Lockdown Protocol

Lockdown Protocol pairs a current-generation 24-core Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with a legacy NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti, a combination that lands at rank 1585 out of 2828 tested combos in this FPS. The data shows a system that is heavily GPU-bound at higher resolutions, yet the CPU's immense headroom becomes clear when settings are dropped. This analysis breaks down the measured frames, the role of each component, and which settings deliver the most playable experience.

FAQ

Q: What is the combo's overall rank in Lockdown Protocol?

A: The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti ranks 1585th out of 2828 tested combos, placing it in the middle of the database's field.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84003. It sits 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (83807), 1.1% ahead of the AMD EPYC 4584PX (83090), and 1.2% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9135 (82980). The AMD EPYC 7F72 scores higher at 85072, putting the 290K Plus 1.3% behind that part.

Q: What is the GTX 1080 Ti's standing among all GPUs?

A: The GTX 1080 Ti holds a percentile rank of 58, meaning it outperforms 58% of all GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score is 15548.

Q: Which GPU rival is closest to the GTX 1080 Ti in performance?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M380 is essentially tied, with a delta of 0.2% (15521 vs 15548). The AMD Radeon Pro W5500 is 0.8% higher (15679), while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 and GTX 580 are 1.7% lower, scoring 15290 and 15283 respectively.

Q: What is the best average FPS recorded for this combo in Lockdown Protocol?

A: The highest average frame rate is 180 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. The lowest average is 40 FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings.

Q: Does the data include any frame time variance information?

A: Yes, for Medium settings, the data provides min and max FPS readings. At 1080p Medium, the range is 108 to 147 FPS with an average of 128. At 1440p Medium, it ranges from 80 to 108 FPS, averaging 94. At 4K Medium, the range narrows to 51 to 69 FPS, averaging 60.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is the clear performance limiter in this pairing for Lockdown Protocol. The GPU's specifications—11 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 352-bit bus with 484.4 GB/s of bandwidth—are substantial for its generation, but the architecture is Pascal, a 16 nm design from TSMC with 11,800 million transistors. Its base clock of 1481 MHz and boost clock of 1582 MHz are fixed, and the data shows that these clocks cannot keep pace with the CPU's demands at higher settings.

The GPU's compute capabilities are modest by modern standards, with 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 88 ROPs. It delivers 11.34 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and a pixel rate of 139.2 GPixel/s, yet the texture rate of 354.4 GTexel/s becomes a bottleneck when detail levels rise. The VRAM allocation of 11 GB is not the limiting factor in this game, as even the highest measured resolution (3840x2160) shows the GPU struggling with compute and fill rate rather than memory capacity.

At 1920x1080, the GTX 1080 Ti demonstrates its legacy strength: a 180 FPS average on Low settings shows the card can still push high frame rates when the pixel load is light. However, the data indicates that the GPU's performance curve flattens quickly as resolution climbs. The 1582 MHz boost clock is a hard ceiling, and the card's 250 W TDP and power connector requirements (1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin) are the physical limits of this design. The GPU's DirectX 12 support (12_1) is present, but the Pascal architecture lacks the dedicated ray tracing and tensor cores found in later generations, which does not directly impact this game's rasterized workload.

The GPU's percentile rank of 58 and average benchmark score of 15548 put it in the lower half of the database, but within the context of this combo, it is the deciding factor. The data shows that at 4K Ultra, the system drops to 40 FPS, a figure that is entirely attributable to the GTX 1080 Ti's inability to process the increased geometry and shading work. The CPU, with its 24 cores and 24 threads, is not the constraint here. The GPU's 11 GB frame buffer is adequate, but the raw shader throughput and memory bandwidth of 484.4 GB/s are the walls the system hits.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data across the three resolutions reveals a classic GPU-bound scaling pattern. Starting at 1920x1080, the system delivers strong results: 180 FPS on Low, 128 FPS on Medium, 111 FPS on High, and 84 FPS on Ultra. Moving to 2560x1440, the averages drop to 132 FPS on Low, 94 FPS on Medium, 82 FPS on High, and 61 FPS on Ultra. At 3840x2160, the numbers fall further to 85 FPS on Low, 60 FPS on Medium, 53 FPS on High, and 40 FPS on Ultra.

The scaling from 1080p to 1440p shows an average reduction of roughly 25-30% across settings. For example, High settings drop from 111 FPS to 82 FPS, a decline of 29 FPS. This is consistent with a GPU that is nearing its limit, as the pixel count increases by 78% from 1080p to 1440p, but the frame rate does not drop proportionally, indicating that other bottlenecks (likely CPU draw call overhead) are partially mitigating the load. The 1440p to 4K transition is more punishing: High settings fall from 82 FPS to 53 FPS, a 35% drop, while the pixel count jumps by 2.25x. This steep decline confirms that the GTX 1080 Ti is saturated at 4K, and the GPU's fill rate and shader units are the limiting components.

The Low settings data is particularly telling. At 1080p Low, the system hits 180 FPS, suggesting the CPU can feed the GPU far more frames than the GPU can render at higher quality. At 4K Low, the average is 85 FPS, which is still playable, but the fact that it is less than half of the 1080p Low figure shows the GPU's resolution scaling efficiency is poor. The Ultra settings at 4K (40 FPS) and 1440p (61 FPS) are the worst performers, with the 1080p Ultra result of 84 FPS being the only Ultra preset that clears a 60 FPS threshold. The data implies that the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is never the limiting factor; even at 1080p Low, the CPU's 5.80 GHz boost clock and 36 MB of L3 cache provide ample headroom, and the GPU is always the component that dictates the final frame rate.

How This Combo Ranks

With a combo rank of 1585 out of 2828, this system sits slightly above the median of all tested combinations in Lockdown Protocol. This placement is a direct consequence of the GTX 1080 Ti's age and the game's reliance on GPU throughput. The CPU, ranking in the 96th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 84003, is a top-tier part, but the GPU's 58th percentile rank (average score 15548) drags the overall combo down.

The CPU's nearest rivals illustrate its strength: it is 0.2% faster than the Core Ultra 9 285K, which is a marginal but consistent lead. Against the AMD EPYC parts, the 290K Plus holds a 1.1% advantage over the EPYC 4584PX and a 1.2% edge over the EPYC 9135, while trailing the EPYC 7F72 by 1.3%. These deltas are small, indicating that the CPU is not a differentiating factor in this combo's rank; any of these CPUs would yield similar results when paired with the same GTX 1080 Ti.

The GPU's nearest rivals are similarly close in raw benchmark scores, with the R9 M380 just 0.2% behind and the RTX 2060 1.7% behind. The GTX 1080 Ti's position in the combo rank is primarily determined by its absolute performance ceiling, not by these small relative differences. The combo's rank of 1585 out of 2828 means that there are 1243 combos that perform worse, but also 1584 that perform better. This places the system in the 56th percentile of combos, which aligns with the GPU's 58th percentile standing—a clear indication that the GPU is the bottleneck. The data suggests that pairing this CPU with a higher-tier GPU would dramatically improve the rank, as the CPU's 96th percentile score has no bearing on the combo's mid-pack placement.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system's best results are as follows: Low settings yield an average of 180 FPS, Medium averages 128 FPS with a min of 108 and max of 147, High averages 111 FPS, and Ultra averages 84 FPS. The 1080p Low figure of 180 FPS is the single highest average in the entire dataset, suggesting that the CPU is capable of far more, but the GPU's pixel throughput is the limit.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low at 132 FPS, Medium at 94 FPS (min 80, max 108), High at 82 FPS, and Ultra at 61 FPS. The 1440p Medium data shows a tighter frame time distribution than 1080p Medium, with a 28 FPS spread (80-108) compared to a 39 FPS spread (108-147) at 1080p. This reduction in variance indicates that the GPU is becoming more consistently saturated as resolution increases, reducing the chance of CPU-induced frame time spikes.

At 3840x2160, the results are: Low at 85 FPS, Medium at 60 FPS (min 51, max 69), High at 53 FPS, and Ultra at 40 FPS. The 4K Medium preset is the only 4K setting with min/max data, showing a 18 FPS spread (51-69), which is the narrowest range in the dataset. This suggests that at 4K, the system is uniformly GPU-bound, with no CPU-related hitches. The 4K Ultra average of 40 FPS is below the threshold for smooth gameplay, while 4K High at 53 FPS is marginal. The 4K Low result of 85 FPS is surprising in its strength, indicating that the GTX 1080 Ti can still deliver playable frame rates at 4K if the graphical detail is minimized.

Comparing the same preset across resolutions, High settings show the most linear scaling: 111 FPS at 1080p, 82 FPS at 1440p, and 53 FPS at 4K. This is a 52% reduction from 1080p to 4K, which is less than the pixel count increase, highlighting that the CPU is still providing some assistance at lower resolutions. The Ultra preset shows a steeper decline: 84 FPS at 1080p, 61 FPS at 1440p, and 40 FPS at 4K, a 52% drop as well, but from a lower starting point. The Low preset shows the least absolute drop (180 to 132 to 85 FPS), which is a 53% reduction from 1080p to 4K, but the absolute numbers remain high enough for competitive play.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the player's resolution and frame rate target. For a 60 FPS experience, the data shows that 2560x1440 with Ultra settings averages 61 FPS, which is technically above the threshold, but the lack of min/max data makes it risky. 3840x2160 with Medium settings averages exactly 60 FPS, with a min of 51 FPS, which could cause noticeable stutters during intense scenes. The safer choice for 60 FPS is 1920x1080 with High settings, which averages 111 FPS, providing a comfortable buffer above 60.

For players seeking the highest possible frame rates, 1920x1080 with Low settings delivers 180 FPS, which is ideal for competitive play where responsiveness is paramount. The 1080p Medium preset at 128 FPS (min 108) is a better balance, offering higher detail while still maintaining a high refresh rate. At 1440p, Low settings at 132 FPS is the only preset that clears 100 FPS, making it the recommended choice for high-refresh-rate monitors at this resolution.

The data suggests avoiding 3840x2160 with Ultra settings entirely, as the 40 FPS average is below playable standards. Similarly, 4K High at 53 FPS is borderline, and the 51 FPS minimum on 4K Medium could be problematic. The best 4K experience is 4K Low at 85 FPS, which sacrifices visual quality but maintains smooth gameplay. For most users, the sweet spot is 1440p Medium (94 FPS, min 80), which offers a high level of detail while keeping frame times consistent. The 1440p High preset at 82 FPS is also acceptable, but the 12 FPS difference between High and Medium does not justify the potential for lower frame times, since the Medium preset's minimum of 80 FPS is higher than the High preset's average of 82 FPS could suggest.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus's 24 cores are never the constraint in this game, as evidenced by the 180 FPS at 1080p Low. The GTX 1080 Ti's 11 GB of VRAM is sufficient for all tested settings, meaning players should prioritize lowering the graphical presets to reduce shader and fill rate load, rather than worrying about memory capacity. The data indicates that the most balanced experience is 1440p Medium, which provides a 94 FPS average and a minimum of 80 FPS, ensuring that the GPU does not become a source of frame time spikes. For those with 1080p panels, 1080p High at 111 FPS is the best quality-to-performance ratio, as the jump to Ultra only yields a 27 FPS drop (to 84 FPS) for marginal visual gains, while dropping to Medium only adds 17 FPS (to 128 FPS) but reduces detail noticeably.