Lockdown Protocol

Lockdown Protocol is a fast-paced FPS that rewards high frame rates, and this combination of an Intel Core i3-12100F (4 cores, 8 threads, base 3.3GHz, boost 4.3GHz) and an AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT (8GB GDDR6, 128-bit bus, 280.3 GB/s) sits mid-pack in the database's tested library. The combo ranks 2,439th out of 3,714 total configurations for this game, meaning nearly two out of three tested builds perform better in aggregate. Both components carry solid individual percentiles: the CPU lands at the 68th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU sits at the 65th percentile. That split is telling—the hardware is capable enough on paper, but this game seems to reward configurations that are more balanced around high sustained output. We'll unpack exactly how these parts behave in Lockdown Protocol, from the GPU's memory and clock behavior to the CPU's core structure, and give you a clear picture of which settings and resolutions give you the best experience from the measured data.

How This Combo Ranks

The overall placement of the i3-12100F + RX 6650 XT is modest but far from marginal. At 2,439 out of 3,714 recorded combos, it lands in the lower-middle range of the test group. That ordering implies more than a few stronger pairings; it's a configuration that might be easily outperformed by many alternatives with a higher thread count or a larger memory bus, but it's not a failure case either. The CPU and GPU each hold decent individual percentiles—68th and 65th, respectively—yet the combined score drags because the chip's modest 4-core/8-thread layout often bottlenecks the GPU in this title.

When you drill into the CPU's nearest rivals, the picture sharpens. The i3-12100F has an average synthetic score of 13,494, which is essentially identical to the Intel Core 3 N355 at 13,492 (0% difference). It edges out the Core i5-9500 (13,452) by 0.3%, but loses by 0.7% to the Core 5 120UL (13,594). The i7-1250U sits behind it, with the i3 being 1.1% faster than that part. This is raw compute; the i3-12100F holds its own against many four-core designs, but its relative weakness shows when multiple threads are hammered, as evidenced by its 3DMark multithreaded score of 4,051 vs its single-thread of 893. In a game like Lockdown, where the engine is known to scale with thread count (at least in the measured benchmarks), the lack of physical cores can negate the strong single-core number.

For the GPU, the RX 6650 XT's average score of 19,765 puts it within 0.6% of the NVIDIA Tesla K40m (19,885) but 0.7% behind the AMD FirePro W7000 (19,905). It runs ahead of the FirePro D300 (19,637) by 0.7% and the Quadro K5200 (19,602) by 0.8%. These neighboring cards are all either workstation-grade or legacy parts, so the editorial no indication of a sweet-spot competitor; the RX 6650 XT's 65th percentile global standing reflects its midrange status, but in this game the bottleneck tilts to the CPU. The rank on the combo list, thus,cannot be blamed on the GPU alone—it's a pairing where CPU spawn the direction.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is built around the Navi 23 die on a 7nm process, with 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Its memory subsystem consists of 8GB of GDDR6 across a 128-bit bus, bringing a bandwidth of 280.3 GB/s. Clocks are lively: base 2055 MHz, game frequency 2410 MHz, and a boost of 2635 MHz. These numbers mean the card is oriented toward 1080p and 1440p gaming, where transistor budget is plenty.

Looking at the measured FPS, the GPU's VRAM size and the bus width matter most at higher resolutions. At 4K (3840×2160), even with "Low" presets the card pushes only 78 FPS average, and that number drops to 49 FPS at "High" and 36 FPS at "Ultra." The 8GB VRAM likely becomes a pressure point, as textures, shading details, and geometry scale with resolution. The only row at 4K where the average touches 60 is "Low" at 78; "Medium" sits at 56, which is just under the typical 60 FPS target, and its listed min frame is 47 FPS, and max 64. This hints that while the card has enough compute for the job, the memory subsystem is fighting the higher pixel workloads. At 1440p the same pattern persists: "High" averages 75, "Medium" 86, "Low" 121, but "Ultra" plummets to 56. At 1080p, the card shines, with "Ultra" reaching 77 FPS and "Low" at 165—the card's 8GB VRAM is not a constraint at that resolution. The GPU's performance is dominated by resolution and the settings table, but it also is clear that the i3-12100F begins to throttle the card at higher resolution, as seen by the FPS parity between and 1440p on high: 1440p High 75, 1080p High 103, and this is because the CPU cannot feed the card faster at 1080p when frame rates climb above 100.

The GPU's benchmark scores back this. Its Geekbench Vulkan score (8,1306) and OpenCL (10,111) are solid, but the 3DMark Steel Nomand (DX12) of 1,859 shows the card's rending efficiency. In direct measurement of this game’s settings, the GPU's Frametime Behaviors follows the expected scaling. The takeaway: the 8GB VRAM and 128-bit bus can handle this title up to 1440p, but beyond that you're trading eye candy for smoothness unless you set everything low.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Lockdown Protocol?

A: At 1080p, all ‐settings—from “Low” at 165 FPS to “Ultra” at 77 FPS—achieve averages above a comfortable 60 FPS, making 1080p the resolution where the pair runs most confidently. At 1440p, “Ultra” drops to 56 FPS, so 1080p is the most reliable.

Q: Does the combo ever drop below 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: The measured data lists "Medium" at 1440p as 86 average with a 73 min FPS, which is above 60. "Ultra" at 1440p sits at 56 average (no min given), so if you push the last notch you lose the 60 FPS cushion.

Q: What is the fastest setting tested at 4K?

A: The "Low" preset at 3840×2160 yields an average of 78 FPS, the highest of any 4K preset. Medium gives 56, High 49, and "Ultra" drops to 36.

Q: Are the VRAM limitations visible in the frame timing?

A: Yes. At 4K Medium, the average is 56 FPS but the min is 47 and max 64, a wide swing that likely stems from the 8GB buffer being filled during intense textures. In contrast, 1440p Medium has min 73 and max 99, signifying a much tighter window.

Q: Which preset gives the best 1080 experience- the high refresh?

A: If your monitor is 144Hz, the "Low" preset at 1080p yields an average of 165 FPS, which is above 144. The "Medium" preset average 117 FPS and "High" 103 FPS; both also exceed 100, but "Ultra" at 77 FPS will feel drastically slower. So for 1080p, "Medium" is the best quality-to-frame-rate tradeoff of the tested settings.

Q: How does the CPU affect 4K results?

A: The measured 4K FPS values (96 low, 56 medium, 49 high, 36 ultra) are lower than the GPU might suggest because the 4-core processor limits the Compute stages. The negligible delta between 4K "Low" and "High" (78 vs 49) shows CPU bound is not the sole factor—GPU settings notable at 4K, but at 1080p where FPS reach 165 the CPU is clearly at its limit.

Settings Recommendations

The smartest settings for this rig depend on the resolution you're running. If you have a 1080p monitor, the "Medium" preset looks like the best quality-per-frame trade-off: it has a 117 average, only 77 on "Ultra", and a min of 100 FPS—a solid choice for a 100Hz panel. "High" sits at 103 average, a slight dip, while "Low" jumps to 165 but at the cost of visual fidelity. If you're calculation simple shooter, "Medium" offers a responsive spot.

For 1440p, the data suggests avoiding the "Ultra" preset (56 average) if you want a 60 FPS floor. "Medium" at 86 average and 73 min is comfortable, "High" at 75 average is also fine, and "Low" at 121 is overkill unless 120Hz is available. Choose whichever visual quality matches your taste—the system holds without frame tearing.

At 4K, the choice is stark: only "Low" at 78 average stays above 60, while "Medium" at 56 is borderline, "High" at 79, and "Ultra" at 36 are not playable for an FPS. For this combo, the recommended configuration for 4K gameplay is "Low," with a warning that you'll need to set everything else to accommodate the 8GB VRAM.

One more note: The middle settings are the most consistent. For resolution, the "Medium" row is the only one with min and max values, giving a reliable picture. At 1080p, it holds 117 average with a min of 100 and max of 135; at 1440p it averages 86 with a 73–99 window; at 4K it's 56 average with 47–64. If you need stable frame times, "Medium" seems to be the sigma-theta sweet spot across all sizes.

Measured FPS Breakdown

Exact measured frame …. All are averages in frames per second (min/max where provided).

| Resolution | Low | Medium | High | Ultra |

|-------------------|--------|--------|------|-------|

| 3840×2160 (4K) | 78 | 56 (min 47, max 64) | 49 | 36 |

| 2560×1440 (1440p) | 121 | 86 (min 73, max 99) | 75 | 56 |

| 1920×1080 (1080p) | 165 | 117 (min 100, max 135) | 103 | 77 |

The trend is monotonic: moving down a settings tier adds roughly 20–40 FPS on average. At 1080p, the leap from "Ultra" to "Low" is 198 FPS & 165 minus 77 = 88 FPS, while at 4K the difference between "Ultra" and "Low" is 42 FPS (78 vs 36). This shows the resolution scaling is steeper for the high settings, which is expected since the pixel shader load catapults with 4K pixel count.

At 1080p, the min FPS on "Medium" is 100, which is already in the safe zone for a high refresh display. At 1440p, "Medium" min 73 ensures no dropped frames below 70. At 4K, even the "Low" 78 avg will cause stun, po because the average 78 is only marginally above the 60 target; the gap between avg and min is unknown, but the "Medium" shows a min of 47 FPs, so you'd likely hit stutters.

No min/max values were recorded for Low, High, or Ultra, so we cannot draw the same range delineations for those. The presence of mid-frame data for Mip-0 presets indicates those runs included sentinel frame captures, and you should expect the diapason to be wider for other settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i3-12100F is a 4-core, 8-thread processor from Alder Lake, fabricated on Intel's 10nm process and running at a 3.3GHz base with a 4.3GHz boost. Its L3 cache is 12MB, with 1.25MB per core L2 and 80KB of L1 per core. It resides in LGA 1700, supporting dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory. In this game, the CPU meaningfully influences the final output at high frame rates, but less so at 4K where the GPU is the bottleneck.

The CPU's own benchmark results matter for interpreting the game data. Its single-thread 3DMark score is 893, while the 8-thread 3DMark score is 4,026, and the max-thread is 4,023 – nearly flat, showing the processor's 8-thread limit. In Cinebench R23 the multi-core score is 11,860, the single-core 1,674; Geekbench single-core 1,932, multi 7,252. These numbers indicate a strong simply sequential performer, which helps in any FPS. However, in Lockdown Protocol, the measured frame rates at 1080p Low – 165 FPS – are not sustained because the CPU cannot keep feeding the GPU at that rate.

That's the tell: the CPU is fine for mid-range at 60–100 FPS, but the moment you lower graphics to extend beyond 120+ FPS, the CPU reaches its ceiling. The delta Pct compared to the i3's nearest rival – 0% difference from the Core 3 N355 – reflects that it's essentially on par with other four-core/configurations. Its average score of 13,494 and its 68th percentile rank in the global pool confirm it's a balanced entry-level part.

In practical measurement, the role of the CPU shows up best when comparing 1080p Medium (117 FPS) to 1440p Medium (86 FPS) and 4K Medium (56 FPS). If the GPU were the only limiter, the differential between 1080p and 1440p would be a constant scale; but 1080p Medium is 117, 1440 Medium is 117, and 4K 56 – so at 1440p versus 1080p the drop is 31 FPs, while at 1440p to 4K the drop is another 30. The balance suggests that at 1080p the CPU is borderline just able to feed the GPU, but at 165fps the CPU prevented it from going to 200. The 8 threads of the i3-12100F are leveraged in this engine, but its core count is limiting when settings are lowered.

The absence of integrated graphics also matters – the i3-12100F uses "Integrated Graphics" = null, which means you must have a discrete GPU, but that's summary. The numbers, the CPU's 144Hz+ potential at 108p Low demonstrates that the core single-thread strength is enough; its 12MB L3 and 8 threads keep the FPS above 150 in that scenario. As the resolution rises to 1440p, the workload shifts to the GPU side and the CPU's role becomes less taxing; the FPS data reflects this shift with a smaller.jump from 121 (Low 1440p) to 86 (Medium 1440p) than from 165 (Low 1080p) to 117 (Medium 1080p). The CPU is not the main constraint at 4K – there the GPU reigns – but its modest thread count marks the combo's overall rank in this game. Combining the CPU at 68% and GPU at 65% , it's no surprise the crowded pairing ends up in the bottom half of the tested field.