Lockdown Protocol

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Intel Core i5-13400F sits in a crowded performance band. Its average benchmark score of 25292 places it within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H, both of which score 25284 and 25201 respectively. The Intel Core 5 120 trails by 0.3% with a score of 25362, and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D also sits 0.3% behind at 25365. In practical terms, any of these processors would deliver nearly identical frame pacing in Lockdown Protocol when paired with the same graphics card. The 13400F holds the 77th percentile among all CPUs, so the data places it comfortably above the median but not at the enthusiast tier.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a different story. Its average benchmark score of 7472 puts it at the 40th percentile among all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are not discrete gaming cards in the traditional sense. The Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, 1% higher. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M scores 7447, 0.3% lower. The Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 7441, 0.4% lower. Even the AMD Radeon R7 350, a card from a previous generation, sits only 0.6% behind at 7425. This grouping tells you the GTX 1650 occupies a narrow performance window where integrated graphics and low-end discrete parts converge. In Lockdown Protocol, swapping the GTX 1650 for an Intel Arc A310 would produce nearly indistinguishable average frame rates, while the integrated UHD 750 would be marginally slower.

The CPU and GPU are wildly mismatched in percentile terms. A 77th percentile processor paired with a 40th percentile GPU means the graphics card will be the limiting factor in almost every scenario. Users considering a build around this combo should expect the 13400F to have substantial headroom left on the table in this game.

CPU and GPU Roles

Lockdown Protocol is clearly GPU-bound for this pairing. The measured FPS data shows the graphics card dictating performance across the board. At 3840x2160 with High settings, the average is 24.1 FPS. Drop to Low settings at the same resolution and the average climbs to 38.6 FPS. That is a 60% gain from lowering settings, which is a classic sign of a GPU-limited scenario. The CPU is not the bottleneck; the rendering workload is.

The resolution scaling reinforces this. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average is 78.5 FPS. At 2560x1440 with Low settings, the average drops to 58.7 FPS. At 3840x2160 with Low settings, it falls further to 38.6 FPS. The frame rate declines of roughly 25% and 34% as resolution increases are consistent with pixel throughput constraints on the GPU rather than CPU thread saturation.

Preset scaling tells the same story. At 1920x1080, moving from Low to Medium costs 23.1 FPS (from 78.5 to 55.4). Moving from Medium to High costs another 9.1 FPS (down to 46.3). High to Ultra costs 11.2 FPS (down to 35.1). The GTX 1650's 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 128-bit bus are being pushed harder at each preset step. The CPU, with 10 cores and 16 threads, has ample compute available. The 13400F's Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22604 and PassMark multithread score of 25032 indicate a processor that can feed frames far faster than this GPU can render them.

For players targeting 60 FPS, the CPU is not the obstacle. The GPU is the sole gatekeeper. At 2560x1440, no preset reaches 60 FPS; the closest is Low at 58.7 FPS, which is just under the threshold. At 1920x1080, only Low clears 60 FPS. The processor would not meaningfully change these outcomes if swapped for a similarly scoring rival.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the GTX 1650 delivers its best results. Low settings produce an average of 78.5 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold by a comfortable 18.5 FPS margin. Medium settings drop to 55.4 FPS, just below the threshold. High settings average 46.3 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 35.1 FPS. The gap from Low to Ultra is 43.4 FPS, showing how sensitive this GPU is to preset changes at 1080p.

At 2560x1440, the results are tighter. Low settings average 58.7 FPS, just missing the 60 FPS mark by 1.3 FPS. Medium settings drop to 43.1 FPS. High settings average 32.4 FPS, and Ultra falls to 24.8 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 33.9 FPS. No setting at this resolution reaches the playable threshold.

At 3840x2160, the GTX 1650 is clearly out of its depth. Low settings average 38.6 FPS. Medium settings average 28.9 FPS. High settings average 24.1 FPS. Ultra settings average 15.1 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 23.5 FPS. None of these results approach 60 FPS.

The database does not record minimum or maximum frame times for this combo, so the analysis relies entirely on average FPS. Players sensitive to frame pacing should note that the averages at playable settings still leave little headroom for demanding scenes.

The Verdict

This PC can run Lockdown Protocol, but only under specific conditions. The verdict data is unambiguous: at 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 78.5 FPS average, clearing the 60 FPS threshold. That is the only playable configuration recorded. Medium settings at 1080p fall to 55.4 FPS, which is below the threshold. High and Ultra at 1080p are worse at 46.3 and 35.1 FPS respectively.

At 2560x1440, no preset is playable. Low settings come closest at 58.7 FPS, missing the 60 FPS mark by a narrow margin. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall well short at 43.1, 32.4, and 24.8 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the situation is worse. Even Low settings only manage 38.6 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra produce 28.9, 24.1, and 15.1 FPS respectively. This resolution is not viable for this pairing.

The practical advice from the data: run Lockdown Protocol at 1080p with Low settings for a smooth experience. If 1440p is required, expect to be just short of 60 FPS on the lowest preset. The GPU is the limiting factor in every scenario. The Core i5-13400F is not holding back the system in this game.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Lockdown Protocol at 60 FPS?

A: Yes, but only at 1920x1080 with Low settings, where the measured average is 78.5 FPS. No other resolution or preset combination in the database reaches 60 FPS.

Q: What is the best settings preset at 1080p?

A: Low settings is the only playable preset at 1920x1080. It delivers 78.5 FPS. Medium settings drop to 55.4 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is 1440p playable with this combo?

A: No. At 2560x1440, the closest result is Low settings at 58.7 FPS, which is 1.3 FPS short of the 60 FPS threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall further behind.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck?

A: The GPU. The GTX 1650 sits at the 40th percentile among all GPUs, while the Core i5-13400F sits at the 77th percentile among all CPUs. Resolution and preset scaling in the measured FPS data both point to the graphics card as the limiting component.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Arc A310?

A: The Arc A310 scores 7550 in the database average, which is 1% higher than the GTX 1650's 7472. In Lockdown Protocol, the two cards would deliver nearly identical frame rates.

Q: What about the Ryzen 9 6900HS as a CPU alternative?

A: The Ryzen 9 6900HS scores 25284, essentially tied with the 13400F's 25292 (0% delta). Swapping between these processors would not meaningfully change Lockdown Protocol frame rates, since the GPU is the bottleneck.

How This Combo Ranks

The Core i5-13400F and GTX 1650 pairing ranks 3518 out of 3714 tested combos in Lockdown Protocol. That places it in the bottom 5% of all recorded configurations. The ranking reflects the GPU's limitations more than the CPU's capabilities. A processor at the 77th percentile is paired with a graphics card at the 40th percentile, and the game's frame rates follow the weaker component.

The 196-combo gap from the bottom of the database shows that while this is a low ranking, there are still slower configurations recorded. However, the practical takeaway is clear: this combo is positioned for 1080p Low gaming in Lockdown Protocol and nothing beyond that. The data shows 78.5 FPS at 1080p Low as the only playable configuration. Users with higher refresh rate displays or larger monitors will need to lower expectations or upgrade the GPU. The CPU has room to support a much stronger graphics card if an upgrade path is considered later.