Lockdown Protocol

Lockdown Protocol presents an unusual pairing: a top-tier 20-core CPU paired with an entry-level 4 GB GPU. The benchmark data shows a system that is almost entirely constrained by its graphics card, with the processor's considerable headroom going largely unused in this FPS title. This combination lands at rank 1578 out of 1637 tested combos, placing it in the bottom 4% of all configurations, which accurately reflects the GPU's 43rd percentile standing among all graphics cards.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It runs at a base clock of 3.90 GHz and boosts up to 5.50 GHz, with 30 MB of shared L3 cache. This is a desktop-class chip designed for heavy multi-threaded workloads, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 50009 and a 97th percentile ranking among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Core Ultra 7 265KF and Core i9-14900KF, both within 0.2% of its average benchmark score, indicating this CPU is at the top of its class.

In Lockdown Protocol, however, this processing power is largely irrelevant. The measured frame rates show no scenario where the CPU becomes the bottleneck. Even at 1080p Low settings — the most CPU-demanding scenario in this dataset — the system only reaches 77.1 FPS average. That figure is far below what this CPU is capable of driving in a well-optimized game. The PassMark single-thread score of 4904 and multi-thread score of 58838 suggest the processor could handle significantly higher frame rates if the GPU were not holding it back. The data indicates that the 265K is essentially idle in this configuration, waiting for the GTX 1650 to deliver frames. For a game like Lockdown Protocol, which appears to be graphically bound rather than physics or AI bound, the CPU's 20 threads provide massive overhead that never gets utilized.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a Turing-architecture GPU with 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. It runs at a base clock of 1485 MHz and boosts to 1665 MHz, with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus delivering 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The card's FP32 performance is 2.984 TFLOPS, and it scores 7880 in PassMark G3D, placing it at the 43rd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the RTX 3050 A Mobile (0.4% faster) and Quadro P2200 (0.5% slower), confirming this is a mid-range part from several generations ago.

The 4 GB VRAM capacity is the critical constraint in Lockdown Protocol. At 4K Ultra settings, the game averages just 19.6 FPS, which strongly suggests the GPU is running out of memory and resorting to heavy texture swapping. The 128-bit memory bus and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for high-resolution textures. Even at 1440p High, the card only manages 32.9 FPS, and at 1080p Ultra it drops to 34.7 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra settings at any resolution reveals the GPU's compute and memory limitations. At 1080p, dropping from Low to Ultra costs 42.4 FPS (from 77.1 to 34.7), which is a 55% performance penalty. This is a GPU that can handle esports-style settings but struggles with any visual fidelity above Medium.

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

The resolution scaling data clearly identifies the GPU as the sole limiting factor. Moving from 1080p Low (77.1 FPS) to 1440p Low (58.8 FPS) represents a 23.7% drop, and then to 4K Low (33.6 FPS) another 42.9% drop from the 1440p figure. This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where increasing pixel count directly reduces frame output. The CPU's performance is constant across resolutions, so any frame rate change must come from the graphics card's workload.

The High settings row shows a similar trend: 50.2 FPS at 1080p, 32.9 FPS at 1440p, and 21.4 FPS at 4K. The 4K High result is barely playable, while 4K Ultra at 19.6 FPS is effectively a slideshow. Interestingly, the difference between 1080p and 1440p at High settings is a 34.5% drop, while the same resolution step at Low settings is only 23.7%. This suggests that at higher settings, the GPU is also hitting memory bandwidth limits, not just raw pixel throughput. The 4 GB VRAM buffer is likely exceeded at 1440p High and above, causing additional performance degradation beyond what pixel count alone would predict.

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

At 1920x1080, the GTX 1650 delivers its best results. Low settings produce 77.1 FPS average, which is smooth for a competitive FPS. Medium settings drop to 53.2 FPS, and High to 50.2 FPS. Ultra settings fall to 34.7 FPS, which is noticeably below the 60 FPS threshold most players target. The 1080p results show a clear pattern: this card can handle Low and Medium presets well, but High and Ultra push it beyond its comfort zone.

At 2560x1440, the performance degrades significantly. Low settings average 58.8 FPS, which is still playable but no longer consistently smooth. Medium drops to 39.8 FPS, High to 32.9 FPS, and Ultra to 28.6 FPS. None of these 1440p results except Low would be considered acceptable for a fast-paced shooter. The step from Medium to High at 1440p costs 6.9 FPS, while the step from High to Ultra costs only 4.3 FPS — the diminishing returns suggest the GPU is already saturated.

At 3840x2160, the card is overwhelmed. Low settings manage 33.6 FPS, Medium 23.3 FPS, High 21.4 FPS, and Ultra 19.6 FPS. These numbers are all below playable thresholds for an FPS. The 4K results confirm that the GTX 1650 is not a 4K gaming card in any capacity, regardless of settings. The entire 4K row of data exists to show the hardware's absolute limits rather than practical usage.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 1578 out of 1637 tested combos in Lockdown Protocol. That places it in the bottom 3.6% of all configurations tested, which is remarkably low given the CPU's strength. The ranking reflects the GPU's dominance in determining game performance. The CPU's 97th percentile standing does not translate to a high combo rank because the game's performance is dictated almost entirely by the graphics card.

Comparatively, the GPU's nearest rivals — the RTX 3050 A Mobile, Radeon 550X, and Quadro P2200 — all have average benchmark scores within 0.5% of the GTX 1650. This means swapping the GPU for any of these parts would yield nearly identical in-game results. The CPU's nearest rivals (265KF, i9-14900KF, i9-14900K) are all within 0.9% of its average score, so swapping the processor would have zero measurable impact on Lockdown Protocol's frame rates. The combo rank of 1578 is essentially a GPU rank, with the CPU contributing nothing to lift the overall position. For context, this rank means there are 1577 other CPU-GPU pairings that deliver better performance in this specific game, which is a sobering statistic for such a powerful processor.

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

The data points to one clear recommendation: at 1080p, use Low settings. The jump from Low (77.1 FPS) to Medium (53.2 FPS) costs 23.9 FPS, which is a 31% performance hit. High settings at 1080p drop to 50.2 FPS, and Ultra falls to 34.7 FPS. For a competitive FPS, the 77.1 FPS average at Low is the only preset that provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. Medium's 53.2 FPS is borderline, but any fluctuation below that average would be problematic.

At 1440p, the only viable option is Low at 58.8 FPS. This is just shy of 60 FPS, so players may experience occasional dips below that threshold. Medium at 39.8 FPS is not recommended for any competitive play. The 4K resolution should be avoided entirely — even Low at 33.6 FPS is too slow for a shooter. If a player insists on higher visual quality, the data shows that 1080p Medium (53.2 FPS) is the best compromise between fidelity and playability, but it comes with a significant frame rate penalty. The measured rows make it clear that this combo's optimal experience is 1080p Low, with 1440p Low as a secondary option for players who prioritize resolution over smoothness. There is no scenario in the measured data where High or Ultra settings provide an acceptable experience at any resolution.