Can I Run It?

Instant compatibility check with FPS benchmarks and optimization tips

The Technomancer
Action RPG 2016

The Technomancer

26%
Not Recommended Your system may struggle with this game.

Performance

1080p (Full HD)

Low 1080p Measured
79 FPS
Ultra 1080p Measured
40 FPS

1440p (2K / QHD)

Low 1440p Measured
52 FPS
Ultra 1440p Measured
26 FPS

4K (Ultra HD)

Low 4K Measured
28 FPS
Ultra 4K Measured
15 FPS
19.2ms Frame Time
29ms Input Latency
1440p Best Resolution

Requirements Check

Processor
Required 37,436
Your CPU 17,507
Graphics Card
Required 27,947
Your GPU 1,482

Recommendations

Upgrade Needed

Your hardware doesn't meet minimum requirements for this game.

Average FPS: resolution vs quality settings

UltraHighMediumLow
4K Ultra HD 15 19 22 28
1440p QHD 26 34 40 52
1080p Full HD 40 52 61 79

Cell color: green is 120+ FPS, teal is 60+, amber is 30+, red is below 30. Cards marked Estimated above have no measured row and are scaled from your GPU benchmark percentile.

Every measured configuration

1920x1080 High 52
1920x1080 Low 79
1920x1080 Medium 61
1920x1080 Ultra 40
2560x1440 High 34
2560x1440 Low 52
2560x1440 Medium 40
2560x1440 Ultra 26
3840x2160 High 19
3840x2160 Low 28
3840x2160 Medium 22
3840x2160 Ultra 15

Performance Analysis: The Technomancer on Your System

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for The Technomancer with the AMD Ryzen 5 4600G and Intel Arc B390 shows a clear performance ceiling. At 3840x2160, the combination never approaches smooth gameplay. High settings produce an average of 19 FPS, Medium averages 22 FPS with minimums of 19 and maximums of 25, Low averages 28 FPS, and Ultra drops to 15 FPS. None of these numbers are close to the 60 FPS playable threshold, and even the Low preset at 4K remains below 30 FPS average.

Moving down to 2560x1440 improves the situation but does not change the fundamental outcome. High settings average 34 FPS, Medium averages 40 FPS with a recorded range of 34 to 46, Low averages 52 FPS, and Ultra averages 26 FPS. The 1440p Low result is the strongest in this resolution, yet it still falls 8 FPS short of the 60 FPS target. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 26 FPS, showing that the preset choice matters substantially for this hardware.

At 1920x1080, the data finally shows playable results. Low settings average 79 FPS, which is the highest recorded average across all resolutions and presets. Medium averages 61 FPS with minimums of 52 and maximums of 70, just clearing the 60 FPS threshold. High averages 52 FPS, and Ultra averages 40 FPS. The scaling from 1440p Low (52 FPS) to 1080p Low (79 FPS) is a 27 FPS jump, demonstrating how strongly resolution affects this particular pairing.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves the 60 FPS target. The database lists no playable settings for this resolution, and the best available average FPS is 28 at Low settings. The verdict data confirms that 4K is not viable for this combination.

At 2560x1440, the same conclusion applies. There are no playable settings recorded, and the best average FPS is 52 at Low. Medium sits at 40 FPS, High at 34, and Ultra at 26. While Low at 1440p is the closest result to the threshold across the two non-playable resolutions, it still misses by 8 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the playable settings are Low and Medium, with Medium being the best preset that holds at or above 60 FPS. Medium delivers an average of 61 FPS, with a minimum of 52 and maximum of 70. Low is also viable at 79 FPS average, but Medium is the most demanding preset that stays above the 60 FPS line. High at 52 FPS and Ultra at 40 FPS both fall short. For a builder targeting 1080p, Medium is the ceiling for consistent 60+ FPS performance, with Low available as a headroom option.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions and presets reveals which component limits performance. The Intel Arc B390 uses system shared memory and reports a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482, placing it in the 9th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1.3% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1.5% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (2.5% faster), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (2.7% faster). This places the GPU in a very low performance tier.

The CPU, meanwhile, sits in the 71st percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 17507. The Ryzen 5 4600G has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 4.20 GHz. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 13593 and singlecore score is 1919. This is a respectable mid-range processor, and the discrepancy between CPU and GPU performance tiers suggests the GPU is the primary constraint.

The resolution scaling supports this. From 1080p Low (79 FPS) to 1440p Low (52 FPS), the average drops by 27 FPS. From 1440p Low to 4K Low (28 FPS), the drop is 24 FPS. These are large reductions for a game from 2016, indicating that the GPU's memory bandwidth and raw throughput are exhausted quickly as pixel count rises. The GPU's pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s and texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 7.680 TFLOPS, but the system shared memory configuration means bandwidth is system dependent, which likely compounds the issue at higher resolutions.

Preset scaling at 1080p shows that CPU headroom exists. Low to Medium at 1080p only costs 18 FPS (79 to 61), while Medium to High costs another 9 FPS (61 to 52). The fact that Medium clears 60 FPS while High does not suggests that the GPU handles the additional shading and texture work poorly beyond a certain point. At 4K, preset scaling from Low to Ultra costs only 13 FPS (28 to 15), which is a smaller absolute gap than at 1080p, consistent with a GPU that is already saturated at the lowest settings in 4K.

In practical terms, the Ryzen 5 4600G is not the bottleneck at any resolution. The CPU's single-thread performance (PassMark single thread score of 2653, 3DMark single thread score of 726) is sufficient to feed the Arc B390 in this title. The data shows that lowering resolution from 1080p to 4K produces a proportional collapse in frame rate that points entirely at the GPU and its shared memory architecture.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the database lists nearest rivals based on average benchmark scores. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE scores 17482, which is 0.1% slower than the Ryzen 5 4600G. The AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE scores 17614, which is 0.6% faster. The Intel Core 7 150U scores 17395, which is 0.6% slower. The Intel Core i3-14100T scores 17648, which is 0.8% faster. In practical terms for The Technomancer, any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates when paired with the Arc B390, because the GPU is the limiting factor. The 4600G's advantage in multicore workloads (Cinebench R20 multicore score of 5709, Geekbench multicore score of 6637) does not translate into measurable FPS differences in this GPU-bound scenario.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are much closer in performance. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, which is 1.3% slower than the Arc B390's 1482. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460, 1.5% slower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5% slower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7% slower. A builder considering the Arc B390 should expect essentially identical behavior from any of these GPUs in The Technomancer. The 2.7% difference between the Arc B390 and the GT 710 would translate to roughly 1 to 2 FPS at 1080p Low, well within measurement noise. The recorded data shows that all of these GPUs belong to the same performance stratum, and none would change the verdict for this game.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 4600G and Intel Arc B390 ranks 3285 out of 3696 tested combos in The Technomancer. This places it in the bottom 11% of all tested configurations. The rank reflects the GPU's severe limitation: a 9th percentile GPU paired with a 71st percentile CPU produces a result that is dominated by the weakest link. The CPU's position in the 71st percentile among all CPUs means that swapping in a faster GPU would likely move this combo up significantly, but as tested, the Arc B390 drags the overall ranking down. The rank of 3285 out of 3696 is consistent with the measured FPS data, which shows playable performance only at 1080p Low and Medium.

The Verdict

Can this PC run The Technomancer? The answer depends entirely on the target resolution. At 3840x2160, no. The data shows no playable settings, with the best average FPS being 28 at Low. At 2560x1440, also no. There are no playable settings recorded, and the best result is 52 FPS at Low. At 1920x1080, yes. The database lists Low and Medium as playable, with Medium being the best setting at 61 FPS average. The minimum recorded FPS at 1080p Medium is 52, which means there will be dips below 60 FPS, but the average holds above the threshold.

For a builder with this specific hardware, the practical advice is straightforward. Play at 1080p with Medium settings for the best visual quality that maintains a 60 FPS average. Low settings provide a comfortable margin at 79 FPS average if frame pacing consistency matters more than visual fidelity. Avoid High and Ultra presets at 1080p, as they drop to 52 and 40 FPS respectively. Avoid 1440p and 4K entirely, as even the lowest settings cannot sustain 60 FPS at those resolutions. The Arc B390 is the limiting component, and no amount of CPU headroom from the Ryzen 5 4600G compensates for the GPU's performance tier. This is a 1080p medium-settings machine for The Technomancer, nothing more.