Lockdown Protocol

# Lockdown Protocol with AMD Ryzen 5 5600X + AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT

This pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT delivers a solid 1080p and 1440p experience in Lockdown Protocol, with the data showing a clear performance ceiling at 4K Ultra that will require settings adjustments. The measured results place this combination in the 935th position out of 1,637 tested combos, meaning it sits in the upper-middle tier of all hardware pairings evaluated for this FPS title. That ranking reflects a balanced system where neither component is dramatically outpacing the other, though the scaling patterns across resolutions reveal where the bottlenecks emerge.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 935 out of 1,637 tested combinations places this system slightly above the median of all tested hardware pairings for Lockdown Protocol. This is not a top-tier enthusiast configuration, but it is far from entry-level — the data positions it in a competitive zone where users can expect playable frame rates at most settings, with the caveat that maximum visual fidelity at 4K pushes the hardware to its limits.

The CPU itself sits at the 78th percentile when compared against all processors in the benchmark database, with an average benchmark score of 20,680. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT at 20,740 (a 0.3% difference), the Intel Core i7-10700 at 20,746 (also 0.3% behind), and the Intel Core i5-12490F at 20,794 (0.5% behind). The Intel Xeon 6325P trails at 20,538, a 0.7% deficit. These sub-1% deltas indicate the Ryzen 5 5600X is extremely well-matched against its direct competitors — the differences are statistically negligible in real-world gaming scenarios.

On the GPU side, the RX 6700 XT holds the 77th percentile among all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 33,721. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 6800 at 33,493 (0.7% ahead of the 6700 XT), the AMD Radeon HD 7950 at 34,050 (1% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 480 at 34,059 (1% behind). The NVIDIA RTX A5000 trails at 33,294, a 1.3% gap. The close margins here — all within 1.3% — suggest that in synthetic benchmarks, this GPU is virtually interchangeable with its immediate rivals, though real-world gaming performance can diverge due to driver optimizations and architecture differences.

When these two components are combined, the resulting system ranks in the 57th percentile of all tested combos. This suggests the pairing is coherent — neither component is severely held back by the other, though the data will show that at lower resolutions, the CPU's influence becomes more pronounced.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT brings 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 384.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The GPU's base clock runs at 2321 MHz, with a game clock of 2424 MHz and a boost clock of 2581 MHz. Memory operates at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective transfer. These specifications are substantial for a mid-range card, and the 12 GB frame buffer proves particularly relevant for Lockdown Protocol at higher resolutions.

At 4K Ultra, the measured average of 44.2 FPS suggests the GPU is the primary limiting factor — the 12 GB VRAM and 384.0 GB/s bandwidth are being taxed heavily by the combination of high resolution and maximum settings. The drop from 4K High (56.2 FPS) to 4K Ultra (44.2 FPS) represents a 21.4% performance penalty for the visual uplift that Ultra provides, which is substantial. This indicates that Ultra settings at 4K are pushing the GPU into territory where its 13.21 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 165.2 GPixel/s pixel rate are insufficient for smooth gameplay.

The GPU's shading units (2,560) and ray tracing cores (40) are relevant for Lockdown Protocol's FPS mechanics, though the game's performance profile suggests rasterization is the dominant workload. The 64 ROPs and 160 TMUs handle texture and pixel processing efficiently at lower settings, as evidenced by the 4K Low result of 89.8 FPS — nearly double the Ultra figure. This wide spread between Low and Ultra at the same resolution demonstrates that the GPU's compute resources scale predictably with settings, but the ceiling at maximum quality is a hard constraint.

FAQ

Q: Is this combination capable of 60 FPS at 4K in Lockdown Protocol?

A: At 4K High settings, the system achieves 56.2 FPS on average, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. Dropping to 4K Medium yields 66.5 FPS, so 60 FPS is attainable at 4K with Medium settings or lower.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 5 5600X scores 20,680 on average, which is within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT (20,740), Intel Core i7-10700 (20,746), and Intel Core i5-12490F (20,794). The Intel Xeon 6325P is 0.7% slower at 20,538.

Q: What kind of frame rate can I expect at 1440p with High settings?

A: The measured average at 2560x1440 with High settings is 86.3 FPS, which provides a smooth experience for competitive FPS play. Ultra settings at this resolution drop to 64.7 FPS.

Q: Does the 12 GB VRAM on the RX 6700 XT cause any issues at 4K?

A: The data shows playable frame rates at 4K Medium (66.5 FPS) and 4K High (56.2 FPS), suggesting the 12 GB frame buffer is sufficient for Lockdown Protocol at these settings. The steep drop to 44.2 FPS at Ultra indicates compute and bandwidth limits rather than VRAM exhaustion.

Q: How does the RX 6700 XT's benchmark score compare to the RX 6800?

A: The RX 6700 XT scores 33,721 on average, while the RX 6800 scores 33,493 — a 0.7% difference in favor of the 6700 XT. This makes them effectively equivalent in synthetic testing.

Q: What is the best resolution for competitive play with this setup?

A: At 1080p Low, the system delivers 191.6 FPS, and at 1080p Medium it achieves 133.8 FPS. For high refresh rate monitors, 1080p Medium strikes a balance between visual quality and frame rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive picture across three resolutions and four settings tiers. At 1920x1080, the system delivers 191.6 FPS on Low, 133.8 FPS on Medium, 117.8 FPS on High, and 88 FPS on Ultra. The jump from Low to Medium costs 57.8 FPS (30.2% reduction), while High to Ultra costs 29.8 FPS (25.3% reduction). This scaling suggests that at 1080p, the CPU has ample headroom and the GPU is the primary driver of performance changes.

Moving to 2560x1440, the figures drop to 138.2 FPS on Low, 100.5 FPS on Medium, 86.3 FPS on High, and 64.7 FPS on Ultra. The percentage drops from 1080p are notable: Low falls by 27.9%, Medium by 24.9%, High by 26.7%, and Ultra by 26.5%. This uniform reduction across all settings indicates the GPU is scaling predictably with pixel count, with no sudden cliff or bottleneck emerging at 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the results are 89.8 FPS on Low, 66.5 FPS on Medium, 56.2 FPS on High, and 44.2 FPS on Ultra. The drop from 1440p to 4K is steeper: Low falls by 35.0%, Medium by 33.8%, High by 34.9%, and Ultra by 31.7%. This consistent 33-35% reduction across settings at 4K suggests the GPU is operating within its memory bandwidth and compute limits, but the absolute frame rates at High and Ultra fall below the 60 FPS threshold.

The most interesting data point is the 1080p Ultra result of 88 FPS versus 1080p High at 117.8 FPS. This 25.3% gap for Ultra settings represents a significant visual investment for a relatively modest frame rate improvement. At 1440p, the Ultra setting (64.7 FPS) barely crosses the 60 FPS line, making it the practical ceiling for smooth gameplay at this resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals how the workload shifts between components. At 1080p Low, the system produces 191.6 FPS, which drops to 89.8 FPS at 4K Low — a 53.1% reduction. This massive drop at the lowest settings tier suggests that pixel throughput becomes the dominant constraint as resolution increases, even when graphical features are minimized.

Examining the scaling more closely: from 1080p to 1440p, the average reduction across all settings is approximately 26.5%. From 1440p to 4K, the average reduction is approximately 33.9%. This steepening curve indicates that the GPU's 384.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 165.2 GPixel/s pixel rate are increasingly taxed as resolution grows. The RX 6700 XT's 192-bit memory bus is a potential limiting factor at 4K, as higher resolutions demand more memory transactions per frame.

The data also shows that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck at any resolution. The Ryzen 5 5600X's single-thread score of 917 in 3DMark and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,622 are sufficient to feed the GPU even at 1080p Low, where 191.6 FPS is achieved. If the CPU were limiting, we would expect to see the 1080p and 1440p Low results converge, but they differ by 27.9%, indicating the GPU is still the constraining factor.

The implication is that for users targeting 4K, the RX 6700 XT is the component that will determine playability. The 4K Ultra result of 44.2 FPS and 4K High of 56.2 FPS both fall short of smooth 60 FPS gameplay, while 4K Medium (66.5 FPS) and 4K Low (89.8 FPS) provide viable options. For 1440p, all settings except Ultra (64.7 FPS) deliver comfortable frame rates above 86 FPS.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600X contributes six cores and twelve threads based on the Zen 3 architecture, running at a base clock of 3.70 GHz with a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The 32 MB L3 cache and 51.2 GB/s dual-channel memory bandwidth are adequate for feeding the GPU in Lockdown Protocol. The CPU's 3DMark scores — 917 single-thread, 1,793 for 2 threads, 3,363 for 4 threads, 4,811 for 8 threads, and 5,588 for max threads — show strong scaling up to 8 threads, with diminishing returns beyond that point.

In Cinebench R23, the multicore score of 18,578 versus single-core of 2,622 yields a ratio of approximately 7.1:1, indicating good multi-threaded efficiency. The Geekbench scores of 2,111 single-core and 8,673 multicore reinforce this profile. For Lockdown Protocol, an FPS title that typically benefits from strong single-thread performance, the 5600X's 917 3DMark single-thread score ensures the CPU can keep up with the GPU's output at all tested settings.

The 65 W TDP and 4,150 million transistors on a 74 mm² die (7 nm TSMC process) make this an efficient processor, though the 4.60 GHz boost clock is more relevant for gaming performance than power efficiency. The PassMark single-thread score of 3,364 places it well above the median CPU, and the data compression score of 252,306 suggests the memory subsystem is capable of handling game asset streaming without stuttering.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 78 and its near-identical performance to rivals (all within 0.7%) indicate that swapping to any of the nearest rival CPUs would produce no measurable change in Lockdown Protocol performance. The bottleneck at all resolutions is clearly the GPU, based on the uniform FPS scaling with resolution changes.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance for optimal settings at each resolution. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset (133.8 FPS) offers the best balance for competitive play, providing a 13.6% frame rate advantage over High (117.8 FPS) while maintaining reasonable visual quality. For users with 144 Hz or higher refresh rate monitors, Low (191.6 FPS) is the only preset that fully saturates such displays, though Medium comes closer to that target than High.

At 2560x1440, the High preset (86.3 FPS) is the recommended choice for most users, as it delivers smooth gameplay well above 60 FPS while preserving visual fidelity. The Medium preset (100.5 FPS) is preferable for those prioritizing frame rate, while Ultra (64.7 FPS) should only be considered if visual quality takes precedence over the 60 FPS baseline. Low (138.2 FPS) is excessive for most 1440p displays unless targeting 144 Hz.

At 3840x2160, the Medium preset (66.5 FPS) is the optimal choice, as it is the only setting that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS while retaining moderate visual quality. High (56.2 FPS) is nearly playable but falls short of the 60 FPS target, and Ultra (44.2 FPS) should be avoided for smooth gameplay. Low (89.8 FPS) is viable for users who prioritize frame rate above all else at 4K.

Across all resolutions, the data indicates that the Ultra preset provides diminishing returns relative to High. The average FPS penalty for Ultra over High is approximately 25-30% across resolutions, which is a substantial cost for marginal visual improvements in an FPS title where frame rate directly impacts gameplay responsiveness. The High preset consistently provides the best balance of visual quality and performance, with the exception of 4K where Medium is the safer choice.