Lockdown Protocol

# Lockdown Protocol with Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus + AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

This pairing combines a top-tier 24-core desktop processor with a mid-range 2019-era graphics card, and the benchmark data shows exactly what you would expect: the CPU is effectively never the bottleneck, while the GPU carries the entire load across every resolution and preset tested. The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus sits in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the RX 5700 XT lands in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, and that gap defines the performance profile of this system in Lockdown Protocol.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, built on TSMC's 3 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core. The chip supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel interface with 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth, and it uses the Intel Socket 1851 platform with PCIe Gen 5 connectivity.

In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 and a single-core score of 7303. The PassMark multi-thread score is 60860, with a single-thread score of 4823. Its average benchmark score of 84003 places it 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, 1.1% ahead of the AMD EPYC 4584PX, and 1.2% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9135. It trails the AMD EPYC 7F72 by 1.3%. These are small margins, indicating that the 290K Plus is among the fastest desktop CPUs available, even if it doesn't dramatically separate itself from its closest rivals.

For Lockdown Protocol, an FPS title, the CPU's single-thread performance is what matters most for game logic, physics, and frame pacing. The 5.80 GHz boost clock and strong single-core scores suggest that the CPU can feed frames to the GPU without becoming a limiting factor. The 24 cores and 24 threads are far more than any current game needs, meaning the processor will sit partially idle during gameplay. The data supports this: at 1080p Low settings, the system produces 156 FPS average, which is the highest result across all tested configurations, and the frame rate drops as resolution or settings increase. If the CPU were the constraint, you would expect frame rates to stay flat or even rise at higher resolutions because the GPU would become the limiting factor earlier. Instead, the consistent downward trend with resolution and settings points to GPU-bound behavior throughout.

The CPU's 96th percentile ranking versus all CPUs reinforces that this is a premium processor. Its PassMark data compression score of 698346 and floating-point math score of 214760 indicate strong general compute capability, but these are not directly relevant to Lockdown Protocol. What matters is that the 290K Plus has enough headroom to handle any background tasks, streaming, or recording workloads while maintaining high frame rates in-game. The benchmark results show no scenario where the CPU appears to hold back the GPU.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is a RDNA 1.0 architecture GPU with 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. It has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The base clock is 1605 MHz, with a game clock of 1755 MHz and a boost clock of 1905 MHz. Memory runs at 1750 MHz, which translates to 14 Gbps effective. The card supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and it uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface.

In synthetic benchmarks, the RX 5700 XT scores 16277 in PassMark G3D and 7650 in PassMark GPU compute. Its average benchmark score of 16361 places it 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, 0.3% behind the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell, 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W7500, and 0.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2. These are extremely tight margins, with the RX 5700 XT performing essentially on par with professional and newer consumer cards in aggregate benchmarks. The 59th percentile ranking versus all GPUs places it solidly in the middle of the pack, which is consistent with its 2019 release date and 7 nm process node.

The 8 GB VRAM capacity is the most likely constraint in Lockdown Protocol. At 4K Ultra settings, the average frame rate drops to 34 FPS, and at 4K High it only reaches 46 FPS. These low results suggest the GPU is both compute-limited and possibly VRAM-limited at higher resolutions. The memory bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s is respectable for the era, but modern games with high-resolution textures can exceed 8 GB of VRAM usage, causing the card to spill into system memory and tank performance. The fact that 4K Low produces 74 FPS while 4K Ultra produces 34 FPS — a 40 FPS gap — indicates that settings have a massive impact on this GPU's ability to render the game.

At 1080p, the GPU performs much more comfortably. The 156 FPS average at Low settings shows that the card can deliver high refresh rate gameplay when the resolution is manageable. The 97 FPS at High and 111 FPS at Medium settings are also playable, while Ultra drops to 72 FPS. The pattern is clear: this GPU is best suited for 1080p gaming, with 1440p being playable at lower settings, and 4K only viable at Low settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a consistent and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases. At 1080p High, the system averages 97 FPS. Moving to 1440p High, it drops to 71 FPS (a 26.8% reduction), and at 4K High it falls to 46 FPS (a 52.6% reduction from 1080p). This steep decline with resolution is characteristic of a GPU-bound system — the CPU is capable of maintaining high frame rates, but the GPU's rendering workload increases exponentially with pixel count.

The Low settings row shows the same trend with higher absolute numbers. At 1080p Low, the average is 156 FPS. At 1440p Low, it drops to 114 FPS (a 26.9% reduction), and at 4K Low, it falls to 74 FPS (a 52.6% reduction from 1080p). The percentage drops are nearly identical between Low and High settings at each resolution step, which indicates that the GPU's memory bandwidth and compute throughput scale linearly with pixel count regardless of the visual settings. This is strong evidence that the GPU is the limiting component across all tested configurations.

The Medium settings row includes min and max FPS values, providing insight into frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the average is 111 FPS with a min of 94 FPS and max of 127 FPS, giving a 33 FPS spread. At 1440p Medium, the average is 81 FPS with a min of 69 FPS and max of 93 FPS, a 24 FPS spread. At 4K Medium, the average is 52 FPS with a min of 44 FPS and max of 60 FPS, a 16 FPS spread. The shrinking spread at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU becomes more consistently loaded, with fewer spikes and dips in frame times. This is typical behavior for a GPU that is saturated at higher resolutions.

The resolution scaling analysis points to one conclusion: the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has ample headroom, and the RX 5700 XT is the sole determinant of frame rates in Lockdown Protocol. If you want higher FPS, the only solution is to reduce resolution or lower settings — no CPU upgrade would help.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus a good match for the RX 5700 XT in Lockdown Protocol?

A: Yes, but only in the sense that the CPU is far more powerful than the GPU needs. The 290K Plus ranks in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the RX 5700 XT ranks in the 59th percentile of all GPUs. The benchmark data shows the GPU is the limiting factor at every resolution and settings combination, so the CPU never bottlenecks the system.

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

A: It can run, but not at high frame rates. At 4K Low, the average FPS is 74. At 4K Medium, it drops to 52 FPS, and at 4K High, it falls to 46 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the average is just 34 FPS. For a competitive FPS game, 4K is only practical at Low settings, and even then, 74 FPS may not be sufficient for high-refresh-rate monitors.

Q: What is the best resolution for competitive play with this hardware?

A: The data shows 1080p is clearly the best choice. At 1080p Low, the system averages 156 FPS, and at 1080p Medium, it averages 111 FPS with a minimum of 94 FPS. These frame rates are suitable for 144 Hz monitors. At 1440p Low, the average drops to 114 FPS, which is still playable, but 1080p provides the highest headroom.

Q: How does the RX 5700 XT compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RX 5700 XT's average benchmark score of 16361 is 0.1% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, 0.3% lower than the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell, 0.3% lower than the AMD Radeon PRO W7500, and 0.9% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2. These are negligible differences in aggregate scores, suggesting the card performs on par with those products in general compute.

Q: Is the CPU's 24-core configuration useful for Lockdown Protocol?

A: Not directly. Lockdown Protocol is an FPS game, and the benchmark results show GPU-bound behavior across all settings. The 24 cores and 24 threads are far more than the game can utilize. However, the high boost clock of 5.80 GHz and strong single-core performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7303) ensure the CPU handles game logic without issue.

Q: What is the performance gap between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 1440p Low, the average FPS is 114. At 1440p Ultra, it drops to 53 FPS. That is a 61 FPS difference, or a 53.5% reduction in average frame rate. The gap is driven entirely by the GPU, as the CPU has no trouble maintaining high frame rates in either scenario.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table shows the exact measured average FPS for each resolution and settings combination:

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

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

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 34 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | High | 46 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 52 | 44 | 60 |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 74 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 53 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | High | 71 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 81 | 69 | 93 |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 114 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 72 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | High | 97 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 111 | 94 | 127 |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 156 | — | — |

At 1080p, the scaling from Low to Ultra is as follows: Low delivers 156 FPS, Medium 111 FPS, High 97 FPS, and Ultra 72 FPS. The step from Medium to High costs 14 FPS, while the step from High to Ultra costs 25 FPS. The largest single drop is from Low to Medium, which costs 45 FPS. This suggests that Low settings unlock significant headroom, likely by disabling expensive effects that heavily tax the GPU's shading units.

At 1440p, the pattern is similar but with lower absolute numbers: Low delivers 114 FPS, Medium 81 FPS, High 71 FPS, and Ultra 53 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 33 FPS, from Medium to High is 10 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 18 FPS. The relative performance penalty for each settings tier is consistent with the 1080p results, confirming the GPU-bound nature of the system.

At 4K, the numbers become marginal: Low delivers 74 FPS, Medium 52 FPS, High 46 FPS, and Ultra 34 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 22 FPS, from Medium to High is 6 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 12 FPS. At this resolution, even Low settings produce frame rates that are below what most competitive players would consider ideal, and Ultra settings are effectively unplayable for fast-paced gameplay.

The Medium settings row at each resolution includes min and max FPS, which show that frame times are relatively stable. At 1080p Medium, the min is 94 FPS and max is 127 FPS, a spread of 33 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the spread narrows to 24 FPS (69 to 93), and at 4K Medium, it narrows further to 16 FPS (44 to 60). This narrowing spread at higher resolutions indicates the GPU is consistently saturated, reducing frame time variance.

Settings Recommendations

For players using this exact hardware combination, the data points to a clear recommendation hierarchy based on desired frame rate and resolution.

At 1080p, which is the sweet spot for this GPU, the Medium preset delivers 111 FPS average with a minimum of 94 FPS. This is the best balance of visual quality and performance, as it stays above 90 FPS at all times according to the minimum reading. High settings at 1080p drop the average to 97 FPS, which is still playable but with less headroom for dips. Low settings at 1080p push the average to 156 FPS, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors, but the visual downgrade may be significant. Ultra settings at 1080p average 72 FPS, which is below the 90 FPS threshold that many competitive players prefer. The Medium preset at 1080p is the recommended choice for most players, as it keeps frame rates high while retaining a reasonable level of visual fidelity.

At 1440p, the Medium preset averages 81 FPS with a minimum of 69 FPS. This is playable but may feel less smooth than 1080p Medium. High settings at 1440p drop to 71 FPS average, and Ultra falls to 53 FPS, both of which are below the 60 FPS threshold for fluid gameplay. Low settings at 1440p average 114 FPS, which is excellent, but the visual compromise is substantial. For 1440p users, Low settings offer the best frame rate, while Medium provides a playable 81 FPS with better visuals. If you have a 144 Hz 1440p monitor, Low settings are the only way to approach that refresh rate.

At 4K, none of the presets deliver ideal performance. Low settings average 74 FPS, which is the only configuration above 60 FPS, but it still falls short of high-refresh-rate targets. Medium averages 52 FPS, High averages 46 FPS, and Ultra averages 34 FPS. For 4K gaming, Low settings are the only viable option if you want a playable experience, and even then, you should expect frame rates in the 60-75 FPS range. If 4K is a priority, this GPU is not adequate for Lockdown Protocol beyond Low settings.

The overall recommendation is to run Lockdown Protocol at 1080p with Medium settings for the best balance of frame rate and visual quality. If you prioritize competitive performance over visuals, drop to Low settings to gain a 45 FPS average increase. Avoid Ultra settings at any resolution, as the performance cost is disproportionate to the visual benefit, given the GPU's 59th percentile ranking. The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus provides plenty of CPU headroom, so the only lever you have for performance is adjusting GPU-bound settings.