Inside

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti presents a stark contrast in capabilities, yet the benchmark data for Inside shows a surprisingly playable combination. The processor is a 24-core, 24-thread powerhouse based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. Its massive multithreaded performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731 points, places it in the 96th percentile among all CPUs. This compute headroom is entirely irrelevant to the game’s frame pacing, as Inside is a 2D puzzle platformer that relies on a single primary thread for game logic. The CPU’s 3MB per-core L2 cache and 36MB shared L3 cache are more than sufficient, but the data indicates the processor is never the limiting factor; it simply idles while the GPU handles the rendering load. In contrast, the GTX 1660 Ti is a Turing-architecture GPU from the GeForce 16 series, built on a 12nm process. It features 1,536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs, with a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 1770 MHz. The 6GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus provides 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. While the GPU’s 41st percentile ranking among all GPUs and its 5.437 TFLOPS of FP32 performance are modest by modern standards, they are clearly the dominant factor in determining the FPS figures seen in the measured data.

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

The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is overkill for Inside. With 24 cores and 24 threads running at a 3.70 GHz base and 5.80 GHz boost, the processor’s capability is far beyond what a puzzle platformer requires. The data supports this: the CPU’s PassMark single-thread score is 4,823, and its Cinebench R23 single-core score is 7,303 points, which are excellent numbers. However, the game’s frame rates are not tied to these scores. For instance, at 1080p Low settings, the average FPS is 216, which is a high number, but it does not scale with the CPU's performance potential. The processor’s 24 threads are largely unused; the game engine likely utilizes only one or two. The L3 cache of 36 MB and the 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth are also irrelevant here, as the game’s data footprint is small. The CPU’s nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (0.2% delta) and the AMD EPYC 4584PX (1.1% delta), show that the 290K Plus is at the top of the heap, but these differences do not translate to any measurable FPS variation in this title. The benchmark results indicate that the CPU is a passive observer, with its performance ceiling so high that it never constrains the GPU. The processor’s 125W TDP and 3nm process node are specifications that speak to efficiency, but again, they have no bearing on the game’s output. The limiting factor is unequivocally the graphics card.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is the component that dictates performance in Inside. Its 6GB of GDDR6 memory is ample for this game’s textures, and its 288.0 GB/s bandwidth ensures data flows quickly enough for the GPU’s 1,500 MHz base and 1,770 MHz boost clocks. The GPU’s Turing architecture, with 1,536 shading units, handles the rendering of the game’s atmospheric 2D scenes. The data shows that the GPU’s performance is the bottleneck, as FPS drops proportionally with resolution and settings increases. For example, at 1080p Ultra, the average FPS is 103, while at 4K Ultra, it falls to 46. This drop is a direct result of the GPU’s fill rate and pixel throughput, which are measured at 84.96 GPixel/s and 169.9 GTexel/s, respectively. The GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 12,871 places it in the 41st percentile, and its nearest rivals—AMD Radeon 540 (0.7% delta), AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (1.9% delta), AMD Radeon R7 250 (2.2% delta), and Intel Arc A310 (2.3% delta)—are all within a narrow performance band. This indicates that the GTX 1660 Ti is a mid-range card that is being pushed to its limits at higher settings. The GPU’s 120W TDP and 12nm process are historical details, but the measured FPS data is what matters: the card can deliver playable frame rates at lower resolutions, but it struggles to maintain high averages at 4K with higher quality presets.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal balance between visual fidelity and performance is achieved at Medium settings. At 1080p, the Medium preset yields an average of 173 FPS, with a minimum of 147 FPS and a maximum of 199 FPS. This is a smooth experience that is well above the refresh rate of most standard monitors. In contrast, the High preset at 1080p drops to 108 FPS average, and Ultra falls further to 103 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium is substantial—from 216 FPS to 173 FPS—but the visual quality improvement is likely significant, making Medium the sweet spot. At 1440p, Medium settings produce an average of 124 FPS (min 106, max 143), which remains excellent. Even at 4K, Medium is the highest playable option, averaging 78 FPS (min 66, max 90). The High and Ultra presets at 4K drop to 49 FPS and 46 FPS, respectively, which are below the 60 FPS threshold for a consistently smooth experience. The Low preset is playable but visually barren, and the data suggests it is unnecessary except for extreme frame rate targets. The recommendation is clear: for the best experience, select Medium settings. It provides a 60+ FPS experience at all resolutions up to 4K, with the only exception being the 4K High and Ultra presets, which are not recommended. The data indicates that the GTX 1660 Ti has enough headroom for Medium, but pushing to High or Ultra introduces a performance penalty that is not worth the marginal visual gains.

FAQ

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

A: Yes, but only at Medium settings or lower. The measured FPS for 4K Medium is 78 FPS (min 66, max 90), while 4K Low is 98 FPS. The High preset drops to 49 FPS, and Ultra to 46 FPS, which are below the ideal 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What is the best settings preset for a 144Hz monitor at 1080p?

A: The Medium preset is ideal, with an average of 173 FPS (min 147, max 199). This stays above the 144Hz refresh rate. The Low preset offers 216 FPS, but Medium provides better visual quality without sacrificing the high frame rate.

Q: How does the 1080p Low setting compare to 1440p Low in terms of average FPS?

A: The 1080p Low setting achieves an average of 216 FPS, while 1440p Low achieves 155 FPS. This is a 61 FPS drop, indicating that resolution scaling has a significant impact on the GPU's load.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus a bottleneck for the GTX 1660 Ti in this game?

A: No. Benchmark results indicate that the CPU's performance is far higher than needed. The CPU's 96th percentile ranking and high single-thread scores (e.g., 4,823 in PassMark) mean it is never the limiting factor; the GPU determines the FPS.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS recorded for the 1440p Medium preset?

A: The measured data shows a minimum of 106 FPS and a maximum of 143 FPS, with an average of 124 FPS. This indicates a consistent performance range without major frame drops.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 Ti compare to its closest rival, the AMD Radeon 540?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti has an average benchmark score of 7,723, which is 0.7% higher than the AMD Radeon 540's score of 7,673. This marginal difference suggests they are in the same performance tier.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data reveals a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, which points directly to the GPU as the limiting component. Starting at 1080p High, the average FPS is 108. Moving to 1440p High, it drops to 78 FPS, a reduction of 30 FPS (27.8%). At 4K High, the average plummets to 49 FPS, a further drop of 29 FPS from 1440p (37.2%). This scaling is not linear, but it is consistent with the GPU's fill rate limitations. The same trend is visible on the Low preset: 1080p Low averages 216 FPS, 1440p Low averages 155 FPS (a 61 FPS drop), and 4K Low averages 98 FPS (a 57 FPS drop). The absolute FPS values are higher on Low, but the percentage drops are similar, indicating that the GPU is always the bottleneck. The CPU's performance remains constant across these resolutions, as its workload does not change with pixel count. The data suggests that the GTX 1660 Ti's 48 ROPs and 84.96 GPixel/s pixel rate are insufficient to maintain high FPS at 4K with higher quality settings. The 6GB VRAM is not exhausted, as the game's textures are modest, so the drop is purely due to shader and pixel processing demands. The measured FPS for the Medium preset highlights this: at 1080p, it is 173 FPS; at 1440p, it is 124 FPS; and at 4K, it is 78 FPS. Each step up in resolution results in a roughly 30% decrease in frame rate, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU, with its 24 cores and high clock speeds, is simply waiting for the GPU to finish each frame.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following is the complete set of measured FPS data for the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti combination in Inside.

1080p (1920x1080)

At Low settings, the system achieves an average of 216 FPS. This is the highest recorded frame rate for this resolution, indicating a very light load on the GPU. Moving to Medium, the average drops to 173 FPS, with a minimum of 147 FPS and a maximum of 199 FPS. This is still a very high frame rate, suitable for competitive play. The High preset yields an average of 108 FPS, a significant drop from Medium, showing the cost of higher quality textures and effects. Finally, the Ultra preset averages 103 FPS, which is only slightly lower than High, suggesting diminishing returns at this resolution.

1440p (2560x1440)

At Low settings, the average FPS is 155, which is still very smooth. The Medium preset averages 124 FPS, with a minimum of 106 FPS and a maximum of 143 FPS, ensuring a consistent experience. High settings bring the average down to 78 FPS, which is playable but noticeably less fluid than Medium. The Ultra preset averages 74 FPS, a marginal drop from High. The data shows that the GPU is starting to work harder at this resolution, but it still provides acceptable frame rates for the Medium and Low presets.

4K (3840x2160)

At Low settings, the average FPS is 98, which is just below the 100 FPS mark and remains playable. The Medium preset averages 78 FPS, with a minimum of 66 FPS and a maximum of 90 FPS, making it the highest playable setting at this resolution. High settings drop the average to 49 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS standard for smooth gameplay. The Ultra preset averages 46 FPS, which is the lowest recorded result. The data clearly shows that the GTX 1660 Ti is not capable of maintaining high frame rates at 4K with anything above Medium settings. The difference between 1080p and 4K is stark: the 1080p Medium average of 173 FPS is more than double the 4K Medium average of 78 FPS. This underscores the GPU's role as the primary performance limiter in this configuration.