Lockdown Protocol

Lockdown Protocol pairs the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, a combination that ranks near the bottom of the tested pool. The data shows a consistent pattern: the CPU is far more capable than the GPU, and the measured frame rates reflect that imbalance across every resolution and preset. This analysis walks through the benchmark results step by step, using only the measured figures and the contextual data provided.

FAQ

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations in Lockdown Protocol?

A: The combination ranks 2737 out of 2828 tested combos, placing it in the bottom 4% of the field. This is a low position, driven almost entirely by the GPU’s limited performance.

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo achieves at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo reaches an average of 76 FPS. This is the highest average frame rate recorded for this pairing in the entire dataset.

Q: Does the Ryzen 9 9900X3D bottleneck the GTX 1650 in this game?

A: Benchmark results indicate the CPU is not the limiting factor. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D scores 47737 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 6739 in single-core, while the GTX 1650’s PassMark G3D score is 7880. The GPU is far weaker relative to the CPU, so frame rates are constrained by the graphics card.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The lowest average is 17 FPS, measured at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings. This is the only row where the average drops below 20 FPS.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rival in raw GPU benchmarks?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472, which is 0.3% higher than the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447) and 0.4% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441). It is 1% lower than the Intel Arc A310 (7550).

Q: Is there a settings preset where the combo maintains playable frame rates at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, only Low settings produce an average above 50 FPS, with 56 FPS. Medium drops to 40 FPS, High to 35 FPS, and Ultra to 26 FPS. So Low is the only viable preset for smoother gameplay at this resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 2737 out of 2828 places this pairing in the 3rd percentile of tested configurations. This is a very low standing, and the data suggests the reason is clear: the GPU is a legacy entry-level part, while the CPU is a high-end desktop processor. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D sits in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54762. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF, scores 55093, which is 0.6% higher. The GTX 1650, by contrast, sits in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 7472. Its nearest rival, the Intel Arc A310, scores 7550, which is 1% higher.

This mismatch is reflected in the game’s measured FPS. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 76 FPS, which is reasonable, but as resolution or settings increase, the frame rate collapses. The ranking is not a measure of the CPU’s capability—it is a measure of the entire system’s output in this specific game. The data shows that the GPU is the bottleneck, as the CPU’s high multi-threaded and single-threaded scores (47737 and 6739 in Cinebench R23, respectively) far exceed what the GTX 1650 can feed to the display. For a game like Lockdown Protocol, which is an FPS, the low rank indicates that most other tested combinations deliver higher average frame rates, likely because they pair more balanced components.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the primary limiter in this combo. Its specifications are modest: 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s. The base clock is 1485 MHz, boosting to 1665 MHz, and the memory runs at 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The GPU has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. Its FP32 performance is 2.984 TFLOPS, and it supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

In Lockdown Protocol, the GPU’s role is to render each frame, and its limited memory bandwidth and compute power directly impact the measured FPS. At 1080p Low, the GPU can push 76 FPS, but this drops to 47 FPS at High and 35 FPS at Ultra. The jump from Low to Medium at 1080p costs 22 FPS (from 76 to 54), indicating that the GPU is sensitive to settings increases. At 1440p, the same pattern holds: Low yields 56 FPS, while Ultra drops to 26 FPS. At 4K, the GPU is overwhelmed, with Low producing only 36 FPS and Ultra dropping to 17 FPS.

The GTX 1650’s benchmark scores reinforce this. Its PassMark G3D score is 7880, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 305. These are low numbers, especially when compared to the CPU’s scores. The GPU’s nearest rivals—the AMD Radeon HD 8850M, Intel UHD Graphics 750, and AMD Radeon R7 350—are all in a similar performance band, with deltaPct values between -1% and 0.6%. This suggests the GTX 1650 is not an outlier but rather part of a cluster of low-end graphics solutions. In the context of Lockdown Protocol, the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for high-resolution, high-settings gameplay, as the measured frame rates show.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The dataset provides measured FPS for three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). At 1080p, the combo starts at 76 FPS on Low, which is the highest average in the entire dataset. Medium drops to 54 FPS, with a minimum of 46 and a maximum of 62. High yields 47 FPS, and Ultra falls to 35 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 41 FPS, showing a significant performance cost for higher settings.

At 1440p, the numbers drop further. Low averages 56 FPS, Medium 40 FPS (min 34, max 46), High 35 FPS, and Ultra 26 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 30 FPS. This resolution is playable only at Low settings, as anything above that dips below 45 FPS. At 4K, the situation worsens. Low averages 36 FPS, Medium 26 FPS (min 22, max 29), High 22 FPS, and Ultra 17 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is the lowest average in the dataset, and even Low at 4K is below the 40 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

The medium settings rows include min and max FPS values, which provide additional context. At 1080p Medium, the FPS ranges from 46 to 62, a 16 FPS variance. At 1440p Medium, the range is 34 to 46, a 12 FPS variance. At 4K Medium, the range is 22 to 29, a 7 FPS variance. This suggests that as resolution increases, the frame rate becomes more consistent, likely because the GPU is consistently saturated. The measured data is clear: the combo’s best results are at 1080p Low, and every other configuration yields lower average FPS.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge), built on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with 128 MB of L3 cache. The CPU supports DDR5 memory with dual-channel bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Its benchmarks are strong: Cinebench R23 multi-core scores 47737, single-core 6739, and Geekbench multi-core 22884. The CPU’s percentile rank is 91, meaning it outperforms most desktop processors.

In Lockdown Protocol, the CPU’s role is to handle game logic, physics, and frame preparation. Given its high scores, the CPU is unlikely to be a bottleneck at any resolution or setting tested. The data supports this: the FPS drops are consistent with GPU limitations. For example, at 1080p Low, the combo hits 76 FPS, but at 4K Low, it drops to 36 FPS. This 40 FPS decrease is far larger than what a CPU bottleneck would cause; it is a classic GPU-bound scenario. The CPU’s 12 cores and 24 threads are more than sufficient for an FPS title, and its single-thread performance (6739 in Cinebench R23 single-core) ensures that even lightly threaded game tasks are handled with ease.

The CPU’s nearest rivals—Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF, Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, Intel Xeon 6505P, and Intel Core i7-14700F—all have average scores within 2.1% of the Ryzen 9 9900X3D. This indicates that the CPU’s performance is not an outlier; it is a high-end part that competes with other top processors. However, in this combo, the CPU’s capability is wasted because the GTX 1650 cannot keep up. The measured FPS at any resolution is limited by the GPU, not the CPU. For instance, at 1440p Ultra, the combo averages 26 FPS, which is the same as the 4K Medium result (26 FPS). This pattern shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor; if it were, we would see similar FPS across different resolutions, which is not the case.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the best experience for this combo is at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This yields an average of 76 FPS, which is the only configuration in the dataset that exceeds 60 FPS. Any other setting or resolution results in lower average frame rates. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 54 FPS, which is still playable but below the 60 FPS threshold. High settings at 1080p average 47 FPS, and Ultra drops to 35 FPS.

For players who prefer higher resolutions, 1440p Low offers 56 FPS, which is the second-highest average in the dataset. However, this is still below the 60 FPS target. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 40 FPS, which may be acceptable for some users but is not ideal for an FPS game. 4K is not recommended, as even Low settings average only 36 FPS, and Ultra drops to 17 FPS. The data suggests that the combo is best suited for 1080p Low or Medium, with Low providing the smoothest experience. If visual quality is a priority, 1080p Medium might be acceptable, but the 22 FPS drop from Low to Medium is substantial. The measured rows show no configuration above 1080p Low that maintains a 60 FPS average, so users should temper expectations.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data shows a clear trend as resolution increases. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 76 at 1080p, to 56 at 1440p, to 36 at 4K. This is a drop of 20 FPS from 1080p to 1440p, and a further drop of 20 FPS from 1440p to 4K. At Medium settings, the averages are 54, 40, and 26 for 1080p, 1440p, and 4K, respectively. The drops are 14 FPS and 14 FPS. At High settings, the averages are 47, 35, and 22, with drops of 12 FPS and 13 FPS. At Ultra settings, the averages are 35, 26, and 17, with drops of 9 FPS and 9 FPS.

This pattern indicates that the GPU is the limiting component. Higher resolutions increase the pixel count, which directly increases the GPU’s workload. The CPU’s performance is constant across resolutions, so if the CPU were the bottleneck, FPS would remain similar regardless of resolution. Instead, FPS falls consistently as resolution rises, which is a hallmark of a GPU-bound system. The GTX 1650’s 4 GB VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for 4K, as evidenced by the 36 FPS average at Low settings. Even at 1080p, the GPU struggles to maintain high frame rates at higher settings, with Ultra averaging 35 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Low settings shows a 53% reduction in FPS (from 76 to 36), which is a typical result for a low-end GPU handling a resolution it was not designed for. The data confirms that this combo is best used at 1080p, and that the CPU’s high-end capabilities do not compensate for the GPU’s limitations.