Instant compatibility check with FPS benchmarks and optimization tips
The Technomancer
Performance
1080p (Full HD)
1440p (2K / QHD)
4K (Ultra HD)
Requirements Check
Recommendations
Your hardware doesn't meet minimum requirements for this game.
Average FPS: resolution vs quality settings
| Ultra | High | Medium | Low | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4K Ultra HD | 15 | 19 | 22 | 28 |
| 1440p QHD | 26 | 34 | 40 | 52 |
| 1080p Full HD | 40 | 52 | 61 | 79 |
Cell color: green is 120+ FPS, teal is 60+, amber is 30+, red is below 30. Cards marked Estimated above have no measured row and are scaled from your GPU benchmark percentile.
Performance Analysis: The Technomancer on Your System
The short answer for this pairing is mixed: the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a very strong processor sitting in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, but the Intel Arc B390 sits in just the 9th percentile of all GPUs, and in The Technomancer the graphics side is the clear bottleneck. The recorded data shows the combination is playable only at 1920x1080 on Low and Medium settings, with Medium delivering an average of 61 FPS. Every higher resolution fails the 60 FPS threshold at every preset.
Measured FPS Breakdown
At 1920x1080, the database records an average of 79 FPS on Low, 61 FPS on Medium, 52 FPS on High, and 40 FPS on Ultra. Only the first two clear the 60 FPS playable threshold. The Medium run is the only one with recorded frame-time spread, averaging 61 FPS with a minimum of 52 and a maximum of 70, which indicates the experience stays above 50 FPS even at its worst moments on that preset.
At 2560x1440, the numbers step down uniformly: 52 FPS on Low, 40 FPS on Medium, 34 FPS on High, and 26 FPS on Ultra. None of these reach 60 FPS, and even the lowest preset falls short by a meaningful margin. The Medium run at this resolution averages 40 FPS with a minimum of 34 and a maximum of 46.
At 3840x2160, performance collapses further: 28 FPS on Low, 22 FPS on Medium, 19 FPS on High, and 15 FPS on Ultra. The Medium result carries a minimum of 19 and a maximum of 25, meaning dips below 20 FPS occur even at a mid-tier preset. Four-kilopixel gaming is simply not viable on this hardware in this title.
CPU and GPU Roles
The scaling data points unambiguously to a GPU-limited configuration. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 on Medium drops the average from 61 FPS to 40 FPS, and dropping further to 3840x2160 reduces it to 22 FPS. That is roughly a one-third loss per resolution step, which is the signature of a graphics subsystem that cannot keep up as pixel count rises. A CPU-limited system would show nearly flat frame rates across resolutions, and that pattern is absent everywhere in this dataset.
Preset scaling tells the same story. At 1080p, going from Low to Ultra cuts the average from 79 FPS to 40 FPS, nearly halving performance purely through visual quality settings. The Technomancer, an Action RPG released in mid-2016, is not a demanding title by modern standards, yet the Arc B390 still cannot push it past 60 FPS at 1080p High.
The Core Ultra 7 265 is doing everything asked of it and more. With 20 cores and 20 threads, a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216 and a single-core score of 5960, plus a PassMark single-thread result of 4689, this Arrow Lake-S processor ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. There is ample CPU headroom at every resolution, and the data shows the integrated-class Arc B390 is the component setting the ceiling. The B390's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482, its 1536 shading units, and its 80 W thermal design power describe a modest graphics solution, and its 9th percentile standing among all GPUs confirms it.
How This Combo Ranks
Within The Technomancer specifically, the Core Ultra 7 265 plus Arc B390 pairing ranks 3285 out of 3696 tested combinations in the database. That places it in the bottom tier for this game, which is notable given how strong the CPU half of the pairing is. The ranking underscores that game performance for this title is decided almost entirely by the GPU, and the B390 drags an otherwise powerful processor down to a low overall position.
The contrast between the two components is stark. The CPU ranks in the 93rd percentile versus all processors, while the GPU ranks in the 9th percentile versus all graphics solutions. A pairing this lopsided will rank poorly in any graphically driven game, and The Technomancer's results are consistent with that expectation.
The Verdict
Can this PC run The Technomancer? Yes, but only in a narrow window. At 1920x1080, both Low (79 FPS) and Medium (61 FPS) clear the 60 FPS playable threshold, and Medium is the best playable preset with its 61 FPS average. High at 52 FPS and Ultra at 40 FPS fall short at 1080p.
At 2560x1440, no preset is playable: the best result is 52 FPS on Low. At 3840x2160, the situation is worse, with a best case of 28 FPS on Low and a worst case of 15 FPS on Ultra. The database verdict is clear: 1080p Medium is the ceiling for this configuration, and anyone wanting higher resolutions or presets needs a stronger graphics solution than the Arc B390.
Similar Performance Alternatives
On the CPU side, the Core Ultra 7 265 sits in a tight cluster of near-equals. The AMD EPYC 4464P averages 64823 in the database, just 0.3 percent ahead; the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F averages 64438, 0.3 percent behind; the AMD EPYC 7343 averages 64202, 0.7 percent behind; and the AMD EPYC 9124 averages 65104, 0.7 percent ahead. Any of these processors would deliver effectively identical CPU-side behavior in The Technomancer, though none would change the outcome because the GPU is the limiting factor.
On the GPU side, the Arc B390's nearest rivals are all in the same modest performance band: the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (average score 1463, 1.3 percent behind the B390's relative standing), the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5 percent), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5 percent), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443, 2.7 percent). Swapping the B390 for any of these would produce broadly similar frame rates in this game. The practical takeaway from the rival data is that meaningful improvement in The Technomancer performance requires stepping well beyond this entire GPU tier, not shuffling within it.
FAQ
Q: Can the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and Arc B390 run The Technomancer at 60 FPS?
A: Yes, but only at 1920x1080. Low settings average 79 FPS and Medium averages 61 FPS, both above the 60 FPS threshold. No preset at 2560x1440 or 3840x2160 reaches 60 FPS.
Q: What is the best playable configuration for this hardware in The Technomancer?
A: 1920x1080 at Medium settings, which averages 61 FPS with a minimum of 52 and a maximum of 70.
Q: Is the CPU or the GPU the bottleneck?
A: The GPU. Frame rates fall sharply as resolution rises, from 61 FPS at 1080p Medium to 40 FPS at 1440p and 22 FPS at 4K, which is classic GPU-limiting behavior. The Core Ultra 7 265 ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Arc B390 ranks in just the 9th percentile of all GPUs.
Q: How does this combination rank against other tested setups for this game?
A: It ranks 3285 out of 3696 tested combinations, placing it near the bottom despite the strong CPU, because the Arc B390 is the deciding component.
Q: Can this setup handle 4K in The Technomancer?
A: No. At 3840x2160 the averages are 28 FPS on Low, 22 FPS on Medium, 19 FPS on High, and 15 FPS on Ultra, all far below the playable threshold.
Q: Would swapping the CPU for a rival improve frame rates?
A: No. The nearest CPU rivals, including the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F and several AMD EPYC parts, sit within roughly 0.7 percent of this processor's average score, so the CPU is not the constraint. Improvement requires a faster GPU.