The Technomancer

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-9400 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 lands at rank 2853 out of 3696 tested combos in the database for The Technomancer. That places this configuration in the lower half of all recorded system pairings, roughly at the 23rd percentile of tested hardware combinations. The ranking reflects a pairing that is clearly capable of running the game, but it is not positioned among the top tier of systems in the database for this title.

The CPU itself sits at the 47th percentile among all processors in the database, while the GPU ranks at the 58th percentile among all graphics cards. The gap between those two percentiles is notable: the graphics card is comparatively stronger than the processor within this pairing. That imbalance shows up in the frame rate data, where the GPU carries most of the load at higher resolutions and the CPU becomes less of a factor as pixel count increases.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded measurements reveal a clear division of labor between the CPU and GPU across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the frame rates are high enough that the CPU likely matters more, since the GPU has plenty of headroom. The spread between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p is 130.6 FPS down to 68.4 FPS, a range of 62.2 FPS. That wide gap suggests the GPU is the limiting factor even at 1080p, because lowering settings produces a massive frame rate jump.

At 2560x1440, the scaling pattern shifts. The Low preset delivers 81.6 FPS, while Ultra drops to 45 FPS. The Medium preset holds at 66.9 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 14.7 FPS, and from Medium to High it is 11.3 FPS. These are substantial steps, indicating that the GPU is under increasing stress as resolution climbs. The CPU, with its six cores and six threads, does not appear to bottleneck at this resolution based on the smooth scaling.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes completely. Every preset falls below 60 FPS, with Low reaching 47.8 FPS and Ultra dropping to 26.2 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 21.6 FPS, which is smaller in absolute terms than at lower resolutions. This compression suggests the GPU is saturated at 4K, and the CPU role becomes negligible because the graphics card cannot push frames fast enough to create a CPU bottleneck.

Looking at preset scaling within each resolution, the data shows that the RTX 2060 responds strongly to setting changes at 1080p and 1440p. The jump from Ultra to Low at 1440p is 36.6 FPS, and at 1080p it is 62.2 FPS. At 4K, the same jump is only 21.6 FPS, which indicates diminishing returns from lowering settings when the GPU is already overwhelmed by pixel throughput.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The database places the Intel Core i5-9400's average benchmark score at 2254, with the nearest rival being the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 at 2259, a delta of negative 0.2 percent. That means the i7-1068NG7 scores essentially identically, within measurement noise. The Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248, which is 0.3 percent lower than the i5-9400. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 sits at 2246, a 0.4 percent deficit. The Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264, putting it 0.4 percent ahead.

For gaming performance in The Technomancer, any of these CPUs would behave nearly identically to the i5-9400. The differences are all under one percent, so swapping in any of these processors would produce frame rates within the same range. The Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 is the oldest of the group, but its benchmark score places it squarely alongside the Intel parts.

On the GPU side, the GeForce RTX 2060 has an average score of 15290. The nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 at 15283, a delta of zero percent. That is a direct match. The AMD Radeon 680M scores 15270, just 0.1 percent lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM scores 15199, a 0.6 percent deficit. The AMD Radeon RX 7600 scores 15171, trailing by 0.8 percent.

The interesting implication here is that the RTX 2060, despite being a Turing architecture card with ray tracing cores and tensor cores, performs within one percent of a much older GTX 580 in this database's aggregate benchmark. In The Technomancer specifically, the measured FPS data would likely be near identical if the GTX 580 were substituted, assuming the rest of the system stayed the same. The RX 7600 and RTX 3050 OEM would also land within a fraction of a percent of the RTX 2060's frame rates in this game.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run The Technomancer at 1920x1080 with maximum settings?

A: Yes. The Ultra preset at 1080p produces an average of 68.4 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. The database lists High, Low, Medium, and Ultra all as playable settings at this resolution.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 2560x1440?

A: The Medium preset is the most demanding setting that stays at or above 60 FPS at 1440p, averaging 66.9 FPS. The High preset drops to 55.6 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is 4K resolution playable with this hardware?

A: No. At 3840x2160, every preset falls below 60 FPS. The Low preset averages 47.8 FPS, Medium averages 33.9 FPS, High averages 32.7 FPS, and Ultra averages 26.2 FPS. None of these reach the playable threshold.

Q: How much performance difference is there between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: The Low preset averages 130.6 FPS, while Ultra averages 68.4 FPS. That is a difference of 62.2 FPS, or roughly 91 percent higher frame rate on Low compared to Ultra.

Q: Which component is more responsible for frame rate drops at 4K?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor. At 3840x2160, even the Low preset only reaches 47.8 FPS, and reducing settings from Ultra to Low only recovers 21.6 FPS. The GPU is saturated by pixel throughput at this resolution.

Q: How does this CPU compare to its nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks?

A: The i5-9400 scores 2254 on average. The closest rival, the i7-1068NG7, scores 2259, which is 0.2 percent higher. The i7-10710U scores 0.3 percent lower, the Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 0.4 percent lower, and the i3-10305 scores 0.4 percent higher.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the recorded averages are as follows:

• Low: 130.6 FPS
• Medium: 100.6 FPS
• High: 85.8 FPS
• Ultra: 68.4 FPS

The step from Low to Medium is 30 FPS, from Medium to High is 14.8 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 17.4 FPS. The largest performance drop occurs when moving from Low to Medium, which suggests the Medium preset enables significant visual features that tax the GPU.

At 2560x1440:

• Low: 81.6 FPS
• Medium: 66.9 FPS
• High: 55.6 FPS
• Ultra: 45 FPS

Here the step from Low to Medium is 14.7 FPS, from Medium to High is 11.3 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 10.6 FPS. The drops are more uniform at this resolution, indicating a steadier GPU load scaling.

At 3840x2160:

• Low: 47.8 FPS
• Medium: 33.9 FPS
• High: 32.7 FPS
• Ultra: 26.2 FPS

The step from Low to Medium is 13.9 FPS, but from Medium to High is only 1.2 FPS. That tiny gap between Medium and High at 4K is curious. The difference between High and Ultra is 6.5 FPS. The near-zero difference between Medium and High suggests those two presets impose similar pixel shading loads at 4K, or that the GPU hits a memory bandwidth ceiling around that range.

Resolution scaling also tells a story. At Low settings, moving from 1080p to 1440p drops the average from 130.6 to 81.6 FPS, a 49 FPS loss. Moving from 1440p to 4K drops it further to 47.8 FPS, a 33.8 FPS loss. At Ultra settings, the same transitions go from 68.4 to 45 to 26.2 FPS, with losses of 23.4 and 18.8 FPS respectively. The frame rate losses from resolution scaling shrink as the preset gets heavier, again pointing to GPU saturation at the top end.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is playable, averaging 68.4 FPS. This is the most demanding setting that stays at or above 60 FPS. The database confirms that all four presets at 1080p clear the threshold, so users can choose Ultra for maximum visual quality without dropping below the playable line.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the best playable option, averaging 66.9 FPS. High falls to 55.6 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Low also clears at 81.6 FPS, but Medium offers higher visual quality while still maintaining 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, no preset is playable. The highest average across all settings is Low at 47.8 FPS, which does not reach 60 FPS. There is no best playable setting at this resolution because none qualify.

The Verdict

The data shows that this PC can run The Technomancer at 1920x1080 with all presets, including Ultra at 68.4 FPS. At 2560x1440, it can run the game at Medium settings with 66.9 FPS, but High and Ultra fall short of the 60 FPS threshold. At 3840x2160, the system cannot maintain 60 FPS on any preset, with the best result being Low at 47.8 FPS.

The practical takeaway is that this configuration is a solid 1080p machine for this game, a capable 1440p machine when settings are moderated, and not suitable for 4K gaming with this title. The RTX 2060's 6 GB of GDDR6 memory and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth appear sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K numbers suggest the GPU lacks the raw throughput needed for the higher pixel count.

The CPU, with six cores and six threads, does not appear to be the limiting factor at any resolution in this game. The frame rate scaling tracks closely with GPU load changes from preset adjustments. The data implies that if a user wanted better 4K performance, upgrading the GPU would yield far larger gains than upgrading the CPU, given that the CPU already sits within one percent of its nearest rivals and the GPU is the component that drops below 60 FPS at 4K.

For the target audience of this benchmark database, the answer is straightforward: this combo delivers smooth gameplay at 1080p with everything maxed out, and at 1440p with Medium settings. It is not a 4K system for this game, and pushing beyond Medium at 1440p will result in frame rates below the playable threshold.