The Technomancer

Best Settings per Resolution

The data for this combination of Intel Core i7-14700F and Intel Arc B370 shows a clear ceiling for The Technomancer. At 3840x2160, no preset achieves a playable 60 FPS average. The best recorded result at this resolution is Low settings, which produces an average of 26 FPS. High settings drop to 17 FPS, Medium to 20 FPS, and Ultra falls to 13 FPS. None of these clear the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the situation improves slightly but remains below the 60 FPS target. Low settings yield 47 FPS on average, High settings 31 FPS, Medium 36 FPS, and Ultra 24 FPS. The recorded data shows no settings combination at this resolution reaches 60 FPS, so there is no "best settings" recommendation that meets the playable bar.

At 1920x1080, the picture changes meaningfully. Low settings deliver an average of 71 FPS, which is the only preset across all resolutions that clears the 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings reach 55 FPS average, High settings 47 FPS, and Ultra 37 FPS. The verdict data confirms this: the best playable setting at 1080p is Low, with an average FPS of 71. For users seeking higher visual fidelity, Medium at 55 FPS is close but does not meet the strict playable threshold.

CPU and GPU Roles

Examining the scaling between resolutions and presets reveals which component dominates in The Technomancer. The Arc B370 is an integrated-class GPU with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. The CPU, by contrast, is a high-end desktop part with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 35122 and a 91st percentile ranking. This imbalance strongly suggests the GPU is the limiting factor.

Evidence from the FPS data supports this. Moving from 1920x1080 Low (71 FPS) to 2560x1440 Low (47 FPS) represents a 34% drop in average FPS. From 2560x1440 Low to 3840x2160 Low (26 FPS), the drop is another 45%. These large reductions as resolution increases are characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where the rendering load scales with pixel count and the CPU has ample headroom.

Preset scaling at a fixed resolution tells the same story. At 1920x1080, going from Low to Ultra cuts average FPS from 71 to 37, a 48% reduction. At 2560x1440, Low to Ultra goes from 47 to 24 FPS, a 49% reduction. The proportional impact of settings is consistent across resolutions, which indicates the GPU is handling the increased graphical workload. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would not scale so sharply with resolution or settings.

The CPU's role is likely to be ensuring minimum frame stability rather than pushing average FPS higher. With 20 cores and 28 threads, the i7-14700F has far more computational headroom than the GPU can utilize in this title. The data implies that for this game, upgrading the GPU would yield far larger FPS gains than any CPU change, especially at higher resolutions where the GPU load is greatest.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded measurements cover three resolutions and four settings each, though some entries lack minimum and maximum values. Here is the complete breakdown:

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 26 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Medium: 20 FPS average, 17 FPS minimum, 23 FPS maximum
• High: 17 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: 13 FPS average, no min/max recorded

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 47 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Medium: 36 FPS average, 30 FPS minimum, 41 FPS maximum
• High: 31 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: 24 FPS average, no min/max recorded

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 71 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Medium: 55 FPS average, 47 FPS minimum, 63 FPS maximum
• High: 47 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: 37 FPS average, no min/max recorded

The Medium settings entries are the only ones with full min/max data. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 47 FPS matches the average of High settings, suggesting occasional dips into that range. At 1440p Medium, the minimum of 30 FPS is exactly the playable threshold, so any frame drop below that would cause visible stutter. At 4K Medium, the minimum of 17 FPS is very low, indicating the experience is likely uncomfortable even at the lower presets.

The gap between Low and Medium at each resolution is notable. At 1080p, the difference is 16 FPS (71 to 55). At 1440p, it is 11 FPS (47 to 36). At 4K, it is 6 FPS (26 to 20). This narrowing gap at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU is increasingly taxed by pixel count, leaving less headroom for settings increases.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of tested combinations for The Technomancer, this pairing of Intel Core i7-14700F and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3408 out of 3696 total combos. This places it in the bottom 8th percentile of all tested systems for this game. The ranking reflects the GPU's low performance ceiling, which drags down an otherwise strong CPU.

The CPU alone would rank far higher if paired with a more capable GPU. Its average benchmark score of 53620 places it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. But the GPU's average benchmark score of 1184 places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. This extreme mismatch explains the poor combo ranking: the system is severely GPU-limited, and the CPU's strengths cannot manifest in a game that demands more graphics horsepower.

The data suggests that this combo would perform similarly to other systems with weak GPUs paired with strong CPUs. The ranking indicates that a large majority of tested combos achieve better FPS in The Technomancer, which is consistent with the GPU being the primary bottleneck.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run The Technomancer at 60 FPS on any settings?

A: Yes, but only at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which achieves an average of 71 FPS. No other resolution or settings combination reaches the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What is the best playable settings preset at 2560x1440?

A: There is no playable settings preset at 2560x1440. The highest average FPS recorded is 47 at Low settings, which falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

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

A: The Intel Arc B370 has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, 0.2% faster), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, 0.5% faster), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, 0.7% faster), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, 1.4% slower). The performance differences are minimal, all within 1.4%.

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

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings average 71 FPS while Ultra averages 37 FPS. This is a 34 FPS difference, meaning Ultra delivers roughly half the frame rate of Low.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game at 4K?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. At 3840x2160, even Low settings only reach 26 FPS average, and the GPU's low percentile ranking (5th) compared to the CPU's high percentile (91st) indicates the GPU cannot keep up with the rendering demands.

Q: Does the Medium preset provide any min/max data?

A: Yes, the Medium preset has full min/max data at all three resolutions. At 1080p, the range is 47 to 63 FPS. At 1440p, the range is 30 to 41 FPS. At 4K, the range is 17 to 23 FPS.

The Verdict

The question of whether this PC can run The Technomancer depends heavily on resolution and settings expectations. The verdict data is clear: at 3840x2160, no settings preset is playable. The highest average FPS is 26 at Low settings, which is far below the 60 FPS playable threshold. At 2560x1440, the same situation applies: no preset achieves 60 FPS, with the best being 47 FPS at Low settings.

At 1920x1080, the system barely qualifies as playable, but only at the lowest settings. The verdict lists Low as the sole playable preset, with an average FPS of 71. This clears the 60 FPS bar by 11 FPS, providing some headroom for frame drops. Medium settings at 55 FPS average are close but do not meet the strict threshold, and the minimum recorded FPS of 47 suggests occasional dips that could feel stuttery.

For users who prioritize smooth gameplay over visual fidelity, 1080p Low is the only viable option. For those who want higher settings or higher resolutions, this hardware combination will not deliver a consistent 60 FPS experience. The data indicates that the Arc B370 is simply too weak for this game at any resolution above 1080p, and even at 1080p, only the lowest preset is acceptable.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for both components provides context for what would behave similarly. The Intel Core i7-14700F has an average benchmark score of 53620. Its closest competitors are the Intel Xeon 6505P (53701, 0.2% faster), Intel Xeon Phi 7290 (53469, 0.3% slower), AMD Ryzen 9 7900X (53288, 0.6% slower), and AMD EPYC 7313P (53206, 0.8% slower). Any of these CPUs would likely produce similar FPS results when paired with the same GPU, since the GPU is the bottleneck.

For the GPU, the Intel Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Its nearest rivals are extremely close in performance: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, 0.2% faster), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, 0.5% faster), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, 0.7% faster), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, 1.4% slower). Swapping the Arc B370 for any of these would result in nearly identical frame rates in The Technomancer, with differences well under 2%.

The practical implication is that users with any of these alternative GPUs paired with a high-end CPU should expect the same performance profile: playable only at 1080p Low, with steep drops at higher resolutions. The CPU choices among the rivals would not meaningfully change the outcome, as the GPU remains the dominant constraint across all tested scenarios.