Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer with a deliberately restrained visual style, yet the measured frame rates for the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 reveal that even a game with this aesthetic can be demanding at high settings. The data shows a configuration that is fully capable of smooth play at 4K, but the performance scaling across resolutions and presets points to a system where the GPU is the primary limiting factor, while the CPU provides a massive headroom of performance. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS to explain what the numbers mean for a practical gaming experience.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, but the rate of that degradation is heavily influenced by the graphics preset. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 297 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 213 FPS, a 28% reduction, and then to 4K Low at 134 FPS, a further 37% reduction from the 1440p figure. This scaling indicates that even at Low settings, the render resolution is beginning to strain the GPU, as the frame rate is not doubling or halving in line with pixel count.

However, the scaling behavior changes significantly when looking at the High and Ultra presets. At 1080p High, the average FPS is 148. At 1440p High, it drops to 107 FPS, a 28% decrease. At 4K High, the average falls to 67 FPS, a 37% decrease from 1440p. The pattern is nearly identical to the Low preset scaling, but the starting point is much lower. This suggests that the GPU is being pushed harder at higher settings, and the resolution increase compounds the load, leading to a steeper absolute drop in frame rate.

The most telling data point for the limiting component comes from the Ultra preset. At 1080p Ultra, the system averages 141 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, it drops to 102 FPS, a 28% reduction. At 4K Ultra, it falls to 64 FPS, a 37% reduction from 1440p. The relative percentage drops are consistent across all presets, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see frame rates at 1080p plateau, regardless of the graphics preset, because the CPU would be maxed out before the GPU could be fully utilized. Here, the 1080p Ultra score of 141 FPS is significantly lower than the 1080p Low score of 297 FPS, proving that the GPU is doing more work and is the component that is limiting the frame rate.

The jump from 1080p to 1440p is substantial in all cases, but the jump from 1440p to 4K is even more punishing. For example, at Medium settings, the average FPS at 1440p is 171, but at 4K it is 107. This 64 FPS drop for a single resolution step indicates that the RTX 4060's memory bandwidth and pixel throughput are being saturated at 4K. The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with a bandwidth of 272.0 GB/s. While this is sufficient for the game's data, the sheer number of pixels at 3840x2160 requires the GPU to process a massive amount of information, and the data shows that this is where it begins to struggle to maintain very high frame rates. In summary, the resolution scaling analysis confirms that the RTX 4060 is the bottleneck for this game, with the CPU having ample spare capacity even at lower resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a 16-core, 16-thread mobile processor based on the Panther Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process. Its benchmark scores are exceptional, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. In Cinebench R23, it scores 18911 points in multi-core and 2200.5 points in single-core tests. This single-core strength is critical for gaming, as many game engines rely heavily on a few fast threads. The measured FPS data for Inside, which is a puzzle platformer, suggests that its CPU demands are moderate, and this processor handles them with ease.

The data shows that the CPU is not a limiting factor at any resolution or setting. At 1080p Low, where the GPU load is lowest, the system pushes 297 FPS. To achieve this frame rate, the CPU must be capable of issuing draw calls and updating game logic at a very high speed. The strong single-core performance, evidenced by the 2200.5 Cinebench R23 score, is what enables this. The 16 cores and 16 threads also provide immense multi-threaded headroom, but a game like Inside is unlikely to utilize all of them effectively, making the single-core speed the more relevant metric.

Comparing the processor to its nearest rivals, its average benchmark score of 44466 is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D, which has a deltaPct of -0.2%. This means the Intel chip is only 0.2% slower on average. It is also 0.3% faster than the Intel Core i9-13950HX and 0.4% faster than the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385. This puts the Ultra X9 388H in elite company. However, in this specific game, the performance differential between these CPUs would be negligible because the GPU is the bottleneck. The CPU's job is simply to feed the GPU with data quickly enough, and with a single-thread score of 4280 in PassMark, it is more than capable of doing so at frame rates well above 200 FPS.

The high base clock of 2.10 GHz and boost clock of 5.10 GHz contribute to the responsive feel. The 18 MB of shared L3 cache is also a healthy amount for a mobile chip, helping to keep frequently accessed data close to the cores. In the context of Inside, the CPU's role is to ensure that the physics calculations for the character and the environment are processed without stuttering, and to maintain the frame pacing. The benchmark results indicate that it performs this role flawlessly, as the frame rates are consistently high across all tested configurations, with no signs of a CPU-induced cap. The CPU is a performance powerhouse that is effectively "along for the ride" in this game, rarely being challenged by the workload.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 is the clear workhorse for this game, and its specifications directly correlate with the measured FPS. It is based on the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD107 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It features 3072 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. The GPU has a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost clock of 2460 MHz. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory is paired with a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 272.0 GB/s. The GPU's PassMark G3D score is 19545, placing it in the 61st percentile of all GPUs, which indicates a solid mid-range performer.

The measured FPS data shows the GPU's performance envelope. At 1080p Medium, the RTX 4060 averages 237 FPS, and at 1440p Medium, it averages 171 FPS. These are excellent results that show the GPU has plenty of power for high-refresh-rate gaming at these resolutions. However, the 4K results paint a different picture. At 4K Medium, the average FPS is 107, which is still very smooth, but at 4K High and Ultra, the frame rates drop to 67 and 64 FPS, respectively. This shows that the GPU is working hard at 4K, and the higher settings are pushing it towards its limits.

The role of the GPU becomes more defined when looking at the memory and clock specifications. The 8 GB VRAM is not a limiting factor for a game like Inside, which likely uses a modest amount of texture memory. The 17 Gbps effective memory speed and 272.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient to feed the GPU's cores at 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the demand for texture fetches and pixel data increases dramatically. The 48 ROPs are responsible for the final pixel output, and the pixel rate of 118.1 GPixel/s is what sets the theoretical ceiling for fill-rate-bound scenarios. The data shows that the GPU is not reaching a hard fill-rate wall, but it is the component that dictates the frame rate at all resolutions.

In terms of its standing among rivals, the RTX 4060's average benchmark score of 17639 is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon HD 7790, which has a deltaPct of -0.2%. It is also only 0.3% faster than the AMD Radeon 780M and 0.5% faster than the AMD Radeon Pro 560. This is an interesting comparison, as it shows that while the RTX 4060 is a modern card with features like DirectX 12 Ultimate support, its raw compute performance is comparable to much older or integrated graphics solutions. However, the measured FPS in Inside is high, which suggests that the game is not heavily reliant on raw TFLOPS but rather on the efficiency of the Ada Lovelace architecture and its memory subsystem. The GPU's boost clock of 2460 MHz is a significant factor, as it allows for high sustained performance in lighter loads. Ultimately, the RTX 4060 is the component that determines the playable settings and resolutions in this game, and the data shows it handles them with competence.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Inside at 4K with maximum settings?

A: Yes, it can. The measured FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is an average of 64 FPS. While this is just above the 60 FPS threshold, it is perfectly playable for a puzzle platformer. The 4K Medium preset achieves 107 FPS, which is a smoother experience if a higher frame rate is preferred.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the system averages 297 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra, it averages 141 FPS. This significant drop is solely due to the increased GPU load, proving the CPU is not the bottleneck. The CPU's high benchmark scores, like the 18911 in Cinebench R23 multicore, show it has ample headroom.

Q: What is the best resolution for a 144Hz monitor?

A: For a 144Hz display, 1440p is the best choice. The Medium preset at 2560x1440 averages 171 FPS, and the High preset averages 107 FPS. The Low preset at 1440p averages 213 FPS, which also exceeds 144Hz. At 4K, the maximum average FPS is 134 on Low, which still doesn't hit 144 FPS, and the higher presets fall well short.

Q: How does the RTX 4060 compare to its closest rivals in general performance?

A: The RTX 4060 has an average benchmark score of 17639. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon HD 7790, has a deltaPct of -0.2%, meaning the NVIDIA card is 0.2% faster on average. It is also 0.3% faster than the AMD Radeon 780M and 0.5% faster than the AMD Radeon Pro 560.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has an average benchmark score of 44466, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D has an average score of 44573. The deltaPct is -0.2%, which means the Intel processor is just 0.2% slower on average than the Ryzen part. This puts them in a statistical tie.

Q: Is there a large performance gap between the Medium and Ultra presets?

A: Yes, there is. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset averages 237 FPS, while Ultra averages 141 FPS, a difference of 96 FPS. At 2560x1440, the gap is 69 FPS (171 vs 102), and at 3840x2160, the gap is 43 FPS (107 vs 64). The visual difference may not justify the performance cost, especially at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following data represents the exact measured average frame rates for the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 combination in Inside.

1080p (1920x1080):

• Low: 297 FPS average
• Medium: 237 FPS average, with a minimum of 202 FPS and a maximum of 273 FPS
• High: 148 FPS average
• Ultra: 141 FPS average

1440p (2560x1440):

• Low: 213 FPS average
• Medium: 171 FPS average, with a minimum of 145 FPS and a maximum of 196 FPS
• High: 107 FPS average
• Ultra: 102 FPS average

4K (3840x2160):

• Low: 134 FPS average
• Medium: 107 FPS average, with a minimum of 91 FPS and a maximum of 123 FPS
• High: 67 FPS average
• Ultra: 64 FPS average

The Medium preset is the only one with reported minimum and maximum frame rates. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 202 FPS, which is still extremely high. At 1440p Medium, the minimum is 145 FPS, which is above the 144Hz threshold. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 91 FPS, which is still smooth. These minimums indicate that the frame pacing is consistent and there are no severe stutters or hitches. The lack of min/max data for other presets suggests they were not tracked, but the averages provide a clear picture of performance.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this system depend heavily on the user's display and performance goals. For a standard 60 Hz display, the 4K Ultra preset is viable, with an average of 64 FPS. This provides the maximum visual quality the game offers, and the frame rate is high enough for a smooth experience in a slow-paced puzzle platformer. If you want to ensure a rock-solid 60 FPS with no dips, the 4K High preset at 67 FPS is the safer choice, and the 4K Medium preset at 107 FPS offers a massive performance buffer, though the visual gains from High to Ultra may be worth the frame rate cost to some.

For users with 144Hz or higher refresh rate monitors, 1440p is the sweet spot. The 1440p High preset at 107 FPS is playable, but it does not fully saturate a 144Hz display. To take full advantage of a 144Hz monitor, the 1440p Medium preset is the best choice, averaging 171 FPS. This preset provides a high frame rate that is well above the refresh threshold, ensuring a responsive and stutter-free experience. The 1440p Low preset at 213 FPS is even faster, but the visual quality reduction is significant and likely not worth it for this type of game.

At 1080p, the system is so fast that it exceeds 240 FPS on Low and Medium settings. For a 144Hz monitor, the 1080p High preset at 148 FPS is a great balance of visual fidelity and high frame rate. For a 240Hz monitor, the 1080p Medium preset at 237 FPS is the only option that gets close to the maximum refresh rate, and it does so with good consistency. The Ultra preset at 141 FPS is the highest visual quality, but it drops just below the 144Hz threshold, which could result in screen tearing if V-Sync is not enabled. In summary, the data suggests that the Medium preset offers the best performance-to-quality ratio across all resolutions, as it provides the highest frame rates that still maintain a high level of visual detail. The High preset is a strong alternative if you prefer visual fidelity and have a 60Hz or 120Hz display.