Lockdown Protocol

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 sits at the 85th percentile among all tested CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 36,938. The closest competing processors in the database are remarkably tightly clustered. The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F matches the Core Ultra 5 225 almost exactly, with a delta of 0% and an average score of 36,945. The AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D trails by just 0.2% at 37,018, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 is 0.4% behind at 37,093. The Intel Core i9-12900T completes the group at 37,112, a 0.5% margin. In practical terms, any of these four processors would deliver nearly indistinguishable frame rates in Lockdown Protocol when paired with the same graphics solution.

The Intel Arc B370 tells a very different story. This integrated graphics processor, built on the Xe3-LPG architecture with 1,280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units, scores a mere 1,184 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. That places it at the 5th percentile among all GPUs, meaning roughly 95% of tested graphics hardware outperforms it. The nearest rivals in the database are all legacy discrete parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1,186 (0.2% ahead), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1,190 (0.5% ahead), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1,192 (0.7% ahead). The AMD FirePro M2000 sits 1.4% behind at 1,168. The data shows that the Arc B370, despite its modern architecture and DirectX 12 Ultimate support, delivers performance on par with graphics hardware from over a decade ago.

For a user considering this pairing, the processor is more than capable for Lockdown Protocol; the bottleneck is unambiguously the graphics subsystem. The CPU's nearest rivals all score within half a percent, so swapping among them would not meaningfully alter the gaming experience. The GPU's nearest rivals, however, illustrate that the Arc B370 is competing in a performance tier where even the modest gains of the HD 5770 or HD 7650M would be noticeable.

Best Settings per Resolution

The recorded data includes measurements at three resolutions and four settings tiers: Low, Medium, High, and Ultra. The playable threshold in the database is 60 frames per second, and the analysis identifies the most demanding preset that maintains at least that average.

At 3840x2160, no settings tier reaches 60 FPS. The Low preset averages 38 FPS, Medium averages 27 FPS with a minimum of 23 and maximum of 31, High averages 23 FPS, and Ultra averages 18 FPS. The database therefore lists no playable settings at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the situation is nearly identical. Low averages 58 FPS, just under the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 42 FPS with a range of 35 to 48, High averages 36 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS. No preset clears 60 FPS, so the database again lists no playable settings.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 80 FPS, comfortably above the threshold. Medium averages 57 FPS with a minimum of 48 and maximum of 65, falling just short of the 60 FPS line. High averages 49 FPS, and Ultra averages 37 FPS. Only Low qualifies as playable, making it the best settings tier at this resolution. The database records the best settings as Low with an average of 80 FPS.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Lockdown Protocol at 60 FPS on a 4K display?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average frame rate recorded is 38 FPS on the Low preset. Medium averages 27 FPS, High averages 23 FPS, and Ultra averages 18 FPS. None of these reach the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1920x1080?

A: The Low preset is the only setting that maintains an average at or above 60 FPS at 1080p, with an average of 80 FPS. Medium falls just short at 57 FPS, with a minimum of 48 and maximum of 65.

Q: How far is the 1440p performance from being playable?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 58 FPS, which is only 2 FPS below the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 42 FPS, High averages 36 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in raw benchmark scores?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1,184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1,186 (0.2% higher), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1,190 (0.5% higher), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1,192 (0.7% higher). The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1,168, which is 1.4% lower.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 the performance bottleneck in this system?

A: The data does not indicate a CPU bottleneck. The Core Ultra 5 225 ranks in the 85th percentile among all CPUs and its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F and Ryzen 5 5500X3D, all score within 0.5% of it. The GPU, however, ranks in the 5th percentile, which strongly suggests the graphics subsystem limits frame rates.

Q: What frame rate range can be expected at 1080p Medium settings?

A: The recorded average is 57 FPS, with a minimum of 48 FPS and a maximum of 65 FPS. The average is 3 FPS below the playable threshold, and the minimum dips well below it.

The Verdict

The database records this combination as rank 3,427 out of 3,714 tested combos for Lockdown Protocol, placing it in the bottom 8% of systems. The verdict by resolution is unambiguous: this PC cannot run the game at 60 FPS at 3840x2160 or 2560x1440 on any settings tier. At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 80 FPS, clearing the threshold with a comfortable margin. No other preset at 1080p reaches 60 FPS; Medium averages 57 FPS, High averages 49 FPS, and Ultra averages 37 FPS.

The practical interpretation is that Lockdown Protocol is playable only at 1080p with the Low preset. The gap between Low and Medium at 1080p is 23 FPS, which is substantial and indicates that the GPU is heavily taxed by even modest increases in visual fidelity. At 1440p, even Low fails to reach the threshold by 2 FPS. At 4K, the best average is 38 FPS on Low, which is playable in a loose sense but far below the 60 FPS standard used in this database.

Owners of this system should target 1080p Low for a consistent experience. The 80 FPS average provides headroom for scene complexity, and the data shows no recorded minimum below 60 FPS for that configuration. Pushing to Medium at 1080p risks frequent drops below the threshold, as the 48 FPS minimum demonstrates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rate data covers twelve configurations, three resolutions by four settings tiers.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 38 FPS with no recorded minimum or maximum. Medium averages 27 FPS, with a minimum of 23 and maximum of 31. High averages 23 FPS with no range recorded. Ultra averages 18 FPS with no range recorded. The progression from Low to Ultra at 4K shows a steady decline: 38, 27, 23, and 18 FPS. The step from Low to Medium costs 11 FPS, while the step from Medium to High costs 4 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 5 FPS.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 58 FPS with no range recorded. Medium averages 42 FPS, with a minimum of 35 and maximum of 48. High averages 36 FPS with no range. Ultra averages 27 FPS with no range. The resolution drop from 4K to 1440p yields gains of 20 FPS on Low (38 to 58), 15 FPS on Medium (27 to 42), 13 FPS on High (23 to 36), and 9 FPS on Ultra (18 to 27). The gains shrink as settings increase, which indicates the GPU becomes more saturated at higher settings.

At 1920x1080, Low averages 80 FPS with no range recorded. Medium averages 57 FPS, with a minimum of 48 and maximum of 65. High averages 49 FPS with no range. Ultra averages 37 FPS with no range. Moving from 1440p to 1080p adds 22 FPS on Low (58 to 80), 15 FPS on Medium (42 to 57), 13 FPS on High (36 to 49), and 10 FPS on Ultra (27 to 37). The same pattern holds: lower settings benefit more from resolution reduction.

Only two configurations in the entire dataset have recorded minimum and maximum values: 4K Medium (23 to 31) and 1440p Medium (35 to 48) and 1080p Medium (48 to 65). These ranges show that the Medium preset at 1080p has a 17 FPS spread, which is significant for a game that needs to maintain 60 FPS. The average of 57 FPS with a 48 FPS minimum means the system spends meaningful time below the playable threshold.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of tested combinations for Lockdown Protocol, this pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3,427 out of 3,714. The rank places the system in the lower tail of tested hardware, with only 287 combinations performing worse. The GPU's 5th percentile standing among all GPUs is the dominant factor in this ranking; the CPU's 85th percentile standing does little to compensate.

The rank relative to other combos is consistent with the measured frame rates. A system that can only clear the 60 FPS threshold at 1080p Low is expected to sit near the bottom of a 3,714-combo ranking. The fact that 287 combos rank below this one suggests there are systems with even weaker graphics solutions, but the margin is slim. The nearest GPU rivals, such as the ATI Radeon HD 5770 and AMD Radeon HD 7650M, would likely place in a similar tier, given their benchmark scores are within 0.7% of the Arc B370.

For context, the CPU alone would not drag this combo down in a meaningful way. The Core Ultra 5 225's nearest CPU rivals all score within 0.5%, so any of those processors paired with the Arc B370 would likely produce nearly identical rankings. The ranking is effectively determined by the graphics component.

CPU and GPU Roles

The division of labor between the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and the Intel Arc B370 in Lockdown Protocol is clear from the scaling data. The CPU is a high-performance desktop part with 10 cores and 10 threads, a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, and an 85th percentile standing. The GPU is an integrated solution with a 5th percentile standing. The frame rate data reflects the GPU's limitations at every resolution and settings tier.

The resolution scaling shows how heavily the GPU is burdened. At Low settings, dropping from 4K to 1440p improves the average by 20 FPS, and dropping from 1440p to 1080p improves it by another 22 FPS. The total gain from 4K Low to 1080p Low is 42 FPS (38 to 80), a 110% improvement. This magnitude of scaling is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where pixel throughput is the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, resolution changes would have a much smaller effect on frame rates.

The settings scaling reinforces this conclusion. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra costs 43 FPS (80 to 37), a 54% reduction. At 1440p, the same settings change costs 31 FPS (58 to 27), and at 4K it costs 20 FPS (38 to 18). The absolute cost of raising settings shrinks as resolution increases because the GPU is already saturated at higher resolutions. This is the signature of a graphics-limited system.

The CPU's role in this game at these settings is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic, and the data suggests it does so without becoming the limiting factor. The Core Ultra 5 225's single-thread score of 4,412 in Passmark and multi-thread score of 30,459 are substantial, and its nearest rivals all cluster within 0.5%. If the CPU were the constraint, the frame rates would not scale as dramatically with resolution and settings changes.

At 4K, the GPU is the overwhelming constraint. Even at Low settings, the system averages only 38 FPS, and the arc of performance across settings (38, 27, 23, 18) shows that the integrated graphics architecture is simply outmatched by the pixel workload. At 1440p, the GPU remains the primary constraint, with Low averaging 58 FPS, just below the threshold. At 1080p, the GPU finally has enough headroom to reach 80 FPS on Low, but Medium still falls short at 57 FPS. The CPU never appears to be the limiting factor in any of the twelve measured configurations.