Inside

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT delivers a performance profile in Inside that is heavily dictated by resolution, shifting from a CPU-bound powerhouse at 1080p to a GPU-limited experience at 4K. Benchmark results show this combination is capable of exceptional frame rates, but the nature of the bottleneck changes dramatically across the tested settings, making the choice of resolution and preset more impactful than the hardware's raw compute potential.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases, with the most significant performance drop occurring between 1440p and 4K. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo produces an average of 140 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same High preset, the average drops to 101 FPS, a decrease of 27.9%. The jump to 3840x2160 at High yields just 63 FPS, representing a further 37.6% reduction from the 1440p result and a total drop of 55% from the 1080p figure. This steep decline at 4K strongly indicates that the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT becomes the limiting factor, as the pixel throughput demand outpaces the GPU's capabilities.

The scaling pattern is even more pronounced at lower settings, which isolates the GPU's raw fill-rate limits. At Low settings, the frame rate plummets from 281 FPS at 1080p to 202 FPS at 1440p (a 28.1% drop), and then to 127 FPS at 4K (a 37.1% drop from 1440p). The fact that even at Low settings the 4K frame rate is less than half of the 1080p result confirms that the GPU's shading units and memory bandwidth are the primary constraints at higher resolutions. The 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 10.60 TFLOPS FP32 throughput are simply insufficient to maintain the high frame rates seen at lower resolutions.

This behavior suggests that the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is not the bottleneck in this title, except possibly at the very lowest resolution and settings. The CPU's 24 cores and 24 threads, with a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, provide ample headroom for the game's logic and physics. The data shows that the frame rate scales almost linearly with the number of pixels being rendered, which is the hallmark of a GPU-limited scenario. The only instance where the CPU might come into play is at 1080p Low, where 281 FPS approaches the point where even a high-end processor's single-thread performance could become a factor, but the results show no such limit being hit here.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT plays the decisive role in determining the playable experience at higher resolutions, with its VRAM capacity and clock speeds being the key attributes. The GPU features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. In Inside, a game with a distinct, minimalist art style, this memory configuration is sufficient for all tested settings, as there are no signs of texture thrashing or stuttering in the minimum FPS data. The Medium preset at 4K reports a minimum of 86 FPS, which indicates that memory allocation is not causing severe frame time spikes.

The GPU's clock behavior is typical of the RDNA 2.0 architecture, with a base clock of 1968 MHz, a game clock of 2359 MHz, and a boost clock of 2589 MHz. These clocks allow the 2048 shading units to achieve a peak FP32 performance of 10.60 TFLOPS. The data shows that this compute throughput is adequate for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where the combo easily exceeds 100 FPS on High settings. However, at 4K, the GPU's raw processing power is insufficient to maintain high frame rates, with the Ultra preset dropping to just 60 FPS. This suggests that the GPU's pixel fill rate and shader execution are the limiting factors at 4K, not its memory subsystem.

The GPU's position in the market is reflected in its percentileVsAllGpus score of 70, placing it above the median. Its nearest rivals, according to the average benchmark scores, include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (0.7% slower) and the Intel Arc A350M (0.8% faster). This indicates that the RX 6600 XT is a solid mid-range performer, but it is not designed for 4K Ultra settings in more demanding titles. In Inside, the results align with this expectation: the GPU can handle 4K at Medium settings (101 FPS) but struggles to maintain 60 FPS on Ultra. The data clearly shows that the GPU is the component that dictates the performance ceiling, particularly beyond 1440p.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Inside, this specific pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT ranks 1998 out of 2887 combos. This places it in the lower third of all tested systems, which is a surprising result given the high-end CPU. The ranking suggests that while the CPU is a top-tier component, the GPU's mid-range standing drags the overall combo performance down, especially when compared to systems equipped with more powerful graphics cards.

The CPU itself is a powerhouse, with a percentileVsAllCpus score of 96, placing it in the top 4% of all processors. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, which it leads by a mere 0.2%, and the AMD EPYC 4584PX, which it beats by 1.1%. This shows that the 290K Plus is among the fastest CPUs available, but its performance is largely irrelevant in Inside at higher resolutions where the GPU is the bottleneck. The combo's low rank is therefore a direct consequence of the GPU's limitations, not the CPU's.

The disparity between the CPU's top-tier ranking and the combo's mid-pack position highlights a significant imbalance in this pairing for this specific game. The data indicates that the RX 6600 XT, which has a percentileVsAllGpus score of 70, is the limiting factor. Its average benchmark score of 24442 is closely matched by the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (24277) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER (24170). This means that in a CPU-light game like Inside, pairing the 290K Plus with a more powerful GPU would yield a much higher combo rank, as the CPU would not bottleneck the system.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across all resolution and settings combinations. The following breakdown details the exact average frame rates, with minimum and maximum values where available.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 281 FPS average
• Medium: 225 FPS average, with a minimum of 191 FPS and maximum of 258 FPS
• High: 140 FPS average
• Ultra: 134 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 202 FPS average
• Medium: 161 FPS average, with a minimum of 137 FPS and maximum of 186 FPS
• High: 101 FPS average
• Ultra: 96 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 127 FPS average
• Medium: 101 FPS average, with a minimum of 86 FPS and maximum of 117 FPS
• High: 63 FPS average
• Ultra: 60 FPS average

The data shows a consistent hierarchy across all resolutions: Low is fastest, followed by Medium, then High, with Ultra being the slowest. The gap between Low and Medium is significant, with Medium being roughly 20-25% slower than Low at each resolution. The transition from High to Ultra is much smaller, with only a 4.3% difference at 1080p (140 vs 134 FPS) and a 4.8% difference at 4K (63 vs 60 FPS). This indicates that the Ultra preset offers marginal visual improvements over High but at a measurable performance cost.

The minimum FPS values for the Medium preset show that the game maintains smooth frame pacing, with no major dips. At 1080p, the minimum is 191 FPS, which is well above the refresh rate of most displays. At 1440p, the minimum drops to 137 FPS, still highly playable. At 4K, the minimum is 86 FPS, which is close to the average of 101 FPS, suggesting that even the most demanding scenes remain fluid. The absence of minimum FPS data for Low, High, and Ultra presets means that the Medium preset is the only one with verified frame time consistency.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution to play Inside with this hardware for a smooth 60 FPS experience?*

A: All three tested resolutions can achieve over 60 FPS on every preset. However, for a consistent 60 FPS with headroom, 4K at Medium settings is the safest choice, as it averages 101 FPS with a minimum of 86 FPS.

*Q: Can this combo handle 4K Ultra settings in Inside?*

A: Yes, but just barely. The 4K Ultra preset averages exactly 60 FPS, which meets the standard for smooth gameplay. However, there is no minimum FPS data available, so it is unclear if any scenes drop below that threshold.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus or the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT the bottleneck in this game?

A: The GPU is the bottleneck at all tested resolutions. This is evident from the performance scaling: as resolution increases, frame rates drop significantly, which is a classic sign of GPU limitation. The CPU's high benchmark scores and 96th percentile ranking indicate it has ample headroom.

Q: How does the RX 6600 XT compare to its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630?

A: The RX 6600 XT has an average benchmark score of 24442, which is 0.7% higher than the GTX 1630's score of 24277. In practical terms, this means the RX 6600 XT is slightly faster in synthetic benchmarks.

Q: What is the performance difference between the High and Ultra presets at 1440p?

A: At 1440p, the High preset averages 101 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 96 FPS. This is a 5 FPS difference, or roughly 4.8%, which is a minor performance hit for potentially better visual quality.

Q: Is the combo's rank of 1998 out of 2887 a poor result?

A: It is a below-average result, placing the combo in the lower third of all tested systems. This is primarily due to the GPU's mid-range performance, as the CPU is a top-tier component. The ranking would be significantly higher with a more powerful GPU.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this hardware depend entirely on the target resolution and display refresh rate. For users with a 1080p display, the High preset is the recommended choice, as it delivers 140 FPS, which is more than enough for any high-refresh monitor. The Ultra preset offers only a marginal performance drop to 134 FPS, so it is also a viable option for those who prioritize visual fidelity, but the 6 FPS difference is negligible. The Low and Medium presets are unnecessary at this resolution, as they provide frame rates far beyond what most displays can show, with 281 FPS and 225 FPS respectively.

At 1440p, the High preset is again the sweet spot, providing 101 FPS. This is ideal for 144Hz monitors, though it does not fully saturate them. The Medium preset offers a substantial boost to 161 FPS, which is better suited for 165Hz or 170Hz displays, and it still maintains a smooth experience with a minimum of 137 FPS. The Ultra preset at 96 FPS is a good choice for 100Hz displays, but the difference from High is minimal. The Low preset at 202 FPS is only recommended for competitive play where maximum frame rate is paramount, as the visual quality is significantly reduced.

For 4K displays, the Medium preset is the clear winner, providing an average of 101 FPS with a minimum of 86 FPS. This is the only preset at 4K that offers a comfortable margin above 60 FPS, ensuring a consistently smooth experience. The High preset at 63 FPS and Ultra at 60 FPS are playable, but they are on the edge of the 60 FPS threshold, and any demanding scene could cause a dip below that mark. The Low preset at 127 FPS is an option for those who want high frame rates on a 120Hz 4K display, but it comes with a significant visual compromise. The data strongly suggests that 4K Medium is the best balance of performance and quality for this combination.