Lockdown Protocol

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT delivers a highly resolution-dependent experience in Lockdown Protocol. At 1920x1080, the combination is exceptionally strong, while 2560x1440 remains very playable with high settings. The data shows that 3840x2160 is the breaking point, where only the Low preset clears the 60 FPS threshold. This pairing exhibits classic GPU-bound behavior at higher resolutions, with the RX 7600 XT’s 16 GB frame buffer and the Core Ultra 9’s high single-thread performance providing a balanced foundation.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of performance scaling across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are consistently high. The Low preset achieves 167 FPS, Medium drops to 119 FPS with a recorded range of 101 to 136 FPS (min/max), High reaches 104 FPS, and Ultra settles at 78 FPS. This shows that even the most demanding preset at this resolution leaves significant headroom above the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages take a noticeable step down. Low still delivers a very playable 123 FPS. Medium produces 87 FPS, with min and max values of 74 and 100 FPS respectively. High is the strongest playable preset at 76 FPS average. Ultra drops to 57 FPS, placing it just below the 60 FPS threshold. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p shows a roughly 25-30% reduction in average FPS across all presets, which is typical for a GPU-limited scenario.

At 3840x2160, the RX 7600 XT’s limitations become pronounced. Low is the only preset that remains playable, averaging 79 FPS. Medium averages 56 FPS, with min and max values of 48 and 65 FPS, placing it under the threshold. High drops to 49 FPS, and Ultra falls to 37 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra at 4K is massive — 79 FPS versus 37 FPS — indicating that the GPU is heavily taxed by the higher settings. The min FPS data point for Medium at 48 FPS highlights that frame pacing can dip below the average, which is a concern for maintaining smooth gameplay.

The lack of min/max data for most presets limits a full frame-time analysis, but the available Medium preset numbers at each resolution show a consistent pattern: the gap between average and minimum FPS grows with resolution. At 1080p Medium, the spread is 18 FPS (119 avg vs 101 min); at 1440p it is 13 FPS (87 vs 74); at 4K it is 8 FPS (56 vs 48). This suggests that higher resolutions push the GPU closer to its limit, reducing the buffer between average and minimum performance.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which averages 78 FPS. This is the optimal choice for visual quality, as all four presets (Low at 167, Medium at 119, High at 104, Ultra at 78) clear the threshold with significant margin. The data supports using Ultra for a fully maxed-out experience at 1080p.

At 2560x1440, the best settings preset is High, which averages 76 FPS. This preset provides the highest visual fidelity while remaining above the 60 FPS playability line. Medium is also viable at 87 FPS, but High is the superior choice for those seeking better image quality. Ultra falls short at 57 FPS, so it should be avoided unless the user accepts sub-60 averages. Low remains an option for higher refresh rates, hitting 123 FPS.

For 3840x2160, the only preset that clears 60 FPS is Low, averaging 79 FPS. This is the definitive recommendation for 4K. Medium (56 FPS), High (49 FPS), and Ultra (37 FPS) all fall below the threshold, making them less suitable for consistent gameplay. The 79 FPS at Low is a strong result, indicating that the GPU can handle 4K when the visual load is reduced. The verdict by resolution confirms this, listing Low as the best playable setting at 4K.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear shift in component roles as resolution changes. At 1920x1080, the difference between Low and Ultra is 89 FPS (167 vs 78), which is significant. This large scaling suggests that the CPU and GPU are well-balanced, but the frame rate is primarily GPU-limited, as the settings increase the GPU load. The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has a high multi-threaded Cinebench R23 score of 51731 and a single-thread score of 7303, indicating it is more than capable of feeding the GPU at 1080p. The bottleneck is likely on the GPU, as the RX 7600 XT’s 22.57 TFLOPS peak FP32 performance is the limiting factor.

At 2560x1440, the scaling between Low and Ultra is 66 FPS (123 vs 57), slightly smaller than at 1080p. This reduction indicates that the GPU is becoming more of a limiting factor, as the pixel count increases. The CPU’s role remains strong, but the GPU’s raw throughput is now more critical. The 100 FPS range on Medium (74-100) shows that the GPU is still able to keep up with the CPU’s frame generation.

At 3840x2160, the scaling narrows further: Low to Ultra is 42 FPS (79 vs 37). This is a clear sign that the GPU is the dominant bottleneck. The RX 7600 XT’s 128-bit memory bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are likely strained by the pixel count, despite the 16 GB frame buffer for capacity. The CPU’s role diminishes further, as the frame rate is capped by the GPU’s rendering capability. The Core Ultra 9’s performance is more than sufficient at 4K; the data shows that the GPU is the primary determinant of playability.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus are all within a narrow performance band. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has an average benchmark score of 83807, which is 0.2% lower than the 290K Plus. This means a 285K would behave nearly identically in Lockdown Protocol, with no noticeable FPS difference. AMD EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9135 are also close, with scores of 83090 (1.1% lower) and 82980 (1.2% lower) respectively. The AMD EPYC 7F72 has a score of 85072, which is 1.3% higher, suggesting a slight edge in CPU-bound scenarios, though the game is likely GPU-bound at most presets.

For the GPU, the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT’s nearestRivals are a mix of older and newer parts. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 has an average score of 17037, which is 0.3% lower, indicating the RX 7600 XT would perform a few FPS better. The AMD Radeon HD 7970M is 0.4% lower, but this is a mobile part and not a direct desktop comparison. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 has a score of 17208, which is 0.7% higher, meaning it would deliver a slightly higher frame rate in the same presets. The NVIDIA Tesla M4 is 0.9% lower, but is a compute-focused card. In practical terms, these rivals would produce frame rates within a few percent of the RX 7600 XT, making them viable alternatives for similar performance.

The Verdict

The question is whether this PC can run Lockdown Protocol. The data shows that it can, but with specific settings per resolution. At 1920x1080, the verdict is clear: all four presets clear 60 FPS, with Ultra averaging 78 FPS. This is a fully playable experience at maximum settings. At 2560x1440, the verdict is also positive, but High (76 FPS) is the best setting; Ultra dips to 57 FPS, which is below the threshold. The system is capable but requires a one-step drop from Ultra.

At 3840x2160, the verdict is more restrictive. Only Low (79 FPS) clears 60 FPS. Medium (56 FPS) and High (49 FPS) are not playable by the threshold, and Ultra (37 FPS) is even lower. Therefore, the system can run the game at 4K, but only with the Low preset. The verdict indicates that this is a playable configuration, but users seeking higher visual fidelity at 4K will need to consider a stronger GPU.

Overall, the system is a capable 1080p Ultra and 1440p High machine for Lockdown Protocol. At 4K, it is limited to Low settings, which is still above the 60 FPS threshold. The data confirms that the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions, while the CPU is more than adequate for all tested scenarios.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of CPU and GPU ranks at 2360 out of 3714 tested combos for Lockdown Protocol. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the database, indicating that while it can run the game well at certain settings, many other hardware combinations offer better performance. The percentile data for the individual components reinforces this: the CPU is in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 60th percentile. The high CPU percentile is not fully utilized by the GPU, which is why the combo ranks lower overall. The rank of 2360 suggests that upgrading the GPU would yield a larger performance gain than the CPU, since the CPU is already near the top.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Lockdown Protocol at 1920x1080 Ultra settings?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS is 78 at 1080p Ultra, which is above the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Q: What is the best graphics preset at 2560x1440?

A: The High preset is the best choice, as it averages 76 FPS. Ultra falls below 60 FPS, averaging 57.

Q: Is 3840x2160 playable with any settings?

A: Yes, the Low preset averages 79 FPS at 4K. Medium and above (56 FPS, 49 FPS, 37 FPS) do not reach the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K compare to the 290K Plus?

A: The 285K has a benchmark score of 83807, which is 0.2% lower than the 290K Plus. The performance difference in Lockdown Protocol would be negligible.

Q: Is the RX 7600 XT a stronger GPU than the RTX 3070?

A: No. The RTX 3070 has an average benchmark score of 17208, which is 0.7% higher than the RX 7600 XT, indicating it would provide slightly higher frame rates.

Q: What is the playable setting at 4K?

A: The Low preset is the only 4K setting that averages above 60 FPS, achieving 79 FPS.