Lockdown Protocol

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the recorded performance for this combination is consistently below the 60 FPS playable threshold. The Low preset delivers an average of 42 FPS, which is the highest result at this resolution. Medium averages 30 FPS with a minimum of 25 FPS and a maximum of 34 FPS. High drops to 26 FPS average, and Ultra falls to 19 FPS average. None of these settings approach a comfortable playable experience, and even the fastest preset here leaves significant headroom short of the target.

Moving to 2560x1440, the picture improves meaningfully. Low preset reaches an average of 65 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. High averages 40 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium at this resolution is 19 FPS, which is substantial and suggests that the step from Low to Medium carries a heavy performance cost. The minimum and maximum data for Medium show a range of 14 FPS, indicating some frame pacing variability under load.

At 1920x1080, the results are the strongest in the dataset. Low preset averages 88 FPS, which is the single highest average recorded across all resolutions and settings. Medium averages 63 FPS with a minimum of 53 FPS and a maximum of 72 FPS, clearing the 60 FPS line. High averages 55 FPS, just shy of the threshold, while Ultra averages 41 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p shows a 19 FPS spread between minimum and maximum, similar to the spread observed at 1440p Medium. The progression from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a steady decline: 88, 63, 55, 41. Each step up in quality costs a noticeable number of frames.

The overall pattern across resolutions is consistent: Low is always the fastest, Ultra is always the slowest, and Medium sits between High and Low in every case. The only settings with recorded minimum and maximum values are Medium at each resolution. That data shows the frame range narrowing as resolution drops: at 4K Medium the range is 25 to 34 FPS, at 1440p Medium it is 39 to 53 FPS, and at 1080p Medium it is 53 to 72 FPS. This indicates that lower resolutions not only raise the average but also tighten the frame delivery, which matters for consistent feel during fast movement.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data shows a clear shift in which component limits performance as resolution changes. At 3840x2160, the gap between Low and Ultra is 23 FPS (42 versus 19). At 2560x1440, the same gap is 35 FPS (65 versus 30). At 1920x1080, the gap is 47 FPS (88 versus 41). The widening spread at lower resolutions indicates that the GPU becomes less of a bottleneck as pixel count drops, and the CPU has more room to push frame rates higher when graphical load is lighter.

Look at the resolution scaling on the Low preset. From 4K to 1440p, the average rises from 42 to 65 FPS, a gain of 23 FPS. From 1440p to 1080p, it rises from 65 to 88 FPS, another gain of 23 FPS. This linear scaling suggests that at Low settings the game is heavily dependent on the graphics pipeline, and each reduction in pixel count translates directly into more frames. The CPU, a 6-core, 12-thread AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with a 3.40 GHz base and 3.90 GHz boost clock, has enough headroom at these settings to let the GPU be the deciding factor.

On the Ultra preset, the scaling is different. From 4K to 1440p, the average rises from 19 to 30 FPS, an 11 FPS gain. From 1440p to 1080p, it rises from 30 to 41 FPS, another 11 FPS gain. The consistent 11 FPS steps on Ultra suggest a different bottleneck profile. At Ultra, the added graphical effects and shading load keep the GPU saturated even at 1080p, so the CPU is less able to stretch its legs. The fact that both Low and Ultra show perfectly even steps across resolutions is notable. It implies that the game scales predictably with pixel count, and neither component suddenly becomes irrelevant at any tested resolution.

For a game like Lockdown Protocol, an FPS title, the practical takeaway is that at 1080p the medium preset relies on both components working together. The 63 FPS average at Medium, 1080p, with a 53 FPS minimum, shows the combination is balanced enough to stay near the threshold. At 1440p, only the Low preset clears 60 FPS, and the 19 FPS cost of stepping from Low to Medium suggests the GPU is the primary limiter at that resolution. At 4K, no preset is playable, and the GPU is clearly the dominant constraint. The CPU's multithreaded performance, measured at 1248 in Cinebench R15 multicore and 13160 in Passmark multithread, is adequate for the frame rates observed here, but it is not the star of the show.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination of AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and Intel Arc B390 ranks 3302 out of 3714 tested combos in the database for Lockdown Protocol. That places it in the lower portion of the field, roughly in the 11th percentile of all combinations measured. The ranking reflects the overall capability of the pair across the tested settings and resolutions. The GPU, Intel Arc B390, sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the CPU sits at the 75th percentile among all CPUs. The wide gap between those two figures tells the story: the processor is a mid-to-upper tier part by general compute benchmarks, but the graphics solution is near the bottom of the distribution. In gaming, the weaker link governs the outcome, and the data confirms that here.

The CPU's average benchmark score is 21484, with nearest rivals including the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V at 21440 (0.2 percent slower), the Intel Core i9-11900H at 21367 (0.5 percent slower), and the AMD EPYC 9454 at 21223 (1.2 percent slower). On the CPU side, the Ryzen 5 2600 is surrounded by parts that perform within a hair of each other, so any of those processors would deliver nearly identical frame rates in a CPU-limited scenario. The GPU's average benchmark score is 1482, with nearest rivals being the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX at 1463 (1.3 percent faster), the NVIDIA GeForce 800M at 1460 (1.5 percent faster), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM at 1446 (2.5 percent faster). The GPU's rivals are all dramatically weaker parts, which underscores how far down the graphics hierarchy this configuration sits.

The combination rank of 3302 out of 3714 means that only about 412 tested combos perform worse. For a desktop pairing with a CPU that benchmarks in the 75th percentile, landing this low in the game-specific ranking is almost entirely attributable to the GPU. The Arc B390, with its 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units, produces a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. That is a very low result for a modern graphics chip, and it drags the overall gaming experience down accordingly.

Similar Performance Alternatives

If the goal is to understand what else would behave like this pairing, the nearest rivals for each component provide the answer. On the CPU side, the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V scores 21440, which is 0.2 percent off the Ryzen 5 2600's 21484. The Intel Core i9-11900H scores 21367, 0.5 percent lower. The Intel Xeon D-1746TER scores 21635, which is 0.7 percent higher, and the AMD EPYC 9454 scores 21223, 1.2 percent lower. In practical terms, swapping the Ryzen 5 2600 for any of these processors would produce almost no measurable difference in Lockdown Protocol frame rates, because the GPU is the limiting factor in this configuration. The CPU has compute headroom that the graphics chip cannot exploit.

On the GPU side, the alternatives are all much weaker cards. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, 1.3 percent higher than the Arc B390's 1482. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460, 1.5 percent higher. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5 percent higher, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7 percent higher. These are all older, low-end graphics solutions. The fact that the Arc B390 sits among them in the benchmark distribution means that, for Lockdown Protocol, this GPU behaves like a legacy entry-level part rather than a modern discrete card. Any of these rivals would produce frame rates in the same ballpark, which is to say, mostly below the 60 FPS target except at the lightest settings and lowest resolutions.

For a builder considering alternatives, the data suggests that upgrading the GPU would change the gaming experience far more than upgrading the CPU. The CPU's nearest rivals are all within 1.2 percent of its score, so there is no meaningful headroom to gain by swapping processors. The GPU's nearest rivals are also close, but they are all at the bottom of the performance scale, meaning that even a modest GPU upgrade would move the needle substantially. The combination rank of 3302 out of 3714 reflects a system where the graphics component is the clear weak point.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the database records no playable settings. The best average FPS at this resolution is 42 on Low, which still falls well short of the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset averages 30 FPS, High averages 26 FPS, and Ultra averages 19 FPS. There is no quality level that reaches a playable state at 4K with this hardware.

At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is Low, with an average of 65 FPS. This is the only preset at this resolution that clears the 60 FPS line. Medium averages 46 FPS, High averages 40 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. The Low preset is the recommended choice here, as stepping up to Medium costs 19 FPS and drops the average below the threshold. The minimum recorded value for Medium at 1440p is 39 FPS, which means even the dips in the playable preset would likely stay higher than the average of the next tier up.

At 1920x1080, the best playable setting is Medium, with an average of 63 FPS and a minimum of 53 FPS. This is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS on average. Low averages 88 FPS and is also playable, but Medium offers a better visual experience while still maintaining an average above the threshold. High averages 55 FPS, which misses the mark, and Ultra averages 41 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p is the sweet spot for this combination: it delivers the highest quality that still meets the playability criterion. The 53 FPS minimum means there will be occasional dips below 60, but the average stays clear. For players who prioritize smoothness over visuals, Low at 88 FPS would be the safer choice, but for those who want the best balance, Medium is the answer.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Lockdown Protocol? The answer depends entirely on the resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, the system is playable on Low and Medium presets. Medium averages 63 FPS, clearing the 60 FPS threshold, and Low averages 88 FPS, offering a large margin of safety. High at 55 FPS and Ultra at 41 FPS are not playable by the database's standard. For a 1080p monitor, this combination works, provided the settings stay at Medium or below.

At 2560x1440, the system is playable only on Low, with an average of 65 FPS. This clears the threshold, but just barely compared to the 1080p results. Every other preset at 1440p falls short: Medium at 46 FPS, High at 40 FPS, and Ultra at 30 FPS. For a 1440p display, the user must accept Low settings to stay above 60 FPS. The visual compromise is significant, but the frame rate is there.

At 3840x2160, the system is not playable at any setting. The highest average is 42 FPS on Low, which is 18 FPS below the threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all sit in the 19 to 30 FPS range, which is not suitable for a fast-paced FPS title. The GPU simply does not have the rendering power to handle 4K in this game, regardless of how far the settings are turned down.

The verdict is straightforward. This is a 1080p machine for Lockdown Protocol, with Medium as the ceiling for quality. At 1440p, it can run the game but only on the lowest settings. At 4K, it cannot run the game at a playable frame rate. The Ryzen 5 2600 has enough processing power to support these frame rates, but the Intel Arc B390 limits the experience. Players with a 1080p display and modest expectations will find this combination adequate. Anyone targeting higher resolutions or higher quality settings will need a different GPU. The data is clear: 60 FPS is achievable, but only under specific conditions, and the margin for error is thin.