The Technomancer

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for The Technomancer with the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and Intel Arc B370 spans three resolutions and four quality presets. At each resolution, the benchmark suite captured average frame rates, with minimum and maximum values recorded only for the Medium preset.

At 3840x2160, the results are consistently low. The High preset delivers an average of 17 FPS. Dropping to Medium raises the average to 20 FPS, with a minimum of 17 and a maximum of 23. The Low preset reaches 26 FPS on average. The Ultra preset falls to 13 FPS. None of these averages approach the 60 FPS playability threshold, and even the most favorable preset, Low, remains far below it.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates improve but still fall short of playable levels. The High preset averages 31 FPS. Medium produces 36 FPS on average, with a minimum of 30 and a maximum of 41. Low reaches 47 FPS. Ultra drops to 24 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 23 FPS, which indicates that the preset selection has a substantial impact at this resolution. Still, every preset remains below 60 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the picture changes meaningfully. The Low preset averages 71 FPS, which is the only recorded configuration in the entire dataset that clears the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 55 FPS, with a minimum of 47 and a maximum of 63. High averages 47 FPS. Ultra averages 37 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 34 FPS, demonstrating that quality settings heavily influence performance at 1080p.

Notably, minimum and maximum frame data are only available for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 3840x2160, the min/max range is 17 to 23 FPS. At 2560x1440, the range is 30 to 41 FPS. At 1920x1080, the range is 47 to 63 FPS. The minimum at 1080p Medium sits below the 60 FPS threshold even though the average is 55 FPS, which means frame pacing could cause occasional dips below playability.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions and presets reveals which component governs performance in The Technomancer. The game is a 2016 Action RPG, and the recorded data suggests that the Intel Arc B370, an integrated GPU with a 25 W TDP and 1280 shading units, is the primary constraint.

Consider the resolution scaling at the Medium preset. From 3840x2160 to 2560x1440, the average FPS rises from 20 to 36, an increase of 16 FPS. From 2560x1440 to 1920x1080, the average rises from 36 to 55, an increase of 19 FPS. The pixel count drops by roughly 44% between 4K and 1440p, and by another 44% between 1440p and 1080p, yet the frame rate gains are proportionally larger at each step. This pattern is typical of GPU-bound workloads, where reducing pixel throughput directly translates into higher frame rates.

The preset scaling reinforces this conclusion. At 1920x1080, moving from Ultra to High increases the average from 37 to 47 FPS, a 27% gain. Moving from High to Medium increases it to 55 FPS, another 17% gain. Moving from Medium to Low jumps to 71 FPS, a 29% gain. Each step down in quality produces a clear frame rate improvement, which indicates that the renderer is heavily dependent on GPU fill rate and shader throughput rather than CPU draw-call overhead.

The CPU role appears secondary. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 has 14 cores, 14 threads, and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 14769, and its single-core score is 2085. These are strong numbers for a desktop processor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates would show less sensitivity to resolution changes. Instead, the measured data shows that reducing resolution consistently improves FPS, which means the GPU is the limiting factor.

The integrated nature of the Arc B370 is also relevant. It uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, and its bus interface is IGP. This design ties GPU performance to memory bandwidth, and at higher resolutions the demand for memory throughput increases. The recorded frame rates at 4K, all below 26 FPS, reflect this constraint. The GPU's 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate are modest figures, and the game's demands at 4K simply exceed what the architecture can deliver.

Best Settings per Resolution

The database's verdict provides a clear answer for each resolution, but a deeper look at the measured FPS helps contextualize those results.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves a playable frame rate. The best average is 26 FPS at Low, and the worst is 13 FPS at Ultra. The database records no playable settings for this resolution, and the best settings entry is null. The data indicates that even the lowest quality preset leaves the system at less than half the 60 FPS target.

At 2560x1440, the same conclusion applies. No preset reaches 60 FPS. The Low preset averages 47 FPS, which is the closest to the threshold but still 13 FPS short. Medium averages 36 FPS, High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 24 FPS. The database lists no playable settings and no best settings for this resolution.

At 1920x1080, exactly one preset qualifies as playable: Low. The average at Low is 71 FPS, which exceeds the 60 FPS threshold by 11 FPS. This is the only configuration in the entire dataset that clears the playability bar. Medium averages 55 FPS, which is close but not sufficient. High and Ultra average 47 and 37 FPS, respectively. The database confirms Low as the best settings at this resolution, with an average of 71 FPS.

The conclusion is straightforward: this combination can run The Technomancer at 1080p with Low settings, and nothing else. Users who prefer higher quality presets will need to accept frame rates below 60 FPS, and users at 1440p or 4K will not achieve playable frame rates under any preset.

The Verdict

The verdict by resolution is unambiguous. At 3840x2160, the system cannot run the game at 60 FPS under any preset. The highest average is 26 FPS at Low, which is far below the playable threshold. At 2560x1440, the situation is identical in outcome: no preset reaches 60 FPS, and the best average is 47 FPS at Low. At 1920x1080, the system can run the game, but only at Low settings, where the average is 71 FPS.

The playable settings list for 1080p contains only Low. The database's verdictByResolution field confirms that the best settings at 1080p is Low with an average FPS of 71. For users targeting exactly 60 FPS, Low at 1080p provides a comfortable margin of 11 FPS. Medium at 1080p averages 55 FPS, which is below the threshold, so it does not qualify.

The practical answer is that this PC can run The Technomancer, but with severe limitations. At 1080p, the game is playable only on the lowest quality settings. At higher resolutions, it is not playable at all. The Intel Arc B370, despite being a current-generation integrated GPU with DirectX 12 Ultimate support, does not have the throughput to handle this title beyond the most modest configuration. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is not the limiting factor; the GPU is.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and the Intel Arc B370 provide context for what similar hardware would behave like in this game.

For the CPU, the Ultra 5 235 has an average benchmark score of 46062 and sits at the 89th percentile among all tested CPUs. Its nearest rivals are separated by less than 1%: the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 scores 46030 (0.1% ahead of the Ultra 5), the Intel Core i9-13900HX scores 46098 (0.1% behind), the AMD EPYC 4364P scores 45970 (0.2% ahead), and the AMD EPYC 7303 scores 45960 (0.2% ahead). In The Technomancer, these processors would deliver essentially identical CPU performance. Since the game is GPU-bound in this configuration, swapping the Ultra 5 235 for any of these rivals would not change the measured frame rates in any meaningful way.

For the GPU, the Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184 and sits at only the 5th percentile among all tested GPUs. Its nearest rivals are equally modest: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (0.2% ahead), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% ahead), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% ahead), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (1.4% behind). These are all older or lower-end parts, and their performance in The Technomancer would be comparable to the Arc B370. None of them would change the verdict: 1080p Low is the ceiling, and 1440p or 4K remains unplayable.

The delta percentages are small across all rivals, which means that any of these alternatives would produce frame rates within a few percent of the measured values. A user with a Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 or a Core i9-13900HX would see the same FPS numbers, and a user with a Radeon HD 5770 would see nearly identical GPU-bound results.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and Intel Arc B370 combination ranks 3408 out of 3696 tested combos for The Technomancer. This places it in the bottom 8% of all configurations in the database. The rank reflects the GPU's severe limitation: the Arc B370 is a 25 W integrated part with a 5th percentile standing among all GPUs, and the game's requirements at 1080p Medium (55 FPS) and above exceed what this hardware can deliver.

For context, the CPU is strong, ranking in the 89th percentile, but the combo rank is driven by the GPU. The 3696 total combos include systems with discrete graphics cards, and the Arc B370 cannot compete with them in a GPU-bound title. The rank of 3408 means that roughly 288 combos perform worse, likely those with even older or more limited integrated graphics.

The data indicates that this combo is near the bottom of the distribution for this game. Users comparing systems should expect this configuration to handle only the lightest settings at 1080p, and it will struggle with any title that demands more GPU throughput than The Technomancer does at its higher presets.

FAQ

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

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest recorded average frame rate is 26 FPS at Low settings. The Medium preset averages 20 FPS, High averages 17 FPS, and Ultra averages 13 FPS. All of these are far below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

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

A: The only playable setting at 1920x1080 is Low, which averages 71 FPS. Medium averages 55 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold, and High and Ultra average 47 and 37 FPS, respectively.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 or the Intel Arc B370 the bottleneck?

A: The Arc B370 is the bottleneck. The CPU ranks in the 89th percentile with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14769, while the GPU ranks in the 5th percentile. Frame rates scale strongly with resolution and preset changes, which is characteristic of GPU-bound performance.

Q: How does the Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 at 1186 (0.2% ahead), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 at 1190 (0.5% ahead), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M at 1192 (0.7% ahead). Performance differences are under 1%.

Q: What frame rates can be expected at 1440p?

A: No preset at 2560x1440 reaches 60 FPS. Low averages 47 FPS, Medium averages 36 FPS, High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 24 FPS. The database records no playable settings for this resolution.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems for this game?

A: The combo ranks 3408 out of 3696 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 8% of the database. The GPU's low performance ceiling is the primary reason for this rank.