The Technomancer

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for this combination of an Intel Core i5-12600KF and an Intel Arc B390 in The Technomancer spans three resolutions and four quality presets. The measurements are complete for average frame rates, with min and max values recorded only for the Medium preset at each resolution.

At 3840x2160, the performance is severely constrained. The High preset delivers an average of 19 FPS, while Low reaches 28 FPS. Medium sits between them at 22 FPS average, with a recorded minimum of 19 FPS and maximum of 25 FPS. Ultra drops to 15 FPS average. No preset at this resolution approaches the 60 FPS playable threshold; every setting remains below 30 FPS, indicating a fundamentally unplayable experience at 4K.

Moving to 2560x1440, the situation improves but remains far from fluid. The Low preset averages 52 FPS, which is the best result at this resolution. High averages 34 FPS, Medium averages 40 FPS with a min/max range of 34 to 46 FPS, and Ultra averages 26 FPS. Despite the improvement over 4K, no preset clears 60 FPS. The 52 FPS Low result is close to the threshold, but it still falls short, leaving 1440p without any playable settings.

At 1920x1080, the experience becomes viable for select presets. Low averages 79 FPS, comfortably above 60 FPS. Medium averages 61 FPS, with a minimum of 52 FPS and a maximum of 70 FPS, placing it just barely above the playable threshold. High averages 52 FPS, which is below 60 FPS. Ultra averages 40 FPS. The data shows a clear progression: the lower the preset, the higher the frame rate, with Low and Medium being the only settings that achieve 60 FPS or better on average.

The scaling between resolutions follows an expected pattern. At 1080p Low, the average of 79 FPS drops to 52 FPS at 1440p Low, a reduction of 27 FPS. At 4K Low, it falls further to 28 FPS. Medium at 1080p averages 61 FPS, dropping to 40 FPS at 1440p and 22 FPS at 4K. High at 1080p averages 52 FPS, falling to 34 FPS at 1440p and 19 FPS at 4K. These figures indicate that the GPU is the dominant bottleneck as resolution increases, with each step up in resolution roughly halving or near-halving the frame rate.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run The Technomancer at 1920x1080 with playable frame rates?

A: Yes, at 1080p the combination achieves playable averages on Low and Medium presets. Low averages 79 FPS, and Medium averages 61 FPS, both clearing the 60 FPS threshold. High and Ultra fall short at 52 FPS and 40 FPS respectively.

Q: Is any preset at 2560x1440 playable for this setup?

A: No. The best result at 1440p is the Low preset at 52 FPS average, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. All other presets, including Medium at 40 FPS, High at 34 FPS, and Ultra at 26 FPS, also fail to reach 60 FPS.

Q: What happens at 3840x2160 with this hardware?

A: The game is unplayable at 4K across all presets. The highest average is 28 FPS on Low, followed by 22 FPS on Medium, 19 FPS on High, and 15 FPS on Ultra. None of these approach the 60 FPS threshold, and even the most demanding settings remain below 30 FPS.

Q: Which preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance at 1080p?

A: Medium is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at 1080p, averaging 61 FPS. It provides higher visual quality than Low while still clearing the playable threshold, though its minimum of 52 FPS indicates occasional dips below 60 FPS.

Q: Does the GPU or CPU limit performance more in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary constraint. Between 1080p and 1440p on Medium, the average drops from 61 to 40 FPS, a 34% reduction, while on Low it drops from 79 to 52 FPS, a 34% reduction as well. This consistent scaling with resolution points to GPU-bound performance, as the CPU workload would not change as dramatically across resolutions.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested configurations?

A: The combination ranks 3285 out of 3696 tested combos for this game, placing it in the lower portion of the database. This aligns with the GPU's low benchmark percentile and the sub-60 FPS results at 1440p and 4K.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Arc B390, based on average benchmark scores, are all NVIDIA GPUs from the low-end segment. The GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, which is 1.3% below the Arc B390's 1482. The GeForce 800M scores 1460, 1.5% lower. The GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5% lower. The GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7% lower. These delta values are small, meaning any of these GPUs would likely produce nearly identical frame rates in The Technomancer, with differences of only a few percent. The Arc B390 sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, confirming its position in the very low end of the performance spectrum.

For the CPU side, the Intel Core i5-12600KF has several near-neighbor processors. The Intel Core i9-10900K scores 27872, which is 0.3% higher than the i5-12600KF's average of 27799. The AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE scores 27712, 0.3% lower. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800U scores 27887, 0.3% higher. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D scores 27896, 0.3% higher. These CPUs are effectively equivalent in overall benchmark performance for this title, with deltas under one percent. Given that the game is GPU-bound at the tested resolutions, swapping the i5-12600KF for any of these rivals would produce no meaningful change in frame rates. The CPU sits at the 79th percentile among all CPUs, indicating strong processing capability that is not the limiting factor here.

The combination of a high-percentile CPU with a very low-percentile GPU creates an unbalanced system for this game. The CPU has ample headroom, while the GPU is the clear bottleneck. Users looking for similar behavior could expect nearly identical results by pairing any of the rival CPUs with any of the rival GPUs listed above, as the performance differences would be within a few percent.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database for The Technomancer, this specific combination of the Intel Core i5-12600KF and Intel Arc B390 ranks 3285 out of 3696 tested combos. This places it in the 11th percentile of all tested configurations, meaning roughly 89% of tested combos perform better in this game. The low rank is driven almost entirely by the GPU, which sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs. The CPU, at the 79th percentile, is far more capable than what the GPU can utilize.

The rank of 3285 out of 3696 means the system is near the bottom of the distribution, but not at the very bottom. The 411 combos ranked below this one likely feature even weaker GPUs, possibly integrated graphics or older discrete parts. The measured data supports this positioning: the system can achieve playable frame rates only at 1080p on Low and Medium presets, which is a narrow operating window.

Given that the playable threshold is 60 FPS, the rank reflects the system's inability to maintain that threshold at 1440p or 4K under any settings. The 1080p Medium result of 61 FPS is just barely above the line, making the system marginally playable at the most common resolution. This fragility is consistent with a rank in the lower 11% of the database.

The Verdict

This PC can run The Technomancer, but only under specific conditions. At 1920x1080, the system clears the 60 FPS playable threshold on Low and Medium presets. Medium averages 61 FPS, making it the best playable setting, though its minimum of 52 FPS means there will be occasional dips below 60 FPS. Low averages 79 FPS, providing a more consistent experience above the threshold.

At 2560x1440, the system cannot maintain 60 FPS on any preset. The best result is Low at 52 FPS average, which falls short of the threshold. Medium averages 40 FPS, High averages 34 FPS, and Ultra averages 26 FPS. None of these are playable by the 60 FPS standard.

At 3840x2160, the system is far from playable. The highest average is 28 FPS on Low, with Medium at 22 FPS, High at 19 FPS, and Ultra at 15 FPS. This resolution is effectively unusable for this game with this hardware.

The verdict is straightforward: playable at 1080p with Low or Medium settings, not playable at 1440p or 4K. Users seeking higher resolutions or higher presets would need a significantly more powerful GPU.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, with an average of 61 FPS. This is the only resolution where a playable setting exists. Low also clears the threshold at 79 FPS, but Medium offers higher visual quality while still meeting the playable average. The minimum of 52 FPS on Medium indicates that frame pacing may dip below 60 FPS during intense scenes, but the average remains acceptable.

At 2560x1440, no preset achieves 60 FPS. The closest is Low at 52 FPS, but since it does not reach the threshold, there is no recommended setting. The database records no playable settings for this resolution, meaning all presets are below the 60 FPS line.

At 3840x2160, the situation is similarly unplayable. The best average is Low at 28 FPS, which is far below the threshold. No preset at 4K is viable. The database lists no playable settings for this resolution.

The practical recommendation is to run the game at 1080p with Medium settings for the best balance of visual quality and performance, or drop to Low if a more consistent frame rate is preferred. For users with 1440p or 4K displays, the game would need to be rendered at 1080p and scaled, or the hardware upgraded.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data shows that the Intel Arc B390 is the dominant factor in this game's performance. The scaling between resolutions is steep and consistent, which is characteristic of GPU-bound workloads. At Medium settings, the average drops from 61 FPS at 1080p to 40 FPS at 1440p, a 34% reduction, and then to 22 FPS at 4K, a further 45% reduction. At Low settings, the averages are 79 FPS at 1080p, 52 FPS at 1440p, and 28 FPS at 4K, with similar percentage drops. This pattern indicates that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are the limiting resources.

The CPU, an Intel Core i5-12600KF with a 79th percentile ranking, is not constraining performance at any tested resolution. Its nearest rivals, including the Ryzen 7 5800X3D and Core i9-10900K, score within 0.3% of it, and any of these would produce identical frame rates in this GPU-bound scenario. The CPU's 10 cores and 16 threads are far more than this title requires at the frame rates observed.

The preset scaling within a single resolution provides further evidence of GPU limitation. At 1080p, going from Low to Ultra drops the average from 79 to 40 FPS, a 49% reduction. At 1440p, the same preset change drops from 52 to 26 FPS, also a 50% reduction. At 4K, it drops from 28 to 15 FPS, a 46% reduction. The consistent proportional impact of preset changes across all resolutions confirms that the GPU is responsible for the majority of the frame rate variance.

At 1080p, where the CPU has the most relative influence, the system still shows GPU-bound behavior. The CPU percentile of 79 versus the GPU percentile of 9 means the GPU is far weaker relative to its peers. Even the best CPU in the database would not improve these results, as the frame rates are capped by the GPU's throughput.

For users considering upgrades, the data suggests that replacing the CPU would yield no measurable benefit in this game. Replacing the GPU, however, would be the only path to playable frame rates at 1440p or higher. The current system is a textbook example of an unbalanced pairing: a strong processor held back by a very weak graphics solution.