Lockdown Protocol

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the recorded data shows no preset achieves the 60 FPS playable threshold. The highest average frame rate at this resolution comes from Low settings at 42 FPS, followed by Medium at 30 FPS, High at 26 FPS, and Ultra at 19 FPS. Since none of these clear 60 FPS, the database marks no playable settings for 4K.

At 2560x1440, only Low settings reach the playable threshold. The measured average at Low is 65 FPS, which sits just above the 60 FPS line. Medium produces 46 FPS, High produces 40 FPS, and Ultra drops to 30 FPS. The verdict identifies Low as the best settings at this resolution, with an average of 65 FPS.

At 1920x1080, two presets clear 60 FPS: Low at 88 FPS and Medium at 63 FPS. High falls short at 55 FPS, and Ultra drops further to 41 FPS. The database selects Medium as the best settings for 1080p, delivering 63 FPS average. This represents the most demanding preset that maintains smooth frame rates at this resolution.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions and presets reveals a clear pattern. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 88 FPS, while at 4K Low it drops to 42 FPS, a reduction of roughly half. This indicates that the GPU becomes progressively more limiting as resolution increases. The Intel Arc B390, with its system-shared memory and 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, appears to be the primary constraint at higher resolutions.

Preset scaling at each resolution reinforces this. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium reduces average FPS from 88 to 63, a 25 FPS drop. From Medium to High, it falls another 8 FPS to 55. From High to Ultra, it drops 14 FPS to 41. The steepest single-step decline is Low to Medium, suggesting the medium preset introduces significant rendering load.

At 1440p, the same pattern holds but with narrower margins. Low gives 65 FPS, Medium gives 46 FPS, High gives 40 FPS, and Ultra gives 30 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 19 FPS, while Medium to High is only 6 FPS. At 4K, Low yields 42 FPS, Medium 30 FPS, High 26 FPS, and Ultra 19 FPS. The compression of frame rates at higher resolutions shows the GPU saturating.

The CPU, an Intel Core i5-12400 with 6 cores and 12 threads, is unlikely to bottleneck in this title given its benchmark scores. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15989 and single-core score of 2257 place it well above typical minimum requirements for competitive FPS games. The data suggests the GPU is the limiting factor at every resolution, since frame rates scale consistently with resolution changes while the CPU workload remains relatively constant.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination of Intel Core i5-12400 and Intel Arc B390 ranks 3302 out of 3714 tested combos in Lockdown Protocol. That places it in the lower percentile of all configurations, roughly in the bottom 11% of the database. The ranking reflects the GPU's modest performance profile, as the CPU is comparatively stronger.

The GPU's percentile versus all GPUs is 9, meaning it outperforms only about 9% of installed graphics cards. This low standing aligns with the observed frame rates. The CPU's percentile versus all CPUs is 72, indicating it sits above most processors in general benchmark performance. The mismatch between CPU strength and GPU weakness explains why this combo ranks so low for gaming: the GPU cannot leverage the CPU's headroom.

The combo rank of 3302 out of 3714 means 412 tested combinations perform worse. While this is not a bottom-tier result, it is far from competitive. For a fast-paced FPS like Lockdown Protocol, where maintaining 60 FPS matters for responsiveness, this ranking suggests the hardware is suitable only for modest settings at lower resolutions.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU's nearest rivals in the database are close in average benchmark score. The AMD EPYC 7643 scores 18697, a delta of -0.1% versus the i5-12400's average of 18683. The Intel Core i7-1355U scores 18730, a delta of -0.3%. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 scores 18811, a delta of -0.7%. The Intel Core i3-14100F scores 18519, a delta of +0.9%. All four fall within roughly 1% of the i5-12400's overall benchmark average, so swapping to any of these would yield nearly identical CPU performance in Lockdown Protocol.

The GPU's nearest rivals are dramatically weaker in average score. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, a delta of 1.3% versus the Arc B390's 1482. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460, a delta of 1.5%. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, a delta of 2.5%. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, a delta of 2.7%. These GPUs are all within 3% of the Arc B390's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score, meaning they would produce nearly identical frame rates in this game. This cluster of low-end GPUs reinforces the Arc B390's position as an entry-level graphics solution.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Lockdown Protocol at 4K?

A: No. The database lists no playable settings at 3840x2160. The highest average frame rate is 42 FPS at Low settings, which falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best settings preset at 1440p?

A: Low settings is the only playable option at 2560x1440, delivering an average of 65 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below 60 FPS.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1080p Medium?

A: The measured average is 63 FPS, with a minimum of 53 FPS and a maximum of 72 FPS. This is the best playable preset at 1080p.

Q: How does the Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463 (1.3% slower), the GeForce 800M scores 1460 (1.5% slower), the GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446 (2.5% slower), and the GeForce GT 710 scores 1443 (2.7% slower).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The GPU is the primary constraint. The CPU ranks in the 72nd percentile among all processors, while the GPU ranks in the 9th percentile. Frame rates scale heavily with resolution, indicating GPU-bound performance.

Q: What is the lowest playable frame rate recorded?

A: At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 19 FPS, which is the lowest recorded average across all tested settings. At 4K Medium, the minimum recorded is 25 FPS.

The Verdict

This PC can run Lockdown Protocol, but only within specific limits. At 1920x1080, the system clears the 60 FPS threshold on Low and Medium settings, with Medium being the best playable preset at 63 FPS average. At 2560x1440, only Low settings reach 65 FPS average, which is above the threshold but offers reduced visual quality. At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS, so 4K gaming is not viable with this hardware.

The verdict by resolution confirms this: 1080p has two playable presets, 1440p has one, and 4K has none. For players who prioritize smooth frame rates, 1080p Medium is the recommended target. Those who want higher resolution must accept Low settings at 1440p, which provides 65 FPS but sacrifices visual fidelity. The combo rank of 3302 out of 3714 reflects this limited capability, positioning the system as adequate for entry-level 1080p gaming but not for higher-end configurations.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the recorded averages are as follows: Low settings produce 42 FPS, Medium produces 30 FPS with a minimum of 25 and maximum of 34, High produces 26 FPS, and Ultra produces 19 FPS. No minimum or maximum values are recorded for Low, High, or Ultra.

At 2560x1440, Low settings produce 65 FPS, Medium produces 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 and maximum of 53, High produces 40 FPS, and Ultra produces 30 FPS. Again, only Medium has recorded minimum and maximum values.

At 1920x1080, Low settings produce 88 FPS, Medium produces 63 FPS with a minimum of 53 and maximum of 72, High produces 55 FPS, and Ultra produces 41 FPS. Medium is the only preset at this resolution with full min/max data.

The pattern across all resolutions is consistent: Low settings deliver the highest frame rates, followed by Medium, then High, then Ultra. The gap between Low and Medium is substantial at every resolution, while the gap between High and Ultra is smaller. This suggests the Medium preset introduces a significant rendering cost, while Ultra adds diminishing returns in visual quality relative to its performance impact.