Inside

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

The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX is a 24-core, 24-thread mobile processor based on the Arrow Lake-HX architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It carries a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, with a 55 W TDP. The chip includes 36 MB of shared L3 cache, alongside 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core, and supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The processor sits at the 94th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 67469. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon w5-3525 (delta -0.3%), AMD EPYC 4484PX (delta -0.5%), AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5955WX (delta -0.6%), and Intel Xeon 6515P (delta +0.7%) — all within a single percentage point of its average score, meaning the 275HX is statistically tied with a cluster of workstation-class parts.

For a puzzle platformer like Inside, the CPU's role is less about raw multi-threaded throughput and more about maintaining a consistent frame pacing floor. The 24 cores and 24 threads are far more than the game can utilize — Inside is a side-scrolling title with a modest simulation load, so single-thread performance and cache latency matter more than core count. The 275HX's single-core Cinebench R23 score of 2204 and Geekbench single-core score of 2458 indicate strong per-thread performance, which helps keep the game logic and rendering thread from stuttering. The high boost clock of 5.40 GHz is the key spec here; it allows the CPU to quickly process the game's physics and collision checks between frames. In Passmark's single-thread test, the chip scores 4713, which is well above the threshold needed to avoid bottlenecking a mid-range GPU at lower resolutions.

The multi-core scores — Cinebench R23 multi at 35589, Geekbench multi at 20795, and Passmark multithread at 55759 — are impressive but largely irrelevant for this game. Inside is not a title that scales across 24 threads; the data shows that the CPU's percentile rank (94th) is driven by workstation workloads like data compression (Passmark score 608381) and floating-point math (Passmark score 191186), not gaming. For this specific game, the CPU is effectively overkill. The benchmark results indicate that the bottleneck in this combo will almost always be the GPU, even at lower settings where frame rates exceed 200 FPS. The 275HX's 24 threads and 36 MB of L3 cache provide ample headroom for background tasks — such as streaming or recording software — without impacting frame times. In short, the CPU is not a limiting factor for Inside; it provides a stable platform that lets the GPU do the heavy lifting.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 7800M is a mobile GPU based on the Navi 32 chip, built on RDNA 3.0 architecture using a 5 nm process from TSMC. It features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's base clock is 1295 MHz, with a boost clock of 2335 MHz and a game clock of 2145 MHz. Memory runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed. The GPU has 3840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, 96 raster output units, and 60 ray tracing cores. Its peak FP32 performance is 35.87 TFLOPS, with a 180 W TDP. The RX 7800M sits at the 73rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 27883. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (delta +0.2%), AMD Radeon Pro W5500X (delta -0.3%), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (delta -0.5%), and AMD FirePro S7150 (delta -0.8%) — again all within a single percentage point, making the 7800M statistically equivalent to a group of older workstation and enthusiast cards.

For Inside, the GPU's 12 GB VRAM is far more than needed; the game's art style uses simple textures and limited geometry, so the memory bus width and bandwidth (432.0 GB/s) are the more relevant specs. The high pixel rate of 224.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 560.4 GTexel/s help the GPU push frame rates well above 60 FPS at all tested settings. The boost clock of 2335 MHz ensures that the GPU can ramp up quickly during scenes with heavy alpha effects or lighting, which are common in Inside's atmospheric presentation. The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (version 12_2) means it can handle the game's draw calls efficiently, though Inside is not a demanding title by modern standards.

The benchmark data shows that the RX 7800M is the primary driver of performance in this combo. At 1080p Low, the GPU produces 286 FPS average, while at 4K Ultra it drops to 61 FPS — a clear indication that the GPU is scaling with resolution and settings as expected. The 12 GB VRAM is never a constraint here; the game's memory footprint is tiny, and the GPU's compute capabilities (Passmark G3D score of 17613) are more than sufficient. The GPU's percentile rank of 73rd is respectable but not top-tier, which aligns with the measured results: strong at 1080p and 1440p, but showing its limits at 4K Ultra where the average FPS dips to 61. The data indicates that the RX 7800M is a capable mid-range mobile GPU that pairs well with the 275HX for this game, though it will struggle to maintain high refresh rates at 4K with maxed settings.

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 GPU-bound scaling as resolution increases. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 143 at 1080p to 103 at 1440p (a 28% reduction) and then to 65 at 4K (a 55% reduction from 1080p). This is a classic GPU-limited curve — the CPU can feed frames fast enough at all resolutions, but the GPU's rendering load grows quadratically with pixel count. The fact that the 1440p High score (103 FPS) exactly matches the 4K Medium score (103 FPS) is telling: the GPU is equally stressed by a 1.78x resolution increase as it is by a one-step settings increase at the same resolution.

At Low settings, the scaling is even more pronounced. The average FPS goes from 286 at 1080p to 206 at 1440p (a 28% drop) and then to 129 at 4K (a 55% drop). These percentages are nearly identical to the High settings percentages, which suggests that the GPU is consistently the limiting factor regardless of settings. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see the 1080p Low score (286 FPS) to be capped by CPU limits, and the scaling from 1080p to 1440p would be flatter. Instead, the consistent 28% and 55% drops across both Low and High settings indicate that the RX 7800M is the sole constraint.

The Medium settings data includes minimum and maximum FPS values, which provide additional insight. At 1080p Medium, the average is 229 FPS with a min of 194 and max of 263 — a spread of 69 FPS, indicating some frame time variance but still well above playable thresholds. At 1440p Medium, the average is 164 FPS with a min of 140 and max of 189 — the spread narrows to 49 FPS, suggesting that as the GPU becomes more loaded, frame pacing becomes more consistent. At 4K Medium, the average is 103 FPS with a min of 88 and max of 119 — the spread widens again to 31 FPS, but the minimum of 88 FPS is still comfortably above 60. This pattern suggests that the GPU has enough headroom at 1440p to handle the game's occasional spikes in complexity, but at 4K it is working closer to its limits, causing more variance.

The data clearly indicates that the CPU plays no limiting role in this game. Even at 1080p Low where the GPU produces 286 FPS, the 275HX's strong single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single at 2204) is sufficient to keep up. The 24 cores and 24 threads are never fully utilized, and the game's modest CPU demands mean that the processor is essentially idle while the GPU does the work. For users with high-refresh-rate displays, this means that 1080p and 1440p are the sweet spots, while 4K will require settings compromises to maintain smooth frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX combined with the AMD Radeon RX 7800M ranks 1877th out of 2887 tested combos for Inside, placing it in the 35th percentile of all combinations. This is a surprisingly low rank given that both components are above-average in their respective categories — the CPU is at the 94th percentile and the GPU is at the 73rd percentile. The discrepancy highlights that Inside is a lightweight game where most of the performance difference between combos is driven by GPU memory bandwidth and clock speeds, not raw compute power. Many lower-tier CPUs paired with faster GPUs will outrank this combo because the game simply doesn't stress the processor.

The rank of 1877th suggests that the RX 7800M, while competent, is not a top-tier performer for this specific title. Its nearest GPU rivals — the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20, AMD Radeon Pro W5500X, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, and AMD FirePro S7150 — are all older or workstation-oriented cards with similar average benchmark scores. The 7800M's 73rd percentile rank among all GPUs means that roughly 27% of GPUs in the database would outperform it in this game. The combo's middle-of-the-pack ranking also reflects that Inside is not a demanding title; many older or lower-end GPUs can achieve high frame rates at 1080p, narrowing the performance gap between the best and worst combos.

That said, the combo's rank is not indicative of a poor experience. The measured FPS data shows that this pairing delivers playable performance at all tested resolutions and settings, with the only exception being 4K Ultra where the average FPS drops to 61 — just above the 60 FPS threshold. The rank of 1877th out of 2887 combos means that about 65% of tested combinations perform better, but most of those combos likely feature higher-end GPUs like desktop-class cards or newer mobile flagships. For a mobile platform, this combo's performance is adequate, but it is not a leader for this game. The CPU's high rank (94th percentile) does not translate to a high combo rank because the game's performance is almost entirely GPU-bound. The data shows that this combo is better suited for titles that demand more CPU throughput, whereas Inside is a title where the GPU's memory bandwidth and pixel throughput are the deciding factors.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the user's resolution and refresh rate goals. At 1080p, all four settings presets deliver playable frame rates: Low (286 FPS), Medium (229 FPS with a min of 194), High (143 FPS), and Ultra (136 FPS). For a 144 Hz or 165 Hz display, the Ultra preset at 136 FPS is the best choice — it delivers the highest visual quality while still hitting the refresh rate ceiling for most monitors. The High preset at 143 FPS is also viable, but Ultra provides marginally better visuals for a negligible FPS cost (7 FPS difference). If the user has a 240 Hz display, the Medium preset at 229 FPS is the sweet spot, offering a significant visual upgrade over Low (286 FPS) while maintaining a frame rate that exceeds most high-refresh panels. The Low preset at 286 FPS is only necessary for competitive play or extremely high refresh rate displays (300+ Hz), which are rare for this genre.

At 1440p, the Medium preset at 164 FPS (min 140, max 189) is the best balance of visual quality and frame rate for high-refresh displays. It provides a 60% FPS improvement over High (103 FPS) while still looking substantially better than Low (206 FPS). The High preset at 103 FPS is acceptable for 100 Hz displays, but the Medium preset offers a more comfortable margin above 144 Hz. The Ultra preset at 98 FPS is the only option that dips below 100 FPS, making it a poor choice for 144 Hz monitors unless the user prioritizes visuals over smoothness. The Low preset at 206 FPS is overkill for most displays and sacrifices too much visual fidelity for a 25% gain over Medium.

At 4K, the Medium preset at 103 FPS (min 88, max 119) is the clear winner. It delivers a smooth experience on 60 Hz displays and even supports 100 Hz panels. The High preset at 65 FPS is playable but leaves little headroom for frame time spikes, while the Ultra preset at 61 FPS is right at the edge of playability — the minimum FPS data is not available for Ultra, but the average suggests it will occasionally dip below 60. The Low preset at 129 FPS is the only way to achieve high refresh rates at 4K, but the visual compromise is significant for a game with such a distinctive art style. The data indicates that the Medium preset at 4K provides the best balance: it offers a 37% FPS improvement over High while maintaining visual quality that is close to the game's intended presentation. For users with 4K 120 Hz displays, the Low preset at 129 FPS is the only option that fully utilizes the panel, but the Medium preset at 103 FPS is a reasonable compromise.

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

At 1920x1080, the measured results show a clear hierarchy across settings. The Low preset delivers an average of 286 FPS, which is the highest score in the entire dataset and indicates that the GPU is barely taxed. The Medium preset averages 229 FPS, with a minimum of 194 and a maximum of 263 — this 69 FPS spread shows some frame time variance, but the minimum is still well above 144 Hz. The High preset averages 143 FPS, which is exactly half the Low score, suggesting a linear scaling with settings complexity. The Ultra preset averages 136 FPS, which is only 7 FPS lower than High — a modest drop that indicates Ultra settings add minimal additional GPU load at this resolution. The 1080p data shows that the combo is GPU-bound at all settings, with the CPU never becoming a limiting factor.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales as expected. The Low preset averages 206 FPS, a 28% drop from 1080p Low, which aligns with the increased pixel count. The Medium preset averages 164 FPS, with a minimum of 140 and a maximum of 189 — the spread narrows to 49 FPS compared to 1080p, indicating more consistent frame pacing as the GPU becomes more loaded. The High preset averages 103 FPS, which is exactly the same as the 4K Medium score, highlighting the equivalence between resolution and settings scaling. The Ultra preset averages 98 FPS, just 5 FPS below High — again showing that Ultra settings have a minimal impact over High at this resolution. The 1440p data suggests that the GPU's memory bandwidth (432.0 GB/s) is sufficient to handle the increased pixel load without significant penalties beyond the expected linear scaling.

At 3840x2160, the GPU begins to show its limits. The Low preset averages 129 FPS, a 37% drop from 1440p Low, which is a larger proportional decrease than the 1080p to 1440p transition. This suggests that the GPU is approaching its memory bandwidth ceiling at 4K. The Medium preset averages 103 FPS, with a minimum of 88 and a maximum of 119 — the 31 FPS spread is the tightest of all Medium settings, indicating that the GPU is working consistently hard at this resolution. The High preset averages 65 FPS, a 37% drop from 1440p High, matching the Low preset's scaling pattern. The Ultra preset averages 61 FPS, which is the lowest score in the dataset and just 1 FPS above the 60 FPS threshold. The 4K data shows that the RX 7800M can handle this game at playable frame rates, but the Ultra preset is borderline, and users seeking higher refresh rates should opt for the Medium preset. The minimum FPS data is only available for the Medium preset (88 FPS), which provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS, but the absence of min/max data for other settings suggests that the average scores may not fully represent worst-case scenarios.