The Technomancer

Similar Performance Alternatives

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D sits in a tight cluster of CPUs with nearly identical average benchmark scores. The database shows the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is the closest match, trailing by only 0.2%. The Intel Core i9-13950HX and AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 are also within 0.5% and 0.6%, respectively, meaning any of these processors would deliver nearly indistinguishable frame pacing in The Technomancer when the GPU is not the limiting factor. On the other side, the Intel Core i5-14600 posts a score 0.7% higher, so it is effectively a peer as well. For this game, swapping between these four CPUs would not measurably change the outcome at most settings, because the recorded frames per second are heavily constrained by the graphics solution.

For the Intel Arc B370, the comparison pool is far less flattering. Its average 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The nearest rival is the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, which scores 1186, a delta of only 0.2%. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 and AMD Radeon HD 7650M are 0.5% and 0.7% ahead, respectively, while the AMD FirePro M2000 sits 1.4% behind. These are all legacy or low-power parts, which underscores how limited the Arc B370 is in this title. Users coming from any of these older GPUs would see similar performance, but none of them approach a comfortable 60 FPS experience at higher resolutions. The data indicates that the Arc B370 is a capable low-resolution or low-preset part, but it does not belong in the same conversation as modern discrete gaming graphics cards for a demanding Action RPG like The Technomancer.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches the 60 FPS playable threshold. The highest recorded average is 26 FPS at Low settings, followed by 20 FPS at Medium, 17 FPS at High, and 13 FPS at Ultra. Since the verdict database lists no playable settings for this resolution, the best choice would be the lowest preset if a user insists on 4K, but the experience will be well below the target.

At 2560x1440, the situation improves slightly but still falls short. Low settings produce an average of 47 FPS, Medium drops to 36 FPS, High to 31 FPS, and Ultra to 24 FPS. None of these clear the 60 FPS bar, and the verdict confirms there are no playable settings at this resolution. The Medium preset does have recorded minimum and maximum values of 30 and 41 FPS, which shows some stability, but the average remains below the threshold.

At 1920x1080, the only playable setting is Low, with an average of 71 FPS. This is the single configuration that passes the 60 FPS requirement. Medium averages 55 FPS with a minimum of 47 FPS and a maximum of 63 FPS, High averages 47 FPS, and Ultra averages 37 FPS. The database verdict explicitly names Low as the best settings at this resolution, with an average of 71 FPS. Users who want a smooth experience must sacrifice visual quality to the lowest preset.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded FPS scaling across resolutions reveals that the Intel Arc B370 is the dominant bottleneck in this pairing. Moving from 1920x1080 Low at 71 FPS to 2560x1440 Low at 47 FPS represents a 33.8% drop, and further to 3840x2160 Low at 26 FPS is a 44.7% drop from the 1440p figure. This steep degradation with resolution is classic GPU-bound behavior. The CPU, with a PassMark multithread score of 25047 and a single-thread score of 3494, is not the limiting factor at any resolution tested.

At higher presets, the GPU load increases even more. At 1920x1080, the difference between Low (71 FPS) and Ultra (37 FPS) is a 47.9% reduction. At 2560x1440, Low (47 FPS) to Ultra (24 FPS) is a 48.9% reduction. At 3840x2160, Low (26 FPS) to Ultra (13 FPS) is exactly a 50% reduction. This consistent halving of performance from Low to Ultra across all resolutions confirms that the Arc B370's shading units, 1280 in total, and its 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 throughput are simply overwhelmed by the game's higher visual settings.

The CPU's role is more apparent at lower resolutions where the GPU has less work. At 1920x1080 Low, the Ryzen 5 7500X3D can feed enough frames to reach 71 FPS, but the GPU still cannot push beyond that. The CPU's 96 MB of shared L3 cache and 12 threads are more than sufficient for a 2016 Action RPG. The data shows no scenario where the CPU becomes the primary constraint; every frame rate drop correlates with either higher resolution or higher preset, both of which increase GPU workload. The verdict is clear: this combo is GPU-limited in every measurable configuration.

The Verdict

Can this PC run The Technomancer? The answer depends entirely on resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, yes, but only at Low settings, where the average FPS is 71, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium settings at the same resolution fall short at 55 FPS, High at 47 FPS, and Ultra at 37 FPS. At 2560x1440, no settings are playable; the best average is 47 FPS at Low, and all other presets are below 36 FPS. At 3840x2160, the situation is worse, with the highest average being 26 FPS at Low and Ultra dropping to 13 FPS.

The database's verdictByResolution field confirms that only 1920x1080 Low is listed as a playable setting, with an average of 71 FPS at that configuration. For users who prioritize frame rate, this is the only viable path. Anyone hoping for Medium or higher at 1080p, or any preset at 1440p or 4K, will need a more powerful GPU. The Ryzen 5 7500X3D is not the problem; the Intel Arc B370's 5th percentile GPU ranking is the limiting factor. This system can deliver a playable, if visually modest, experience, but it cannot handle the game's higher fidelity options.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest playable setting for this combo?

A: The only playable setting, defined as staying at or above 60 FPS, is Low at 1920x1080, with an average of 71 FPS.

Q: Can this system run The Technomancer at 2560x1440?

A: No. The best average at 1440p is 47 FPS on Low, and the verdict lists no playable settings for this resolution.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D has an average benchmark score of 44573. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is 0.2% slower, the Intel Core i9-13950HX is 0.5% slower, and the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is 0.6% slower. The Intel Core i5-14600 is 0.7% faster.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking?

A: The Intel Arc B370 sits in the 5th percentile of all GPUs in the database, with an average 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1920x1080?

A: Low averages 71 FPS, while Ultra averages 37 FPS, a reduction of 34 FPS or approximately 47.9%.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. FPS drops by roughly half from Low to Ultra at every resolution, and increasing resolution causes steep FPS losses, while the CPU's scores are high enough to avoid limiting performance.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for The Technomancer, this pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3408 out of 3696 combos. That places it in the bottom 7.8% of all tested systems. The rank reflects the GPU's severe limitation: 1280 shading units, 20 ROPs, and 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 performance are insufficient for this game at any preset beyond Low at 1080p. The CPU's strong benchmark results cannot compensate for the GPU's low throughput. While the Ryzen 5 7500X3D sits in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, the Arc B370's 5th percentile GPU standing drags the overall combo down. Users should treat this configuration as a low-end 1080p machine for this title, and even then, only with the lowest visual preset. The data shows that for The Technomancer, this combo is unsuitable for any higher resolution or quality target.