The Technomancer

FAQ

Q: Can this system run The Technomancer at 60 FPS on a 4K display?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest recorded average is 26 FPS on Low settings, and the Ultra preset drops to 13 FPS. None of the 4K presets reach the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1920x1080?

A: The Low preset is the only playable option at 1080p, delivering an average of 71 FPS. The Medium preset averages 55 FPS, which falls short of the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest rivals in GPU benchmarks?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Its closest rival, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, scores 1186, a difference of 0.2%. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, 0.5% higher, while the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, 1.4% lower.

Q: What is the performance gap between the Ryzen 5 2600 and its closest CPU rival?

A: The Ryzen 5 2600 has an average benchmark score of 21484. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V scores 21440, only 0.2% lower. The Intel Xeon D-1746TER scores 21635, which is 0.7% higher than the Ryzen.

Q: Does the system hit 60 FPS at 2560x1440 on any preset?

A: No. The best result at 1440p is 47 FPS on Low settings. High averages 31 FPS, Medium 36 FPS, and Ultra 24 FPS. All presets remain below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What percentile does the Arc B370 rank in among all GPUs?

A: The Arc B370 sits in the 5th percentile of all GPUs in the database. This indicates it performs well below the majority of recorded graphics hardware.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The recorded data places the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 in the 75th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 21484. Nearby hardware includes the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V at 21440 (0.2% lower), the Intel Core i9-11900H at 21367 (0.5% lower), the Intel Xeon D-1746TER at 21635 (0.7% higher), and the AMD EPYC 9454 at 21223 (1.2% lower). For gaming workloads, the Core i9-11900H is the closest mobile alternative, while the Core Ultra 5 228V represents a modern low-power option. The EPYC 9454 and Xeon D-1746TER are server-class parts that would behave similarly in synthetic multi-threaded tests but are not typical gaming choices.

For the graphics side, the Intel Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and ranks in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all older discrete and mobile parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (0.2% higher), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% higher), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (1.4% lower). In practice, a system with any of these GPUs would exhibit similar frame rates in The Technomancer, with the HD 5770 being the closest desktop equivalent and the HD 7650M representing the mobile side.

When combining the CPU and GPU data, the Ryzen 5 2600 offers substantial multi-threaded headroom compared to the GPU's modest graphics throughput. The CPU's PassMark multi-thread score of 13160 and Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 1248 indicate it is not the primary constraint at most settings. The Arc B370, by contrast, sits at the low end of the GPU distribution, which explains the sub-60 FPS results at all resolutions above 1080p.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The recorded averages are 26 FPS on Low, 20 FPS on Medium (with a range of 17 to 23 FPS), 17 FPS on High, and 13 FPS on Ultra. The most demanding preset that stays closest to the playable threshold is Low at 26 FPS, but it still misses the 60 FPS target by a wide margin.

At 2560x1440, the situation improves but remains below the threshold. Low averages 47 FPS, Medium averages 36 FPS (range of 30 to 41 FPS), High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 24 FPS. The Low preset is the best option here, though it falls 13 FPS short of the playable target.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset is the only one that clears 60 FPS, averaging 71 FPS. Medium averages 55 FPS (range of 47 to 63 FPS), High averages 47 FPS, and Ultra averages 37 FPS. For users who prioritize frame rate, Low at 1080p is the only viable choice. Those who accept a lower frame rate can use Medium, which occasionally reaches 63 FPS in the recorded maximum.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows that this combination of AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and Intel Arc B370 cannot run The Technomancer at the 60 FPS playable threshold in 4K or 1440p. At 3840x2160, the best average is 26 FPS on Low, and at 2560x1440, the best average is 47 FPS on Low. Both resolutions return no playable settings according to the verdict data.

At 1920x1080, the system can run the game at 60 FPS, but only on the Low preset, which averages 71 FPS. The verdict data lists Low as the sole playable setting at this resolution. Medium comes close at 55 FPS average, with a recorded maximum of 63 FPS, but the average does not meet the threshold. High and Ultra average 47 FPS and 37 FPS respectively, making them unsuitable for smooth gameplay.

In practical terms, this system is limited to 1080p gaming for The Technomancer, and only with reduced graphical settings. Users targeting higher resolutions or higher presets would need a more capable GPU. The CPU side is not the limiting factor: the Ryzen 5 2600's benchmark scores place it well above the GPU in relative performance, and the frame rate patterns across resolutions point to the Arc B370 as the bottleneck.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results indicate that the Intel Arc B370 is the dominant constraint in this pairing. The GPU ranks in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, while the CPU ranks in the 75th percentile of all CPUs. This disparity is reflected in the frame rate scaling across resolutions.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is heavily strained. The difference between Low (26 FPS) and Ultra (13 FPS) is exactly 13 FPS, a 50% drop from the lowest preset to the highest. At 2560x1440, Low averages 47 FPS and Ultra averages 24 FPS, a 23 FPS gap. At 1920x1080, Low averages 71 FPS and Ultra averages 37 FPS, a 34 FPS gap. The absolute frame rate increases as resolution decreases, but the relative penalty for higher presets remains consistent. This pattern is typical of a GPU-bound scenario: the CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU at all settings, and the frame rate is governed by the graphics workload.

The CPU's role becomes more apparent when looking at the minimum and maximum FPS values. At 1080p Medium, the range is 47 to 63 FPS, a 16 FPS spread. At 1440p Medium, the range is 30 to 41 FPS, an 11 FPS spread. At 4K Medium, the range is 17 to 23 FPS, a 6 FPS spread. The narrowing range at higher resolutions suggests that frame time consistency improves when the GPU is the sole bottleneck, whereas at 1080p the CPU can occasionally push the frame rate higher when the GPU is less loaded.

The Ryzen 5 2600's multi-threaded capabilities, including a PassMark multi-thread score of 13160 and a Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 1248, are more than sufficient for a game from this era. The game's release date of 2016-06-27 predates the CPU's launch, so the CPU is not a limiting factor in this title. For users considering upgrades, the data suggests that replacing the Arc B370 would yield a larger frame rate improvement than replacing the Ryzen 5 2600.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3408 out of 3696 tested combos in The Technomancer. This places it in the bottom 8% of all recorded system configurations for this game. The low ranking is driven primarily by the GPU, which sits in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, while the CPU's 75th percentile ranking does little to offset the graphics deficit.

In the context of the database, this combo outperforms only a small fraction of tested systems. The nearest GPU rivals, such as the ATI Radeon HD 5770 and AMD Radeon HD 7650M, would likely produce similar rankings if paired with comparable CPUs. The combo's position near the bottom of the distribution aligns with its inability to hit 60 FPS at 1440p or 4K, and its limited playability at 1080p.

The CPU's nearest rivals do not change this picture. Even if the Ryzen 5 2600 were swapped for the faster Xeon D-1746TER (0.7% higher average score), the GPU would still cap performance in this game. Conversely, pairing the Arc B370 with a weaker CPU would likely yield similar results, as the GPU is already the limiting factor at all tested resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the recorded data shows the following averages: Low 26 FPS, Medium 20 FPS (with a minimum of 17 and maximum of 23), High 17 FPS, and Ultra 13 FPS. The Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum values, indicating a relatively tight frame time distribution at that setting.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 47 FPS, Medium averages 36 FPS (minimum 30, maximum 41), High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 24 FPS. The Medium preset again shows the only recorded range, with an 11 FPS spread between minimum and maximum.

At 1920x1080, Low averages 71 FPS, Medium averages 55 FPS (minimum 47, maximum 63), High averages 47 FPS, and Ultra averages 37 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p has a 16 FPS spread, the largest recorded range in the dataset. This suggests that at 1080p Medium, the system can occasionally exceed the 60 FPS threshold, reaching 63 FPS in the maximum reading, but the average remains below playable.

The overall pattern across resolutions is consistent: each step from Low to Ultra reduces the average frame rate by roughly 10 to 14 FPS at 1080p, 11 to 12 FPS at 1440p, and 6 to 7 FPS at 4K. The diminishing absolute differences at higher resolutions reflect the GPU becoming increasingly saturated, with less headroom for preset changes to affect the frame rate.