Lockdown Protocol

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

The Intel Core i5-10400F is a 6-core, 12-thread desktop processor built on Intel's Comet Lake architecture using a 14 nm process node. It operates with a 2.90 GHz base clock and can boost up to 4.30 GHz, drawing a 65 W TDP. The CPU's cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR4 in a dual-channel configuration with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s.

Benchmark data places this chip in the 68th percentile of all CPUs tested, with an average benchmark score of 14185. Its nearest rivals in aggregate CPU performance include the Intel Xeon 6756E (0.2% ahead), the Intel Core 7 160UL (0.3% behind), the AMD EPYC 7552 (0.5% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (0.6% behind). These numbers show the i5-10400F sits in a tightly contested mid-pack region where no single rival is more than a fraction of a percentage point away.

In multithreaded workloads, the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 10283 indicates solid throughput for a 6-core part. Single-thread performance, measured at 1451 in Cinebench R23 single-core, reflects the 4.30 GHz boost capability. The 3DMark thread scaling tests tell a similar story: 1350 with 2 threads, 2560 with 4 threads, 3929 with 8 threads, and 4748 with 16 threads. The jump from 8 threads to 16 threads is modest (about 21%), which suggests diminishing returns beyond the physical core count in some synthetic workloads, though the game's actual thread utilization may differ.

For a fast-paced FPS like Lockdown Protocol, the relationship between CPU throughput and frame pacing matters. The PassMark physics score of 696 and the 3DMark max-threads score of 4735 indicate that the CPU can feed a mid-range GPU without becoming the primary bottleneck at lower resolutions. At 1080p, where the GPU has less pixel work to do, the CPU's single-thread and moderate multi-thread scores become more relevant. The 122 FPS average at 1080p Low suggests the CPU is capable of driving high frame rates when the GPU load is light.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-10400F bottleneck the GTX 1660 Ti in Lockdown Protocol?

A: At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 122 FPS average, indicating the CPU can keep up with the GPU's output when pixel load is minimal. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 27 FPS, which is far more GPU-limited than CPU-limited, based on the resolution scaling pattern.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 Ti compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti has an average benchmark score of 7723 and sits in the 41st percentile of all GPUs. The AMD Radeon 540 is 0.7% ahead, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 is 1.9% ahead, the AMD Radeon R7 250 is 2.2% ahead, and the Intel Arc A310 is 2.3% ahead. All rivals are within a few percentage points.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo based on measured data?

A: At 1080p Medium, the combo delivers 87 FPS average with a minimum of 74 FPS and maximum of 100 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 64 FPS with 54 min and 73 max. At 4K Medium, the average falls to 41 FPS with 35 min and 47 max. The 1080p Medium setting provides the most balanced frame rate.

Q: How does the CPU's multithreaded performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The i5-10400F scores 10283 in Cinebench R23 multicore. Its nearest CPU rivals by average benchmark score are within 0.6% either way, meaning there is no meaningful performance separation between them in aggregate benchmarks.

Q: Is the GTX 1660 Ti more suited to 1080p or 1440p gaming in this title?

A: The data shows 1080p High produces 76 FPS average, while 1440p High produces 56 FPS average. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 57 FPS, identical to 1440p High. The GPU can handle 1440p at medium settings (64 FPS) but is more comfortable at 1080p with higher presets.

Q: What does the combo's rank of 3199 out of 3714 combos indicate?

A: This places the i5-10400F + GTX 1660 Ti combo in the lower portion of tested combinations for Lockdown Protocol, meaning roughly 86% of tested combos outperform it in this game. The measured FPS data confirms this is a sub-60 FPS experience at 4K across all settings.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data across three resolutions reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound performance scaling. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 122 FPS average. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 90 FPS (a 26% reduction), and at 4K Low it falls to 58 FPS (a further 36% reduction from 1440p). This steep decline with increasing pixel count is a classic signature of GPU limitation — the GTX 1660 Ti is the component being saturated as resolution climbs.

The Medium settings tier shows similar scaling. From 87 FPS at 1080p, the average drops to 64 FPS at 1440p (26% lower) and then to 41 FPS at 4K (36% lower). The consistent percentage drops across Low and Medium presets strongly indicate that resolution, not scene complexity, is the dominant factor in frame rate reduction. The CPU's workload does not scale with pixel count, so if the i5-10400F were the bottleneck, we would expect frame rates to remain relatively flat across resolutions.

At High settings, the pattern continues: 76 FPS at 1080p, 56 FPS at 1440p (26% lower), and 36 FPS at 4K (36% lower). Ultra settings produce 57 FPS at 1080p, 42 FPS at 1440p (26% lower), and 27 FPS at 4K (36% lower). The uniformity of these percentage drops — 26% from 1080p to 1440p and 36% from 1440p to 4K across every settings tier — is striking. It suggests the rendering pipeline scales predictably with pixel throughput and that neither the CPU nor memory bandwidth introduces a secondary bottleneck at any resolution.

The 4K Ultra result of 27 FPS is particularly telling. A 120 W GPU with 5.437 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus (288.0 GB/s bandwidth) simply cannot sustain playable frame rates at 4K with maximum settings. The pixel rate of 84.96 GPixel/s and texture rate of 169.9 GTexel/s further indicate the GPU's fill-rate limits are being reached. In contrast, the 1080p Low result of 122 FPS shows the GPU can produce high frame rates when the render load is reduced, confirming that the GTX 1660 Ti is the limiting component across all measured configurations.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The Intel Core i5-10400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti ranks 3199 out of 3714 tested combinations in Lockdown Protocol. This places the combo in the bottom 14% of all configurations tested for this game. The rank reflects a hardware pairing that is substantially outclassed by the majority of systems in the benchmark database for this specific title.

The CPU's 68th percentile standing among all processors does not translate into a strong in-game ranking because the GPU's 41st percentile placement drags the overall combination down. The GTX 1660 Ti, while capable of 1080p gaming, lacks the raw compute and memory bandwidth needed for higher resolutions in a modern FPS. The GPU's passmark G3D score of 12871 and DirectX 12 score of 51 indicate modest DirectX 12 performance, which is relevant for a 2024-released game like Lockdown Protocol.

The combo's rank is more informative when viewed alongside the measured FPS data. A ranking of 3199 out of 3714 suggests that most other tested combinations achieve higher frame rates in this game. The 4K Ultra average of 27 FPS and the 1440p Ultra average of 42 FPS both fall below the 60 FPS threshold that many players consider the minimum for a competitive FPS. Only the 1080p Low (122 FPS), 1080p Medium (87 FPS), and 1080p High (76 FPS) settings produce clearly playable averages.

The nearest CPU rivals — the Intel Xeon 6756E, Intel Core 7 160UL, AMD EPYC 7552, and AMD Ryzen 3 7320C — all score within 0.6% of the i5-10400F in aggregate benchmarks, meaning CPU swaps within this performance tier would not meaningfully change the combo's in-game rank. Similarly, the GPU's nearest rivals are all within 2.3% of its average score, so the entire performance envelope of this hardware tier is tightly clustered. The ranking reflects the tier's overall capability in Lockdown Protocol rather than any specific pairing deficiency.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

1920x1080 (1080p):

Low settings produce the highest average at 122 FPS. Medium settings yield 87 FPS average with a minimum of 74 FPS and maximum of 100 FPS. High settings deliver 76 FPS average. Ultra settings drop to 57 FPS average. The gap between Low and Ultra is 65 FPS (53% reduction), indicating that the GPU is sensitive to quality preset changes at this resolution.

2560x1440 (1440p):

Low settings produce 90 FPS average. Medium settings yield 64 FPS average with a minimum of 54 FPS and maximum of 73 FPS. High settings deliver 56 FPS average. Ultra settings drop to 42 FPS average. The gap between Low and Ultra is 48 FPS (53% reduction), identical to the percentage drop at 1080p. This consistency suggests the settings scaling is resolution-independent, operating proportionally across pixel counts.

3840x2160 (4K):

Low settings produce 58 FPS average. Medium settings yield 41 FPS average with a minimum of 35 FPS and maximum of 47 FPS. High settings deliver 36 FPS average. Ultra settings drop to 27 FPS average. The gap between Low and Ultra is 31 FPS (53% reduction), matching the other resolutions. At 4K, no settings tier achieves 60 FPS average, and only Low settings exceed 50 FPS.

The Medium settings rows are the only ones with min/max data. At 1080p, the minimum of 74 FPS suggests the frame time variance is modest, with a 26 FPS spread between min and max. At 1440p, the spread narrows to 19 FPS (54 to 73). At 4K, the spread is 12 FPS (35 to 47). This tightening of frame variance as resolution increases is consistent with GPU-bound operation — the GPU's consistent rendering time per frame dominates, and CPU-side stutter or thread scheduling jitter becomes less visible.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

For players targeting 60 FPS average as a baseline, the only settings that achieve this at 1080p are Low (122 FPS) and Medium (87 FPS). High settings at 1080p produce 76 FPS average, which still clears 60 FPS but with less headroom. Ultra at 1080p sits at 57 FPS average, just below the 60 FPS mark. The Medium preset at 1080p offers the best balance: 87 FPS average with a minimum of 74 FPS, meaning the frame rate never drops below 74 FPS in the measured sample. This provides a smooth experience with visual quality that is one step above Low.

At 1440p, Medium settings (64 FPS average, 54 min, 73 max) are the only preset that clears 60 FPS average. Low settings produce 90 FPS average and would be the choice for players prioritizing maximum frame rate over visual fidelity. High settings at 1440p fall to 56 FPS average, and Ultra drops to 42 FPS. For 1440p gaming, Medium is the recommended preset for a stable, playable experience, while Low offers a significant frame rate boost (40% higher average) for competitive play.

At 4K, no settings tier reaches 60 FPS average. Low settings at 58 FPS average are the closest, with Medium at 41 FPS, High at 36 FPS, and Ultra at 27 FPS. Players with a 4K display should accept either a reduced internal resolution or lower quality expectations. The 58 FPS average at 4K Low is borderline playable, but the 41 FPS average at Medium suggests that dropping to 1440p would be the more practical choice for a better experience.

The 1080p Medium preset stands out as the single best measured configuration for this combo: 87 FPS average, 74 FPS minimum, and a 26 FPS variance between min and max. This delivers smooth frame pacing with enough visual quality to distinguish objects at range in an FPS title. The 1440p Medium preset is a viable alternative (64 FPS average) for players with higher-resolution displays who can tolerate slightly lower frame rates. The 4K Low result of 58 FPS average is the only playable 4K option, and even that sits below the 60 FPS threshold.