Lockdown Protocol

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Lockdown Protocol at 60 FPS or higher on any setting at 1080p?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination delivers an average of 76 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. This is the only setting at this resolution that reaches that mark.

Q: What is the most demanding setting that stays at or above 60 FPS at 1080p?

A: Low settings is the only preset at 1920x1080 that achieves a playable average frame rate. Medium settings drop to 54 FPS average, High settings fall to 47 FPS, and Ultra settings bottom out at 35 FPS.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its closest rivals in terms of average benchmark score?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472. The Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, which is 1% higher. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M scores 7447, a 0.3% difference. The Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 7441, a 0.4% difference, and the AMD Radeon R7 350 scores 7425, a 0.6% difference.

Q: What is the best frame rate achievable at 1440p with this hardware combination?

A: The highest average FPS at 2560x1440 is 56, achieved with Low settings. Medium settings produce 40 FPS average, High settings produce 35 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 26 FPS. None of these reach the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: Does the CPU hold back the GPU in this game?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the limiting factor. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D ranks in the 91st percentile among all CPUs, while the GTX 1650 ranks in the 40th percentile among all GPUs. The frame rates scale heavily with resolution and settings, which is typical of GPU-bound scenarios.

Q: What is the overall rank of this combo among tested configurations for Lockdown Protocol?

A: This combination ranks 3580 out of 3714 tested combos for this game, placing it in the lower portion of the database's tested configurations.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data for Lockdown Protocol shows a clear pattern: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the dominant factor in determining playability, while the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D provides ample headroom that goes unused at most settings.

Examining the scaling between resolutions at identical settings reveals the GPU bottleneck. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 76 FPS at 1920x1080 to 56 FPS at 2560x1440, then further to 36 FPS at 3840x2160. That is a 53% reduction from 1080p to 4K. At Medium settings, the averages are 54 FPS, 40 FPS, and 26 FPS respectively. At High settings, the averages are 47 FPS, 35 FPS, and 22 FPS. At Ultra settings, the averages are 35 FPS, 26 FPS, and 17 FPS. The consistent degradation as pixel count increases points squarely at the GPU's 4 GB memory capacity and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth being overwhelmed by higher resolutions.

The Ryzen 9 9900X3D, with its 12 cores, 24 threads, and 128 MB of L3 cache, ranks in the 91st percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF, Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, Intel Xeon 6505P, and Intel Core i7-14700F, all score within 2.1% of it. This level of CPU performance is far beyond what a GTX 1650 can feed in a typical FPS title. The CPU's role is essentially to avoid being a bottleneck, and it succeeds at that task easily.

The preset scaling within each resolution reinforces this interpretation. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium costs 22 FPS, from Medium to High costs 7 FPS, and from High to Ultra costs 12 FPS. This irregular pattern suggests the GTX 1650's 896 shading units and 32 ROPs are the constraining resources, not the CPU's compute capability.

At 1440p, the gap between Low and Ultra is 30 FPS, and at 4K the gap is 19 FPS. The diminishing absolute differences at higher resolutions occur because the GPU is already operating near its limits even at Low settings. The CPU's single-thread score of 4646 in Passmark and multi-thread score of 56154 indicate it has no trouble keeping up with frame pacing; the GPU simply cannot push more frames.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the Low preset is the only configuration that maintains an average of at least 60 FPS, delivering 76 FPS. Medium settings fall to 54 FPS average, which misses the playable threshold by 6 FPS. High settings produce 47 FPS, and Ultra produces 35 FPS. The database's recorded data marks Low as the best playable setting at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, no setting reaches the 60 FPS playable threshold. The closest is Low at 56 FPS average, followed by Medium at 40 FPS, High at 35 FPS, and Ultra at 26 FPS. The verdict data lists no playable settings for this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the situation is similar. Low settings average 36 FPS, Medium averages 26 FPS, High averages 22 FPS, and Ultra averages 17 FPS. No preset comes close to the 60 FPS threshold, and the verdict data confirms there are no playable settings at 4K.

The pattern is consistent: this hardware combination is only viable at the lowest preset on the most common resolution, and even then only at 1080p.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals in the database are all within a narrow performance band. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 55093, which is 0.6% lower than the Ryzen 9 9900X3D's average benchmark score of 54762. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K scores 54053, 1.3% higher than the Ryzen. The Intel Xeon 6505P scores 53701, 2% higher. The Intel Core i7-14700F scores 53620, 2.1% higher. Any of these processors would deliver essentially identical frame rates in Lockdown Protocol when paired with the GTX 1650, because the GPU is the limiting component.

On the GPU side, the GTX 1650's nearest rivals are equally close. The Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, 1% higher than the GTX 1650's 7472. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M scores 7447, 0.3% lower. The Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 7441, 0.4% lower. The AMD Radeon R7 350 scores 7425, 0.6% lower. Swapping to any of these GPUs would produce near-identical frame rates, meaning the playability verdict would remain unchanged: only 1080p Low would clear 60 FPS.

The practical implication is that this combination sits at a performance plateau. Upgrading the CPU within the nearest rival group would not improve FPS. Swapping the GPU to any nearest rival would also yield negligible changes. The measured FPS values are so far below the 60 FPS threshold at higher settings that only a substantial GPU upgrade would alter the verdict.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the recorded data shows the following:

• Low: 76 FPS average
• Medium: 54 FPS average, with a minimum of 46 FPS and a maximum of 62 FPS
• High: 47 FPS average
• Ultra: 35 FPS average

The Medium preset's frame time variance is notable: the 16 FPS spread between minimum and maximum indicates occasional dips below the 60 FPS threshold even when the average is close. The minimum of 46 FPS would cause noticeable stuttering in a fast-paced FPS.

At 2560x1440, the measurements are:

• Low: 56 FPS average
• Medium: 40 FPS average, with a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS
• High: 35 FPS average
• Ultra: 26 FPS average

The Medium preset at 1440p shows a 12 FPS spread, which is tighter than at 1080p but still below the playable threshold on average.

At 3840x2160, the measurements are:

• Low: 36 FPS average
• Medium: 26 FPS average, with a minimum of 22 FPS and a maximum of 29 FPS
• High: 22 FPS average
• Ultra: 17 FPS average

At 4K, the Medium preset's 7 FPS spread shows that the GPU is fully saturated; there is little variance because the GPU is consistently maxed out. The maximum of 29 FPS is less than half of the 60 FPS threshold.

The trend across all resolutions is linear: each step up in settings or resolution reduces the average by roughly 10 to 20 FPS, with the GPU's memory bandwidth and texture rate being the limiting factors.

The Verdict

The database's playability threshold is 60 FPS, and the verdict data is unambiguous. At 3840x2160, there are no playable settings; the best average is 36 FPS on Low. At 2560x1440, there are also no playable settings; the best average is 56 FPS on Low, just 4 FPS short of the threshold. At 1920x1080, Low settings produce an average of 76 FPS, which clears the threshold by 16 FPS.

This system can run Lockdown Protocol, but only under strict conditions: 1080p resolution, Low preset, and acceptance that the frame rate will be playable but not high. Medium settings at 1080p drop to 54 FPS average, which is below the threshold and would result in a compromised experience in a competitive FPS. Higher resolutions are not viable at any setting.

The GTX 1650's 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are the primary constraints. The GPU's 40th percentile ranking among all GPUs aligns with this outcome. The CPU, ranked in the 91st percentile, is never the bottleneck.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination of AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 3580 out of 3714 tested combos for Lockdown Protocol. That places it in the bottom 4% of configurations in the database for this game.

The low rank is not surprising given the measured data. The GPU is the weakest link, and its performance tier is far below what the CPU could support. The ranking reflects the overall capability of the system, not the CPU's quality. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D is a high-end processor, but pairing it with a GPU from the 40th percentile creates a severe imbalance.

For context, the combo rank is driven by the fact that the GTX 1650 cannot sustain 60 FPS at any resolution above 1080p Low, and even at 1080p, only the lowest preset works. The database shows 134 combos ranked below this one, which likely feature even weaker GPUs or CPUs. But for a modern FPS title, this combination is only marginally playable at the entry-level resolution and preset.

The verdict is clear: this system is a 1080p Low machine for Lockdown Protocol, nothing more. Upgrading the GPU would yield the most significant improvement, while the CPU has ample headroom to support far more powerful graphics hardware.