. These scores place it in the 47th percentile of all GPUs, which is a mid-range position. The nearest rivals, such as the AMD FirePro W5000 (deltaPct -0.2%) and NVIDIA Quadro M2000M (deltaPct -0.5%), are professional or mobile parts, highlighting that the GTX 1070 is a capable but not top-tier gaming card by modern standards. In the context of Inside, this means the GPU can handle 1080p and 1440p with high frame rates at lower presets, but it struggles to maintain 60 FPS at 4K on higher presets. The boost clock of 1683 MHz is the maximum speed the GPU will run at, and the data suggests that it is running at or near this limit in all scenarios, as the frame rates are consistently limited by the GPU's rendering capacity.