Lockdown Protocol

# CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X brings an 8-core, 16-thread configuration based on the Zen 4 (Raphael) architecture, built on TSMC's 5 nm process. Its base clock sits at 4.50 GHz with a boost clock reaching 5.40 GHz, and the chip draws a 105 W TDP. The processor is unlocked, so overclocking headroom exists, though the benchmark data here reflects stock performance. The 32 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support (with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth) shape how data flows to the GPU in Lockdown Protocol.

Looking at synthetic CPU benchmarks, the 7700X posts a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 19088 and a single-core score of 1987. The Geekbench results show 12451 multicore and 2289 single-core. The 3DMark multi-threaded scores are telling: 8859 with 16 threads, 7057 with 8 threads, and 4074 with 4 threads, while the single-thread test yields 1090. The scaling from 4 to 8 threads (a 73% increase) and then to 16 threads (a 25% increase from 8-thread) suggests that Lockdown Protocol’s engine can utilize additional cores, but with diminishing returns beyond 8 threads.

The CPU sits at the 85th percentile among all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 35909. Its nearest rivals — the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 (avg score 35802, deltaPct 0.3), Intel Core 7 250H (35728, 0.5), AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 (35719, 0.5), and Intel Core Ultra 9 185H (35670, 0.7) — are all within 0.7% of the 7700X's average score. This clustering indicates that for CPU-bound workloads in this game, the 7700X is essentially performance-equivalent to those alternatives, with differences well inside benchmark noise.

In Lockdown Protocol, the 1080p Low preset achieves 304 FPS average, which represents the ceiling imposed by the CPU at lower resolutions where GPU load is lighter. The fact that the 1080p High preset drops to 188 FPS — while still high — suggests that the game's higher settings introduce additional CPU-side work (physics, AI, or draw calls) that scales with core count. The 16-thread capability likely prevents bottlenecks in crowded firefights or complex map segments, though the 3DMark 16-thread score of 8859 versus 8-thread score of 7057 shows that hyperthreading adds roughly 25% throughput, which may or may not be fully exploited depending on the game's threading model.

# GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 31 chip (codename Plum Bonito), manufactured on TSMC's 5 nm process with 57,700 million transistors. It packs 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's base clock is 1929 MHz, with a game clock of 2365 MHz and a boost clock reaching 2498 MHz. Memory runs at 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective). The card features 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, 192 ROPs, and 96 ray tracing cores, producing a pixel rate of 479.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 959.2 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 61.39 TFLOPS.

The GPU's benchmark results show a Passmark G3D score of 31238 and a Passmark GPU compute score of 17689. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 6841. Geekbench results include 50465 for OpenCL and 85612 for Vulkan. Despite these strong raw numbers, the RX 7900 XTX sits at only the 64th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19410. Its nearest rivals are surprising: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB (avg score 19334, deltaPct 0.4), NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19602, -1), AMD FirePro D300 (19637, -1.2), and NVIDIA TITAN Xp (19177, 1.2). This clustering suggests that the Passmark average score doesn't fully capture gaming performance, as the RX 7900 XTX's modern architecture and massive memory bandwidth deliver far better real-world results in Lockdown Protocol than those legacy cards.

The 24 GB VRAM capacity is far beyond what Lockdown Protocol requires at any resolution, even at 4K Ultra. This means VRAM is never a limiting factor — the game won't spill into system memory, avoiding stutter from memory swapping. The memory bandwidth of 960.0 GB/s, however, becomes critical at 4K resolutions where texture streaming and fill rate demands increase. The 384-bit bus width allows the GPU to maintain high throughput even when pushing 4K High at 89 FPS average.

The GPU's TDP is 355 W with a suggested 750 W PSU, and it uses a dual-slot cooler with 2x 8-pin power connectors. The card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring full API compatibility with modern game engines. The end-of-life production status suggests that while the card is no longer in active production, its performance in Lockdown Protocol remains competitive as the data confirms.

# FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Lockdown Protocol at 4K with high refresh rates?

A: Yes, but with caveats. At 3840x2160 with High settings, the average FPS is 89, which is playable for most monitors. Dropping to Medium raises it to 102 FPS average (with 87 min and 117 max), while Low hits 144 FPS average. Ultra drops to 67 FPS average, so 60 Hz displays will work at Ultra, but high-refresh 4K monitors will require Medium or Low settings.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals in terms of multi-threaded performance?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700X has an average benchmark score of 35909, placing it 0.3% above the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 (35802), 0.5% above the Intel Core 7 250H (35728) and AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 (35719), and 0.7% above the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H (35670). These differences are negligible in practice, meaning the 7700X offers no meaningful performance advantage over these alternatives in CPU-bound scenarios.

Q: Is the 24 GB VRAM necessary for Lockdown Protocol?

A: No. The game's VRAM usage at any settings combination will be far below 24 GB. The excess VRAM doesn't hurt performance, but it also doesn't provide a benefit in this title. The 960.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is more relevant, as it helps maintain consistent frame rates at high resolutions where memory throughput can become a bottleneck.

Q: What is the most balanced settings preset for 1440p gaming?

A: At 2560x1440, the High preset delivers 138 FPS average, which is excellent for 144 Hz monitors. Medium achieves 158 FPS average (134 min, 182 max), while Low hits 223 FPS and Ultra drops to 103 FPS. For a balance between visual quality and smoothness, High is the sweet spot, though Medium offers a 14% FPS improvement if you prefer higher refresh rates.

Q: How does the GPU's percentile ranking affect its real-world performance?

A: The RX 7900 XTX sits at the 64th percentile among all GPUs, which seems low for a flagship card. However, the average benchmark score of 19410 is weighted by synthetic tests that may not reflect gaming workloads. In Lockdown Protocol, the measured FPS data shows the card performing strongly, with 4K High at 89 FPS and 1080p Low at 304 FPS, indicating that the percentile ranking understates its gaming capabilities.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU at any resolution?

A: At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 304, which is likely CPU-limited given the lighter GPU load. As resolution increases to 1440p and 4K, the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor — 4K Ultra drops to 67 FPS while 4K Low hits 144 FPS. The data suggests the CPU can feed the GPU adequately up to about 300 FPS, beyond which the GPU's output at lower resolutions is constrained by the processor.

# How This Combo Ranks

The Ryzen 7 7700X + RX 7900 XTX combination ranks 460th out of 3714 tested combos in Lockdown Protocol, placing it in the top 12.4% of all systems tested. This is a strong showing for a high-end desktop combo, though the rank suggests that some more powerful combinations exist — likely featuring newer CPUs with higher boost clocks or GPUs with better scaling at high resolutions.

The CPU's 85th percentile ranking among all processors (avg score 35909) and the GPU's 64th percentile ranking (avg score 19410) combine to produce a system that performs well above average. The disparity between CPU and GPU percentiles is noteworthy: the CPU is clearly a top-tier performer, while the GPU's synthetic benchmark percentile lags. Yet in Lockdown Protocol, the measured FPS data shows no evidence of the GPU underperforming relative to its specifications.

The rank of 460 out of 3714 means that 3713 other combinations were tested, and this combo outperforms 3254 of them. The gap between this combo and the top-ranked systems likely comes from GPUs with higher FP32 throughput or CPUs with higher single-thread scores, as Lockdown Protocol appears to benefit from both strong single-core performance (evidenced by the 1080p Low results) and high GPU fill rates (evidenced by 4K scaling).

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four quality presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). Medium is the only preset with min/max FPS data, providing insight into frame time consistency.

1080p Results:

• Low: 304 FPS average
• Medium: 216 FPS average (183 min, 248 max)
• High: 188 FPS average
• Ultra: 141 FPS average

1440p Results:

• Low: 223 FPS average
• Medium: 158 FPS average (134 min, 182 max)
• High: 138 FPS average
• Ultra: 103 FPS average

4K Results:

• Low: 144 FPS average
• Medium: 102 FPS average (87 min, 117 max)
• High: 89 FPS average
• Ultra: 67 FPS average

The Medium preset data reveals frame time consistency across resolutions. At 1080p, the gap between min and max is 65 FPS (183 to 248), which represents a 35% swing. At 1440p, the gap is 48 FPS (134 to 182), a 36% swing. At 4K, the gap narrows to 30 FPS (87 to 117), a 34% swing. This consistent relative variance suggests that frame pacing issues scale proportionally with resolution, likely due to GPU load fluctuations rather than CPU-side stuttering.

The FPS drop from Low to Ultra at each resolution shows the GPU's scaling with quality settings: at 1080p, Ultra is 54% lower than Low (141 vs 304); at 1440p, it's 54% lower (103 vs 223); at 4K, it's 53% lower (67 vs 144). This uniform drop indicates that the GPU's performance penalty for Ultra settings is consistent across resolutions, pointing to a well-balanced rendering pipeline.

# Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the target display refresh rate and resolution.

For 1080p displays, the Low preset at 304 FPS is overkill for most monitors (which typically cap at 144, 165, or 240 Hz). The Medium preset at 216 FPS average (183 min) provides ample headroom for 165 Hz displays while offering better visual quality. For 144 Hz displays, High at 188 FPS still exceeds the refresh rate, making it the best visual choice without sacrificing smoothness. Ultra at 141 FPS is borderline for 144 Hz — it will occasionally drop below the refresh rate, but the 141 average is close enough that most users won't notice.

For 1440p, the High preset at 138 FPS is ideal for 144 Hz monitors, providing near-saturated refresh rates with good visuals. Medium at 158 FPS (134 min) offers a safety margin for 144 Hz displays, ensuring that even the minimum FPS stays above the refresh rate. Low at 223 FPS is unnecessary unless using a 240 Hz monitor. Ultra at 103 FPS is best suited for 100 Hz or 120 Hz displays, but the 103 average means occasional dips below 100 FPS.

For 4K, the Medium preset at 102 FPS (87 min) is the best overall choice for 100 Hz displays, as the minimum FPS of 87 stays within G-Sync/FreeSync ranges. High at 89 FPS is acceptable for 90 Hz displays but may dip below 60 FPS in demanding scenes. Low at 144 FPS is overkill for most 4K displays (which typically run at 60-120 Hz). Ultra at 67 FPS is only suitable for 60 Hz displays, and even then, the average is close enough to 60 that frame drops could cause noticeable stutter.

The data suggests that Medium is the "safe" choice across all resolutions — it provides the best balance of visual fidelity and frame rate consistency, as evidenced by the min/max FPS data showing the tightest relative variance.

# Resolution Scaling

Analyzing the FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals the balance between CPU and GPU load in Lockdown Protocol. Using the Medium preset as a reference (since it has complete data), the FPS progression is: 216 FPS at 1080p, 158 FPS at 1440p, and 102 FPS at 4K. This represents a 27% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 53% drop from 1080p to 4K.

The scaling pattern shows that the GPU is the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions. The drop from 1080p to 1440p (27%) is less than the pixel count increase (78% more pixels), indicating that the CPU is still contributing to the frame rate at 1080p. The drop from 1440p to 4K (35%) is closer to the pixel count increase (125% more pixels), suggesting that at 4K, the GPU is almost fully saturated and the CPU has headroom to spare.

At Low settings, the scaling is more dramatic: 304 FPS at 1080p, 223 FPS at 1440p, and 144 FPS at 4K. This represents a 53% drop from 1080p to 4K, which is less than the 78% drop seen at Medium. This suggests that at Low settings, the CPU becomes a more significant bottleneck at 1080p (304 FPS is near the CPU's limit), and the GPU has more headroom to scale as resolution increases.

At Ultra settings, the scaling shows: 141 FPS at 1080p, 103 FPS at 1440p, and 67 FPS at 4K — a 52% drop from 1080p to 4K. This similar percentage drop across all presets indicates that the GPU's workload scales consistently with pixel count, regardless of quality settings.

The fact that the 1080p Low result (304 FPS) is nearly double the 1080p High result (188 FPS) suggests that the CPU can push well beyond 300 FPS in this game when the GPU load is minimal. The 4K Low result (144 FPS) being exactly equal to the 1080p Ultra result (141 FPS) is a coincidence but highlights how GPU-bound the system becomes at higher resolutions.

The data implies that for this combo, the CPU is never a meaningful bottleneck at 1440p or above — even at 4K Low, the GPU is still capable of 144 FPS, which is well above what most 4K displays can handle. The limiting component at 4K is clearly the GPU's pixel throughput, not the CPU's processing power.