The Technomancer

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded frame rate data for The Technomancer with the Intel Core i5-14600KF and Intel Arc B390 combination covers three resolutions and four quality presets. At 3840x2160, the average frame rates are uniformly low, with the Low preset achieving 28 FPS, Medium reaching 22 FPS, High dropping to 19 FPS, and Ultra falling to 15 FPS. The only complete min/max range recorded at this resolution is for Medium, which spans 19 to 25 FPS. These figures place 4K well outside the playable range, as even the least demanding preset fails to approach the 60 FPS threshold.

Stepping down to 2560x1440 improves the averages substantially, though the results remain below the 60 FPS target. The Low preset produces an average of 52 FPS, Medium delivers 40 FPS, High drops to 34 FPS, and Ultra settles at 26 FPS. The Medium preset at this resolution has a recorded range of 34 to 46 FPS, which confirms that even the best-case frame times stay below the playability threshold. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 26 FPS, showing that the quality settings have a significant impact on performance, but the overall ceiling is still too low for smooth gameplay.

At 1920x1080, the combination finally reaches acceptable performance on certain presets. Low yields an average of 79 FPS, Medium produces 61 FPS with a range of 52 to 70 FPS, High averages 52 FPS, and Ultra drops to 40 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium costs 18 FPS, while moving from Medium to High costs another 9 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 12 FPS. The Medium preset is the only one at 1080p that clears the 60 FPS average while maintaining a minimum above 50 FPS, which suggests that the workload becomes increasingly demanding as settings rise.

Resolution scaling is steep across the board. Comparing Low presets, 1080p delivers 79 FPS, 1440p delivers 52 FPS, and 4K delivers 28 FPS. That translates to a 34% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 46% drop from 1440p to 4K. For Medium, the progression is 61, 40, and 22 FPS, indicating that the GPU becomes the limiting factor as pixel count grows. High settings show 52, 34, and 19 FPS, while Ultra shows 40, 26, and 15 FPS. The data indicates that this pairing is heavily resolution-bound, with each step up in display resolution exacting a large toll on average frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database, this specific CPU and GPU pairing ranks 3285 out of 3696 tested combinations for The Technomancer. That places it in the lower portion of the distribution, with roughly 89% of tested combos performing better. The rank reflects the GPU's limited compute resources more than the CPU's capabilities, as the processor is a high-end desktop part while the graphics solution is an integrated-class component.

The GPU alone sits at the 9th percentile among all graphics cards in the database, which is a very low standing. Its average benchmark score is 1482, and its nearest rivals in the GPU rankings are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX at 1463, the NVIDIA GeForce 800M at 1460, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM at 1446, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 at 1443. The Arc B390 leads these by margins of 1.3%, 1.5%, 2.5%, and 2.7% respectively. These are extremely small deltas, meaning the Arc B390 is essentially in the same performance class as a decade-old entry-level discrete GPU.

The CPU, by contrast, is positioned at the 90th percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 49394. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 at 49228, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G at 49196, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 at 48995, and the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 at 49796. The deltas are 0.3%, 0.4%, 0.8%, and -0.8% respectively, which places the i5-14600KF in a tightly packed group of high-end CPUs. The discrepancy between CPU and GPU standing is stark, and it explains why the combo rank is so low: the processor has ample headroom, but the graphics solution cannot translate that into frame rate.

The measured FPS data aligns with this imbalance. At 1080p Low, the system produces 79 FPS, which is respectable given the GPU class, but the drop to 52 FPS at 1440p Low and 28 FPS at 4K Low shows that the graphics component is overwhelmed by pixel throughput demands. The CPU's high single-thread and multi-thread scores in the database do not appear to be the bottleneck, as frame rates deteriorate with resolution in a pattern consistent with GPU limitation.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 3840x2160, the database records no playable settings. Even the Low preset, which is the least demanding option, only reaches an average of 28 FPS, far below the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset averages 22 FPS, High averages 19 FPS, and Ultra averages 15 FPS. None of these come close to the playable mark, so the verdict for 4K is that this combination cannot run the game smoothly at any quality level.

At 2560x1440, the situation improves but remains unplayable. The Low preset reaches 52 FPS, which is the closest any setting gets to the 60 FPS target at this resolution, but it still falls short by 8 FPS. Medium averages 40 FPS, High averages 34 FPS, and Ultra averages 26 FPS. The database lists no playable settings for 1440p, confirming that users must either accept sub-60 FPS performance or lower the resolution.

At 1920x1080, the playable threshold is finally met. The Low preset produces 79 FPS, and the Medium preset produces 61 FPS with a minimum of 52 FPS and a maximum of 70 FPS. The database identifies Medium as the best playable setting at this resolution, as it delivers the highest quality that still maintains an average at or above 60 FPS. High drops to 52 FPS and Ultra to 40 FPS, both below the threshold. Therefore, the optimal configuration for this system is 1080p with Medium settings, yielding an average of 61 FPS.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the GPU's nearest rivals in the database, the performance differences are minimal. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, which is 1.3% lower than the Arc B390's 1482. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460, a 1.5% deficit. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5% lower, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7% lower. Any of these GPUs would deliver nearly identical frame rates in The Technomancer, meaning the measured performance is representative of a very low-end graphics tier.

On the CPU side, the nearest rivals are all high-end desktop or mobile processors. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900 scores 49228, just 0.3% below the i5-14600KF's 49394. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G scores 49196, 0.4% lower. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 scores 48995, 0.8% lower. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 49796, which is 0.8% higher. These deltas are negligible in gaming terms, so swapping the i5-14600KF for any of these CPUs would not meaningfully change the frame rates observed in The Technomancer. The bottleneck is clearly the GPU, not the processor.

For a user considering this pairing, the data suggests that the CPU is overqualified for the task. A mid-range processor would likely produce similar results, as the Arc B390's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482 indicates a very low graphics throughput. The GPU's nearest rivals are all older, low-end models, and the performance gap between them is under 3%. This means the measured FPS values can be generalized to any system using a GPU in this performance class, regardless of the CPU attached.

CPU and GPU Roles

The division of labor between the Intel Core i5-14600KF and the Intel Arc B390 in The Technomancer is heavily skewed toward the GPU. Evidence comes from the resolution scaling patterns. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 79 FPS, but at 1440p Low it drops to 52 FPS, and at 4K Low it falls to 28 FPS. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the frame rates would remain relatively flat across resolutions, since the processor workload does not increase proportionally with pixel count. The sharp declines indicate that the GPU's rendering throughput is the primary constraint.

The preset scaling reinforces this conclusion. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium reduces the average by 18 FPS, from Medium to High by 9 FPS, and from High to Ultra by 12 FPS. At 1440p, the same transitions cost 12, 6, and 8 FPS respectively. At 4K, they cost 6, 3, and 4 FPS. The absolute drops shrink at higher resolutions because the GPU is already saturated, leaving less headroom for additional quality settings to have a visible impact. This is a classic sign of GPU-bound performance.

The CPU's role is more apparent at lower resolutions and lower presets. At 1080p Low, the system produces 79 FPS, which is the highest recorded value in the dataset. This suggests that the CPU can drive the frame rate when the GPU is not overwhelmed, but even then the GPU's limitations cap the maximum. The i5-14600KF has a high multi-thread score of 32544 in Cinebench R23 and a single-thread score of 4594, indicating it can handle game logic and draw calls without breaking a sweat. Yet the Arc B390's 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate are simply too low for demanding scenes.

At 1440p and 4K, the GPU dominates the equation entirely. The Medium preset at 1440p shows a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS, a narrow band that indicates consistent GPU saturation. At 4K Medium, the range is 19 to 25 FPS, again tight and low. The CPU is not the source of these limits; rather, the graphics solution cannot keep up with the pixel fill requirements. Users should expect that any performance improvements would require a GPU upgrade, not a CPU change.

FAQ

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

A: No. The database records no playable settings at 3840x2160. The highest average is 28 FPS on Low, while Medium averages 22 FPS, High averages 19 FPS, and Ultra averages 15 FPS. All fall far below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1080p?

A: Medium is the best playable setting at 1920x1080, with an average of 61 FPS, a minimum of 52 FPS, and a maximum of 70 FPS. Low also clears the threshold at 79 FPS, but Medium offers higher quality while still meeting the 60 FPS average.

Q: How does the Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad, which is 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, 1.5% higher than the GeForce 800M, 2.5% higher than the GT 625 OEM, and 2.7% higher than the GT 710. These are very small margins, so performance is essentially equivalent.

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

A: The GPU is the bottleneck. Frame rates drop steeply with resolution, from 79 FPS at 1080p Low to 52 FPS at 1440p Low to 28 FPS at 4K Low. The CPU's nearest rivals are within 0.8% of its benchmark score, and the processor ranks at the 90th percentile, so it is not the limiting factor.

Q: What is the combo's rank among tested systems?

A: This CPU and GPU pairing ranks 3285 out of 3696 tested combinations for The Technomancer, placing it in the lower portion of the database. The GPU's 9th percentile standing drives this low rank, while the CPU sits at the 90th percentile.

Q: Does lowering settings help enough to reach 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: No. The Low preset at 2560x1440 reaches 52 FPS on average, which is 8 FPS short of the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 40 FPS, High averages 34 FPS, and Ultra averages 26 FPS. No setting at 1440p achieves playable performance.

The Verdict

The Intel Core i5-14600KF and Intel Arc B390 combination can run The Technomancer, but only under specific conditions. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 79 FPS and the Medium preset delivers 61 FPS, both clearing the 60 FPS threshold. Medium is the best playable setting at this resolution, offering an average of 61 FPS with a minimum of 52 FPS and a maximum of 70 FPS. High and Ultra fall short at 52 FPS and 40 FPS respectively.

At 2560x1440, the system cannot maintain 60 FPS on any preset. The closest is Low at 52 FPS, followed by Medium at 40 FPS, High at 34 FPS, and Ultra at 26 FPS. At 3840x2160, the results are worse, with Low at 28 FPS, Medium at 22 FPS, High at 19 FPS, and Ultra at 15 FPS. The verdict by resolution is clear: 1080p is the only viable option, and Medium is the highest quality setting that remains playable.

The data paints a consistent picture. The CPU is a high-end part with strong benchmark scores, but the GPU is an integrated-class solution that ranks at the 9th percentile. The measured frame rates reflect this imbalance, with the graphics component dictating performance at every resolution. Users seeking higher resolutions or more demanding presets would need a more powerful GPU, as the processor has ample headroom to spare. For 1080p Medium gameplay, this combo meets the mark; for anything beyond that, it does not.