Lockdown Protocol

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Lockdown Protocol with the Intel Core i7-12700KF and Intel Arc B390 shows a clear and predictable pattern: performance degrades as resolution increases, but the rate of degradation is not uniform across settings presets. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces an average of 88 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same Low preset drops that average to 65 FPS, a reduction of 23 FPS. At 3840x2160, the Low preset average falls further to 42 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Low settings represents a 46 FPS loss, or roughly half the original frame rate.

The Medium preset tells a slightly different story. At 1920x1080, the average is 63 FPS, with a minimum of 53 FPS and a maximum of 72 FPS. At 2560x1440, that average drops to 46 FPS, with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. At 3840x2160, the Medium preset averages 30 FPS, with a minimum of 25 FPS and a maximum of 34 FPS. The step from 1080p to 1440p costs 17 FPS, while the step from 1440p to 4K costs 16 FPS. This near-linear drop suggests the GPU is the primary bottleneck at these settings.

High settings exhibit a similar pattern: 55 FPS at 1080p, 40 FPS at 1440p, and 26 FPS at 4K. The delta between 1080p and 1440p is 15 FPS, and between 1440p and 4K is 14 FPS. Ultra settings, however, show the steepest proportional decline. At 1080p, Ultra averages 41 FPS; at 1440p, it falls to 30 FPS; and at 4K, it bottoms out at 19 FPS. The 1440p-to-4K step at Ultra is an 11 FPS loss on an already low base.

The data indicates that the limiting component shifts with resolution. At 1080p, the CPU's strong single-thread performance can still push frame rates above 80 FPS on Low, but the GPU's limited fill rate — evidenced by its 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 120.0 GTexel/s texture rate — begins to cap results as pixel count rises. The 4K Ultra result of 19 FPS is essentially a GPU-bound floor for this title at maximum quality. The fact that Low settings at 4K still achieve 42 FPS, versus 19 FPS at Ultra, underscores how much of the performance headroom is consumed by higher-quality rendering features rather than raw resolution alone.

How This Combo Ranks

In the global ranking of tested CPU-GPU combinations for Lockdown Protocol, this pairing sits at rank 2512 out of 2828 combos. That places it in the lower portion of the field, specifically in the 89th percentile from the bottom. The combo's overall position is heavily influenced by the GPU's modest standing among all graphics cards. The Intel Arc B390 ranks in the 9th percentile versus all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Its nearest rivals in the GPU benchmark database are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (avg score 1463, delta 1.3%), the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (avg score 1460, delta 1.5%), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (avg score 1446, delta 2.5%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (avg score 1443, delta 2.7%). The Arc B390 leads those older parts by margins of 1.3% to 2.7%, which is a narrow gap in absolute terms.

The CPU, by contrast, is a much stronger component in the pairing. The Intel Core i7-12700KF ranks in the 85th percentile versus all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35365. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-13700T (avg score 35403, delta -0.1%), the Intel Core 5 213PE (avg score 35428, delta -0.2%), the Intel Core i5-13600T (avg score 35305, delta 0.2%), and the Intel Core i7-12700K (avg score 35287, delta 0.2%). The differences among these CPUs are fractions of a percent, meaning the 12700KF is squarely in the middle of a very tight cluster of similar-performing processors.

The disparity between the CPU's high percentile and the GPU's low percentile is the defining characteristic of this combo. In a game like Lockdown Protocol, where the measured FPS at 1080p Low is 88 FPS, the CPU is clearly capable of feeding the GPU with enough frames at lower resolutions. However, as resolution climbs and the GPU becomes the bottleneck, the combo's ranking suffers because the Arc B390 cannot sustain playable frame rates at higher quality presets. The data suggests that the combo's rank of 2512 out of 2828 is primarily a function of the GPU's limitations, not the CPU's.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process. It features 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units, along with 12 ray tracing cores. Its base clock is 300 MHz, with a boost clock of 2500 MHz. The memory configuration is system shared, meaning the GPU draws from the system's main memory rather than dedicated VRAM, and memory bandwidth is system dependent. This shared-memory design is a critical factor in the game's performance, as it limits the effective bandwidth available to the GPU, particularly at higher resolutions where memory pressure increases.

The GPU's pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance is 7.680 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1). These specifications place the Arc B390 in a very low tier of graphics hardware, as confirmed by its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 and its 9th percentile ranking among all GPUs. The nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, scores 1463, which is only 1.3% lower. This close grouping with decade-old discrete GPUs illustrates the Arc B390's limited performance envelope.

In Lockdown Protocol, the GPU's role is most visible in the scaling of FPS with resolution and settings. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 88 FPS, which is the highest measured average across all configurations. But even at this resolution, the GPU's limits are apparent when settings increase: High drops to 55 FPS, Medium to 63 FPS, and Ultra to 41 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 47 FPS. At 4K, the gap between Low (42 FPS) and Ultra (19 FPS) is 23 FPS, showing that the GPU's fill-rate and shading capacity are exhausted well before maximum quality is reached.

The boost clock of 2500 MHz is relatively high, but the low base clock of 300 MHz suggests significant power and thermal constraints, consistent with its 80 W TDP and IGP slot width. The GPU has no power connectors and is designed for portable devices, indicating that sustained performance may be limited by the host system's cooling and power delivery. The data shows that the GPU can push playable frame rates at low-to-medium settings at 1080p and 1440p, but 4K gaming is only viable at Low settings, and even then only at 42 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and the player's tolerance for sub-60 FPS gameplay. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 88 FPS, which is the only configuration that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS. Medium at 1080p averages 63 FPS, with a minimum of 53 FPS and a maximum of 72 FPS, making it a viable choice for players who want better visual fidelity while staying close to 60 FPS. High at 1080p drops to 55 FPS, and Ultra to 41 FPS, both below the 60 FPS threshold.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 65 FPS, which is playable and above 60 FPS on average. Medium at 1440p averages 46 FPS, with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS, which may be acceptable for players who prioritize visual quality over smoothness. High at 1440p averages 40 FPS, and Ultra drops to 30 FPS. The data suggests that for 1440p, Low is the only preset that reliably maintains a 60 FPS average, while Medium offers a playable experience for those who can tolerate occasional dips below 40 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more constrained. Low averages 42 FPS, Medium averages 30 FPS (with a minimum of 25 FPS and a maximum of 34 FPS), High averages 26 FPS, and Ultra averages 19 FPS. None of these configurations reaches 60 FPS, and even 30 FPS is only achieved on Low. Players targeting 4K should use Low settings for the best balance of playability and visual quality, accepting that the experience will be below the standard 60 FPS target.

The Medium preset provides the most consistent frame pacing across resolutions, as it is the only preset with recorded minimum and maximum values for all three resolutions. At 1080p, the Medium range is 53-72 FPS; at 1440p, it is 39-53 FPS; and at 4K, it is 25-34 FPS. This consistency suggests that Medium is the most predictable preset for frame timing, even if the average FPS is lower than Low. For the best overall experience, the data points to 1080p Low as the only configuration that delivers both high average FPS and a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS target.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Lockdown Protocol?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 88, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: Can this combo run Lockdown Protocol at 4K?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings does it approach 42 FPS average. Medium averages 30 FPS, High 26 FPS, and Ultra 19 FPS, all below the 30 FPS threshold except Low.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in benchmarks?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463), 1.5% ahead of the GeForce 800M (1460), 2.5% ahead of the GT 625 OEM (1446), and 2.7% ahead of the GT 710 (1443).

Q: What is the combo's ranking among all tested CPU-GPU combinations for this game?

A: The combo ranks 2512 out of 2828 tested combinations.

Q: Which settings preset offers the most stable frame pacing?

A: The Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values across all three resolutions, showing ranges of 53-72 FPS at 1080p, 39-53 FPS at 1440p, and 25-34 FPS at 4K.

Q: How does the CPU's benchmark standing compare to the GPU's?

A: The Intel Core i7-12700KF ranks in the 85th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 35365, while the Intel Arc B390 ranks in the 9th percentile among all GPUs with an average score of 1482.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-12700KF is a 12-core, 20-thread processor from the Core 12th Gen series, based on the Alder Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a TDP of 125 W. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 25 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and it uses an Intel Socket 1700 with Gen 4 PCIe providing 20 lanes. Its launch MSRP was $384.

The CPU's benchmark results show strong multi-threaded performance: Cinebench R23 multicore scores 28838, Cinebench R20 multicore scores 12111, and Cinebench R15 multicore scores 2906. Single-thread scores are also solid: Cinebench R23 singlecore at 4071, Cinebench R20 singlecore at 1709, and Cinebench R15 singlecore at 410. PassMark tests show a multithread score of 34092 and a single-thread score of 3984. The 3DMark tests indicate scaling from 2065 (2 threads) to 9983 (max threads), with 16 threads at 9282. Geekbench scores are 14367 multicore and 2255 singlecore.

In Lockdown Protocol, the CPU's role is most apparent at 1080p Low, where the combo achieves 88 FPS. This frame rate is high enough that the CPU is likely the limiting factor at lower resolutions, given the GPU's low benchmark standing. The CPU's 85th percentile ranking among all CPUs, combined with its high single-thread performance in Cinebench R23 (4071) and PassMark (3984), suggests it can handle the game's physics and AI workloads without becoming a bottleneck at moderate frame rates.

However, the CPU's strong performance does not translate into higher FPS at higher resolutions or quality settings, because the GPU becomes the bottleneck. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 9282 and max-thread score of 9983 indicate that the CPU has ample headroom for multi-threaded workloads, but Lockdown Protocol's frame rate at 4K Ultra (19 FPS) is clearly constrained by the Arc B390's rendering capabilities, not the CPU. The data shows that the CPU can push frame rates to 88 FPS at 1080p Low, but the GPU cannot maintain that pace as pixel count and shading complexity increase.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four settings presets, with average FPS recorded for all combinations and minimum/maximum FPS recorded only for the Medium preset.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 88 FPS. The Medium preset averages 63 FPS, with a minimum of 53 FPS and a maximum of 72 FPS. The High preset averages 55 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 41 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 47 FPS, with the largest single step being from Medium to High (8 FPS) and from High to Ultra (14 FPS).

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 65 FPS. The Medium preset averages 46 FPS, with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. The High preset averages 40 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 30 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 35 FPS, with the step from Low to Medium (19 FPS) being the largest single drop.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 42 FPS. The Medium preset averages 30 FPS, with a minimum of 25 FPS and a maximum of 34 FPS. The High preset averages 26 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 19 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra at 4K is 23 FPS, with the step from Low to Medium (12 FPS) being the largest single drop.

The data shows that the Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max information, allowing for an assessment of frame consistency. At 1080p Medium, the range is 53-72 FPS, a spread of 19 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the range is 39-53 FPS, also a spread of 14 FPS. At 4K Medium, the range is 25-34 FPS, a spread of 9 FPS. The narrowing range at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU's frame time variance decreases as it becomes more consistently bottlenecked.

Comparing across resolutions at the same settings, the Low preset shows the largest absolute drops: from 88 FPS at 1080p to 65 FPS at 1440p (a 23 FPS loss), then to 42 FPS at 4K (another 23 FPS loss). The Medium preset loses 17 FPS from 1080p to 1440p and 16 FPS from 1440p to 4K. The High preset loses 15 FPS from 1080p to 1440p and 14 FPS from 1440p to 4K. The Ultra preset loses 11 FPS from 1080p to 1440p and 11 FPS from 1440p to 4K. This pattern indicates that the relative cost of resolution scaling is higher at lower settings, where the CPU has more influence, and lower at higher settings, where the GPU is already saturated.