Inside

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, built on TSMC's 3 nm process. Its base clock is 3.70 GHz with a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, and it carries 36 MB of shared L3 cache alongside 3 MB of L2 per core. This configuration places it in the 96th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 93785 — a figure that puts it statistically even with the Intel Xeon 6520P (93786, 0% delta) and marginally ahead of the AMD EPYC 4564P (95183, -1.5%) and AMD EPYC 9175F (95615, -1.9%).

For Inside, a puzzle platformer that is not known for extreme CPU demands, this processor's multithreaded muscle is largely surplus. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 44253 and the Passmark multithread score of 68574 indicate that the CPU can handle far more complex workloads than a 2D side-scroller requires. However, the single-thread performance matters more here. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2439 and Passmark single-thread score of 5068 show strong per-core throughput, which ensures that the game's physics calculations and entity updates never become a bottleneck.

The data confirms this interpretation. At 1080p Low settings, the system produces 378 FPS, which is the highest recorded figure in the entire measured dataset. Even at 4K Low, the system still delivers 171 FPS. These numbers suggest that the CPU is not limiting performance in any measurable way, even at lower resolutions where CPU overhead typically becomes more visible. The 24 threads and 5.50 GHz boost clock provide ample headroom, and the DDR5 memory support with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth ensures that data feeding the GPU is never starved.

When compared to its nearest rivals, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus's performance profile is essentially identical to the Xeon 6520P, with a 0% delta in average benchmark score. The slight negative deltas against the EPYC parts (-1.5% and -1.9%) are within noise for a game like Inside. The practical takeaway is that this CPU is overqualified for the task; the frame rates observed are dictated almost entirely by the GPU and the settings chosen, not by processor capability.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 is built on the Ampere architecture using Samsung's 8 nm process, featuring the GA104 chip with 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die. Its base clock runs at 1500 MHz with a boost clock of 1725 MHz, and it is paired with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's shading units number 5888, with 184 texture mapping units and 96 raster output units. Its FP32 performance is rated at 20.31 TFLOPS.

The RTX 3070 sits in the 61st percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17208. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT (17083, 0.7% ahead), followed by the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (17037, 1% ahead) and the AMD Radeon HD 7970M (17019, 1.1% ahead). The data shows the RTX 3070 is slightly behind the NVIDIA Tesla K40c (17468, -1.5%), but these are all tight margins.

In the context of Inside, the RTX 3070's capabilities are more than sufficient. The game's art style uses muted colors and simple geometric shapes, which means the GPU's 8 GB VRAM is never stressed. Even at 4K Ultra, the highest settings tested, the system maintains 81 FPS average, which is well above playable thresholds. The GPU's 1725 MHz boost clock and 448.0 GB/s memory bandwidth allow it to push high frame rates across all resolutions, with the most demanding configuration (4K Ultra) still producing smooth motion.

The Passmark G3D score of 22214 and the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3162 indicate that the GPU is a mid-to-upper tier performer in the current landscape. For Inside, the RTX 3070 never appears to be the limiting factor until you reach the very top settings at 4K. The gap between 4K High (85 FPS) and 4K Ultra (81 FPS) is only 4 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is approaching its ceiling at this resolution but still has enough headroom to deliver a consistent experience.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of resolution scaling that identifies the GPU as the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU remains untaxed throughout. Starting at 1080p Low, the system produces 378 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 272 FPS, a reduction of 106 FPS (28% lower). At 4K Low, the frame rate falls to 171 FPS, which is 45% below the 1440p figure and 55% below the 1080p figure.

The pattern holds across all settings. At Medium settings, the frame rates are 302 FPS (1080p), 217 FPS (1440p), and 136 FPS (4K). The percentage drops from 1080p to 4K are consistent: roughly 55-56% for both Low and Medium presets. At High settings, the figures are 189 FPS (1080p), 136 FPS (1440p), and 85 FPS (4K), representing a 55% drop from 1080p to 4K. Ultra settings follow the same trend: 180 FPS (1080p), 129 FPS (1440p), and 81 FPS (4K), a 55% reduction.

This uniform scaling behavior is a classic signature of GPU-bound performance. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see a plateau at lower resolutions where the frame rate stops increasing despite reduced pixel counts. Instead, the frame rates scale almost linearly with pixel count, indicating that the RTX 3070 is doing all the heavy lifting. The CPU's 24 cores and high boost clock are never the constraint, even at 1080p where CPU overhead is typically most pronounced.

The fact that 1080p Low produces 378 FPS while 4K Ultra produces 81 FPS — a 4.7x difference — underscores the GPU's role as the performance arbiter. For competitive play or high-refresh monitors, 1080p or 1440p settings are where this combo shines. At 4K, the system remains playable but the frame rates drop into a range where the GPU's limits become apparent.

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

Based on the measured data, the optimal settings for this configuration depend on the target resolution and refresh rate. For 1080p displays, the High preset delivers 189 FPS, which is sufficient for any monitor up to 165 Hz. The Ultra preset only adds 9 FPS over High (180 FPS), which is a negligible gain given that the visual difference between High and Ultra in Inside is minimal. The Medium preset at 302 FPS is excessive for most displays and offers no practical benefit beyond High.

At 1440p, the High preset produces 136 FPS, which comfortably handles 120 Hz and 144 Hz monitors. The Medium preset at 217 FPS is overkill, while Ultra at 129 FPS is only 7 FPS slower than High. The data suggests that High is the sweet spot at this resolution, offering a balanced frame rate without the diminishing returns of Ultra.

For 4K displays, the situation changes. The High preset delivers 85 FPS, which is smooth but not ideal for high-refresh gaming. The Medium preset at 136 FPS is the standout choice, providing a 60% improvement over High while still maintaining a very playable experience. The Low preset at 171 FPS is even faster but sacrifices visual quality in a game where atmosphere matters. The Ultra preset at 81 FPS is the lowest playable option and does not justify its performance cost over High.

The measured rows show that Medium settings at 4K (136 FPS) offer the best balance of visual fidelity and performance. At 1080p and 1440p, High is the recommended preset. The Low preset is only advisable for extreme frame rate chasing, which is unnecessary given that Inside is a single-player puzzle game without competitive multiplayer.

FAQ

*Q: Can this system run Inside at 4K Ultra settings?*

A: Yes, the measured data shows an average of 81 FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings. This is playable, though it is the lowest frame rate recorded in the dataset.

Q: What is the highest frame rate this configuration can achieve?

A: The maximum recorded average is 378 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. At Medium settings, the highest is 302 FPS, and at High settings, it is 189 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 3070 compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RTX 3070 scores 17208 on average, which is 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT (17083), 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (17037), and 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 7970M (17019). It is 1.5% behind the NVIDIA Tesla K40c (17468).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting component at higher resolutions. Frame rates drop by approximately 55% from 1080p to 4K across all settings, which is consistent with GPU-bound performance. The CPU's 24 threads and high boost clock are never the constraint.

Q: What settings should I use for a 144 Hz monitor at 1440p?

A: The High preset at 2560x1440 produces 136 FPS, which is close to a 144 Hz refresh rate. The Ultra preset at 129 FPS is also viable, but High offers the best balance without the extra load.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus rank among all CPUs?

A: It sits in the 96th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 93785. It is statistically tied with the Intel Xeon 6520P (93786, 0% delta) and slightly ahead of the AMD EPYC 4564P (95183, -1.5%) and AMD EPYC 9175F (95615, -1.9%).

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

1920x1080:

• Low: 378 FPS average
• Medium: 302 FPS average, with a minimum of 257 FPS and a maximum of 347 FPS
• High: 189 FPS average
• Ultra: 180 FPS average

2560x1440:

• Low: 272 FPS average
• Medium: 217 FPS average, with a minimum of 185 FPS and a maximum of 250 FPS
• High: 136 FPS average
• Ultra: 129 FPS average

3840x2160:

• Low: 171 FPS average
• Medium: 136 FPS average, with a minimum of 116 FPS and a maximum of 157 FPS
• High: 85 FPS average
• Ultra: 81 FPS average

The data shows a consistent performance hierarchy across all resolutions. Low settings always produce the highest frame rates, followed by Medium, then High, with Ultra being the slowest. The gap between Low and Medium is substantial: at 1080p, the difference is 76 FPS (378 vs 302), at 1440p it is 55 FPS (272 vs 217), and at 4K it is 35 FPS (171 vs 136). The gap between High and Ultra is much smaller: 9 FPS at 1080p (189 vs 180), 7 FPS at 1440p (136 vs 129), and 4 FPS at 4K (85 vs 81).

This pattern indicates that the Medium preset offers the most significant performance headroom over High and Ultra, while the visual differences between High and Ultra are minimal in this title. The minimum and maximum values recorded for Medium settings show consistent frame pacing, with the 4K Medium minimum of 116 FPS still well above playable thresholds. Overall, this combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 delivers exceptional performance for Inside at any resolution, with the only caveat being that 4K Ultra is best reserved for players who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate headroom.