Lockdown Protocol

# Lockdown Protocol with Intel Core i5-9400 + AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT

The pairing of Intel's 6-core Coffee Lake CPU with AMD's RDNA 3 flagship-class GPU produces a fascinating split in Lockdown Protocol: at 1080p the system is clearly CPU-bound, while at 4K the GPU takes over completely. The measured results show a combo ranking 749th out of 1637 tested configurations, placing it in the upper-middle of the database, but the shape of its performance curve reveals more about where this system excels than the raw rank suggests.

Settings Recommendations

The data shows a clear hierarchy across all three resolutions: Low delivers the highest frame rates, followed by Medium, then High, with Ultra bringing up the rear. At 1080p, the spread from Low to Ultra is 164.7 to 108 FPS, a 56.7 FPS gap that indicates the CPU is the primary limiter—even the most demanding preset cannot push the frame rate below triple digits. At 1440p, the same settings spread from 150.1 down to 79.9 FPS, while at 4K the range tightens to 114 down to 52.1 FPS.

For competitive play, the Low preset at 1440p appears to be the sweet spot: 150.1 FPS is 13.4 FPS higher than the 1080p High setting, and the resolution bump provides better visual clarity for spotting enemies. At 4K, Low still manages 114 FPS, which is perfectly playable, but the 1440p Low option offers a 36.1 FPS advantage over 4K Low. The Medium preset at 1440p (122.9 FPS) is the best balance for players who want visual fidelity without sacrificing responsiveness, as it sits 42.9 FPS above the 4K High result and only 14.4 FPS below the 1080p High number.

Ultra settings are only viable at 1440p and below, where the 79.9 FPS result remains above the 60 FPS threshold. At 4K, Ultra drops to 52.1 FPS, which is below what most FPS players would consider acceptable. The data suggests that Medium at 1440p delivers the best overall experience, providing a substantial visual upgrade over Low while maintaining frame rates that exceed the 1080p High preset.

GPU Role

The RX 7800 XT brings 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's boost clock reaches 2430 MHz, with a game clock of 2124 MHz and a base of 1295 MHz. This memory configuration is substantial for a 2024 FPS title, and the benchmark results indicate the GPU has headroom at lower resolutions.

At 1080p, the GPU's role is diminished because the Core i5-9400's six threads become the bottleneck. The 164.7 FPS Low result versus 108 FPS Ultra shows only a 56.7 FPS difference, which is modest compared to what the GPU could theoretically deliver. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4157 and Passmark G3D score of 24176 place this GPU in the 76th percentile of all GPUs, confirming it is a high-end part that is being held back by the CPU at 1080p.

At 4K, the GPU's 16 GB memory buffer and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth become critical. The 114 FPS Low result at 4K demonstrates that the GPU can handle the resolution increase, but the 52.1 FPS Ultra result shows the raw compute demands of Ultra settings at 4K. The GPU's 37.32 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 233.3 GPixel/s pixel rate are the relevant metrics here, and the 4K results suggest the card is operating near its limits at that resolution with high settings.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the system's bottleneck shifts dramatically. At Low settings, the drop from 164.7 FPS at 1080p to 114 FPS at 4K represents a 30.8% reduction, which is relatively modest and suggests the CPU is still contributing to the limit even at 4K. At Medium settings, the decline is steeper: 145.2 to 80.5 FPS, a 44.6% drop. The High preset falls from 137.3 to 70.3 FPS (48.8% reduction), while Ultra drops from 108 to 52.1 FPS (51.8% reduction).

The pattern is clear: as settings increase, the resolution scaling penalty grows. This indicates that at higher settings, the GPU becomes the dominant limiting factor, and the 4K Ultra result of 52.1 FPS reflects the GPU's compute ceiling. Conversely, the 1080p Low result of 164.7 FPS is likely near the CPU's maximum frame delivery capability, given the i5-9400's 6-core/6-thread configuration and 4.10 GHz boost clock.

The 1440p results sit between these extremes, with the Low preset achieving 150.1 FPS—only 14.6 FPS below the 1080p Low number. This suggests that at 1440p Low, the system is still somewhat CPU-limited, but the GPU is beginning to contribute more significantly. The 4K Low result of 114 FPS is 36.1 FPS below the 1440p Low figure, showing the GPU is now the primary constraint.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are: Low 164.7, Medium 145.2, High 137.3, and Ultra 108. The gap between Low and Medium is 19.5 FPS, while the Medium-to-High step is only 7.9 FPS. The High-to-Ultra penalty is substantial at 29.3 FPS, indicating that Ultra settings introduce a significant computational burden. The 1080p results all exceed 100 FPS, making this resolution fully playable at any preset.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 150.1, Medium 122.9, High 109.1, and Ultra 79.9. The Low-to-Medium drop is 27.2 FPS, and the Medium-to-High reduction is 13.8 FPS. The High-to-Ultra penalty of 29.2 FPS mirrors the 1080p pattern. The 1440p Ultra result of 79.9 FPS is the only sub-100 FPS reading at this resolution, but it remains above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 114, Medium 80.5, High 70.3, and Ultra 52.1. The Low-to-Medium drop is 33.5 FPS, which is the largest single-setting penalty across all resolutions. The Medium-to-High reduction is 10.2 FPS, and the High-to-Ultra drop is 18.2 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is the only measured value below 60 FPS in the entire dataset, making it the sole configuration that fails to maintain a smooth frame rate.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 749th out of 1637 tested combinations, placing it in the 54th percentile of all tested systems. This mid-pack ranking is somewhat surprising given the GPU's 76th percentile standing, but it reflects the CPU's 50th percentile position. The i5-9400's Cinebench R23 multicore score of 7969 and single-core score of 1125 indicate a processor that was mid-range at launch and is now showing its age.

The nearest CPU rivals provide context: the Core i3-10305 (0.2% faster) and Core i3-1125G4 (0.2% faster) are essentially performance equivalents, while the Xeon E-2134 (0.4% faster) and Core i7-8809G (0.6% slower) bracket the i5-9400's position. This clustering suggests that the CPU is not dramatically outperforming or underperforming its peers—it is simply average for its class.

The GPU's nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 (0.2% faster), NVIDIA P104-100 (0.4% slower), and NVIDIA T600 Mobile (0.7% slower), with the AMD FirePro S10000 (0.7% faster) rounding out the group. These tiny deltaPct values indicate the RX 7800 XT is very closely matched with these other GPUs in synthetic benchmarks, yet the gaming results show the GPU is capable of much more than the CPU allows at lower resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset for competitive play at 1440p?

A: The Low preset at 2560x1440 delivers 150.1 FPS, which is the highest frame rate at that resolution. It exceeds the 1080p High result of 137.3 FPS by 12.8 FPS while offering a higher native resolution.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming?

A: Yes, but with caveats. The Low preset at 3840x2160 achieves 114 FPS, and Medium reaches 80.5 FPS. However, Ultra drops to 52.1 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The data indicates the CPU is the primary limiter at 1080p. The 164.7 FPS Low result versus 108 FPS Ultra shows only a 56.7 FPS spread, suggesting the i5-9400's 6 cores and 6 threads cap frame delivery.

Q: How does the i5-9400 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core i3-10305 and Core i3-1125G4 are both 0.2% faster in average benchmark scores, while the Xeon E-2134 is 0.4% faster. The Core i7-8809G is 0.6% slower. These are negligible differences.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between 1080p and 4K at High settings?

A: The 1080p High result is 137.3 FPS, while 4K High is 70.3 FPS. This represents a 67 FPS reduction, or approximately a 48.8% performance drop.

Q: Is the RX 7800 XT a high-performing GPU in this system?

A: The GPU's 76th percentile ranking and Passmark G3D score of 24176 indicate it is a strong performer. However, the combo's 749th rank out of 1637 shows the CPU limits overall system performance.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 provides 6 cores and 6 threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and boost clock of 4.10 GHz. This Coffee Lake architecture CPU has 9 MB of shared L3 cache and supports DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration, delivering 42.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The CPU's 50th percentile ranking and Cinebench R23 multicore score of 7969 place it exactly at the median of all tested processors.

The CPU's role in Lockdown Protocol becomes evident when examining the frame rate scaling. At 1080p, the system achieves 164.7 FPS on Low settings, but this number barely improves with resolution drops—the 1440p Low result of 150.1 FPS is only 14.6 FPS lower, suggesting the CPU can sustain roughly 150-165 FPS maximum. The 4K Low result of 114 FPS indicates the GPU is now the limiting factor, but the CPU's six threads still contribute to the overall frame delivery.

The i5-9400's nearest rivals show it is not a standout performer: the Core i3-10305 and Core i3-1125G4 both match its average score within 0.2%, and the Xeon E-2134 is only 0.4% faster. This clustering means the CPU is not providing any unique advantage for Lockdown Protocol. The 4.10 GHz boost clock is the key metric for gaming, as the single-core Cinebench R23 score of 1125 reflects the CPU's ability to handle the primary game thread.

The lack of multi-threading (6 cores, 6 threads) is a potential weakness for modern FPS titles that can utilize additional threads. The 1080p Ultra result of 108 FPS, while still playable, shows that the CPU cannot push beyond this threshold even with the powerful RX 7800 XT. At 4K, the CPU's role diminishes, but the 52.1 FPS Ultra result at 4K confirms that even the GPU's substantial compute resources cannot overcome the combination of high resolution and demanding settings. The data suggests that this CPU will remain the limiting factor in most scenarios, and players seeking higher frame rates would need to consider a processor with more threads or higher single-core performance.