The Technomancer

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the recorded data shows no preset reaches the 60 FPS playable threshold. The highest average frame rate at this resolution is 28 FPS on Low settings, which falls far short of smooth gameplay. Medium settings produce 22 FPS, High settings drop to 19 FPS, and Ultra settings bottom out at 15 FPS. None of these configurations can be recommended for 4K play.

At 2560x1440, the situation improves but remains below the playability threshold. Low settings deliver 52 FPS, which is the best result at this resolution, yet it still misses the 60 FPS target. Medium settings average 40 FPS, High settings average 34 FPS, and Ultra settings average 26 FPS. The database records no playable settings for 1440p with this combination.

At 1920x1080, the data finally shows playable configurations. Low settings reach 79 FPS, comfortably above the threshold. Medium settings average 61 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS line with minimal headroom. The best playable preset at 1080p is Medium, with an average of 61 FPS, because it offers a higher visual quality tier than Low while still maintaining playability. High settings fall to 52 FPS, and Ultra drops to 40 FPS, both below the threshold.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run The Technomancer at 4K resolution?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the best recorded average is 28 FPS on Low settings. Medium averages 22 FPS, High averages 19 FPS, and Ultra averages 15 FPS. The verdictByResolution data lists no playable settings at this resolution.

Q: What is the best preset for 1080p gameplay?

A: Medium settings at 1920x1080, with an average of 61 FPS. This is the highest quality preset that stays at or above the 60 FPS threshold. Low settings average 79 FPS, but Medium provides better visual fidelity while still clearing the playability bar.

Q: How does the frame rate scale from 1080p to 1440p on Medium settings?

A: Medium settings at 1920x1080 average 61 FPS, while the same preset at 2560x1440 averages 40 FPS. That is a drop of 21 FPS, or roughly a 34% reduction in average frame rate when moving up one resolution tier.

Q: What frame rate range can be expected at 1440p Medium settings?

A: The recorded data shows an average of 40 FPS, with a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS. This range indicates noticeable fluctuation during gameplay, and the average falls well below the 60 FPS target.

Q: Which resolution offers the smoothest experience with this hardware?

A: 1920x1080. Low settings deliver 79 FPS and Medium settings deliver 61 FPS, both above the playable threshold. No other resolution in the measured data achieves 60 FPS or higher on any preset.

Q: Is Ultra settings playable at any resolution?

A: No. At 1920x1080, Ultra averages 40 FPS. At 2560x1440, Ultra averages 26 FPS. At 3840x2160, Ultra averages 15 FPS. Every Ultra configuration falls far below the 60 FPS threshold.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded measurements cover three resolutions and four quality presets. At 3840x2160, Low settings average 28 FPS. Medium settings at 4K average 22 FPS, with a minimum of 19 FPS and a maximum of 25 FPS. High settings average 19 FPS, and Ultra settings average 15 FPS. The 4K data shows the system struggles to maintain fluid motion even at the lowest quality preset.

At 2560x1440, Low settings average 52 FPS. Medium settings average 40 FPS, with a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS. High settings average 34 FPS, and Ultra settings average 26 FPS. The 1440p results show a meaningful improvement over 4K, but every preset still lands below the 60 FPS threshold.

At 1920x1080, Low settings average 79 FPS, the highest recorded value in the entire dataset. Medium settings average 61 FPS, with a minimum of 52 FPS and a maximum of 70 FPS. High settings average 52 FPS, and Ultra settings average 40 FPS. The 1080p data reveals a clear split: Low and Medium presets clear the playability bar, while High and Ultra do not.

The frame rate deltas between presets are consistent across resolutions. Moving from Low to Medium costs roughly 6 FPS at 4K, 12 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 1080p. Moving from Medium to High costs roughly 3 FPS at 4K, 6 FPS at 1440p, and 9 FPS at 1080p. The cost of Ultra over High is roughly 4 FPS at 4K, 8 FPS at 1440p, and 12 FPS at 1080p. The scaling pattern indicates that higher resolutions amplify the performance cost of each quality tier.

The Verdict

The data answers directly: this combination can run The Technomancer, but only at 1920x1080 and only on Low or Medium presets. The verdictByResolution data lists playable settings solely for 1080p, specifically Low and Medium. The best playable preset at 1080p is Medium, with an average of 61 FPS, which just clears the 60 FPS threshold.

At 2560x1440, the verdict records no playable settings. The closest result is Low at 52 FPS, which misses the threshold by 8 FPS. At 3840x2160, no preset comes close; the best result is Low at 28 FPS, less than half the required frame rate. Users targeting 1440p or 4K will need to lower expectations significantly or consider different hardware.

The playable margin at 1080p Medium is slim. The average sits at 61 FPS, but the recorded minimum is 52 FPS. This means that during demanding scenes, the frame rate can dip below the 60 FPS line even though the average clears it. Low settings provide more headroom with an average of 79 FPS, which may be the safer choice for consistent smoothness.

For a game from 2016, these results indicate that the graphics subsystem is the limiting factor. The CPU is a modern 8-core, 16-thread processor, but the GPU sits in the 9th percentile of all tested graphics cards. The combination ranks 3285 out of 3696 tested combos for this game, placing it in the lower portion of the database.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data shows a system that is heavily constrained by the GPU across all resolutions. The Intel Arc B390 ranks in the 9th percentile of all tested GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1482. Its nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, the NVIDIA GeForce 800M, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710. These are all entry-level or legacy graphics solutions, which contextualizes the frame rate results.

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT, by contrast, sits in the 81st percentile of all tested CPUs. Its average benchmark score is 29879, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H, the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS, the AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS, and the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X. The CPU is clearly not the bottleneck in this configuration.

The frame rate scaling between resolutions confirms this imbalance. At 1080p, the system averages 79 FPS on Low settings. At 1440p, the same preset drops to 52 FPS, a 34% reduction. At 4K, it falls to 28 FPS, another 46% reduction. This steep decline as resolution increases is characteristic of GPU-bound performance, where the graphics card is responsible for filling more pixels.

The preset scaling tells the same story. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra costs 39 FPS (from 79 to 40). At 1440p, the same preset range costs 26 FPS (from 52 to 26). At 4K, it costs 13 FPS (from 28 to 15). The absolute cost of higher presets shrinks at higher resolutions because the GPU is already saturated by pixel throughput, leaving less headroom for additional shading and effects work.

The CPU's role is minimal in this title. With 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 3 architecture, the processor has ample compute headroom for a 2016 Action RPG. The database shows strong multi-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23794 and a single-core score of 3359. These figures suggest the CPU can handle the game's logic and physics without becoming a limiting factor.

If the GPU were replaced with a stronger part, the frame rates would likely scale significantly, particularly at 1080p where the CPU has more room to feed frames. As configured, the Arc B390's 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate place it well below what The Technomancer demands for high-refresh or high-resolution play.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this CPU and GPU combination at 3285 out of 3696 tested combos for The Technomancer. This places the system in the bottom 11% of all tested configurations, which aligns with the measured frame rate data showing limited playability.

The GPU is the primary driver of this low ranking. The Arc B390's percentile of 9 means it outperforms only about 9% of all tested graphics cards in the database. Its nearest rivals are all older or entry-level NVIDIA parts, and the delta percentages are small: 1.3% ahead of the GeForce GT 520MX, 1.5% ahead of the GeForce 800M, 2.5% ahead of the GeForce GT 625 OEM, and 2.7% ahead of the GeForce GT 710. These are not competitive margins; they place the Arc B390 in the same performance tier as decade-old entry-level hardware.

The CPU ranking tells a very different story. The Ryzen 7 5800XT sits in the 81st percentile of all tested CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29879. Its nearest rivals show near-parity: the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H scores 29868, the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS scores 29955, the AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS scores 29955, and the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X scores 29713. The delta percentages range between -0.3% and 0.6%, meaning all five processors perform within a fraction of a percent of each other.

The combination's rank of 3285 reflects the severe mismatch between the two components. A high-tier CPU paired with a low-tier GPU produces results that are dictated almost entirely by the graphics card. The measured FPS data confirms this: even at 1080p Low settings, the system only reaches 79 FPS, and playable settings are limited to Low and Medium.

For context, the combo ranking means that 411 tested combinations perform worse than this setup in The Technomancer. However, the vast majority of tested combos, 3284 of them, deliver better results. The system is functional for 1080p play at medium quality, but it does not have the graphical headroom for higher resolutions or more demanding presets. Users seeking 1440p or 4K performance would need to look at combinations with substantially stronger GPUs, as the CPU is not the limiting factor in this pairing.