The Technomancer

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K sits in a tight cluster of competitive desktop processors. Its average benchmark score of 70,879 places it within 1.3% of the nearest rivals in the database. The Intel Xeon 6511P scores 71,051, a delta of -0.2% relative to the Ultra 7, meaning the Xeon is essentially tied with this chip. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 posts 71,370, which is 0.7% higher. On the other side, the Intel Core i7-14700KF scores 70,163, putting it 1% behind, and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F scores 69,996, or 1.3% lower. Any of these four processors would deliver near-identical CPU-bound behavior in this game, though the GPU will dominate the performance picture at every resolution tested.

The Intel Arc B370 is a very different story. Its average benchmark score of 1,184 places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, which is exceptionally low. The nearest rivals are all older or lower-tier parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1,186 (delta -0.2%), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1,190 (-0.5%), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1,192 (-0.7%), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1,168 (+1.4%). The B370 is effectively interchangeable with these parts in terms of raw 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 performance. In practice, this means the GPU is the limiting factor in The Technomancer, and any system with one of these alternatives would produce similar frame rates.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data for The Technomancer shows a clear pattern: the Intel Arc B370 is the dominant constraint across all resolutions and settings. The CPU's high multi-core capabilities, such as a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35,850 and a Passmark multi-thread score of 58,594, are largely irrelevant here because the game never approaches CPU saturation at these frame rates. The GPU, with a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of just 1,184, is the bottleneck.

Resolution scaling confirms this. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 and then to 3840x2160 causes frame rates to drop proportionally with pixel count, which is characteristic of GPU-bound rendering. At 1920x1080 Low, the system averages 71 FPS. At 2560x1440 Low, the average falls to 47 FPS, a reduction of roughly one-third. At 3840x2160 Low, the average is 26 FPS, another substantial drop. The same pattern holds for High settings: 47 FPS at 1080p, 31 FPS at 1440p, and 17 FPS at 4K. These are textbook GPU-limited scaling curves.

Preset scaling also points to the GPU as the primary factor. At 1920x1080, raising the preset from Low to Medium drops the average from 71 to 55 FPS, then to 47 at High, and finally to 37 at Ultra. The CPU's role is negligible in these transitions; the game is simply asking the GPU to do more work. The only scenario where the CPU might matter is at 1080p Low, where the 71 FPS average could in theory be influenced by processor throughput, but given the GPU's low overall standing, it is more likely that even this setting is still GPU-limited.

FAQ

Q: Can this system achieve 60 FPS at 1920x1080?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings. The average frame rate at 1080p Low is 71 FPS. At Medium, the average drops to 55 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

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

A: No setting at 1440p reaches 60 FPS. The highest average is 47 FPS at Low, followed by 36 FPS at Medium, 31 FPS at High, and 24 FPS at Ultra. None of these meet the playable threshold.

Q: Is 3840x2160 playable at any setting?

A: No. The best result at 4K is 26 FPS at Low, with Medium at 20 FPS, High at 17 FPS, and Ultra at 13 FPS. All are far below the 60 FPS threshold.

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

A: The B370's average 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1,184 is within 1.4% of four other GPUs: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, ATI Radeon HD 5770, AMD Radeon HD 7650M, and AMD FirePro M2000. Performance in this game would be similar across all of them.

Q: What is the frame time consistency at Medium settings?

A: The recorded data includes minimum and maximum frame rates for Medium presets. At 1920x1080, the range is 47 to 63 FPS. At 2560x1440, it is 30 to 41 FPS. At 3840x2160, it is 17 to 23 FPS. The spread is relatively narrow, indicating stable frame pacing, though the averages are low.

Q: Does the CPU's performance affect the outcome?

A: Benchmark results show the CPU is far more capable than the GPU. The Ultra 7 265K scores in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, while the Arc B370 sits in the 5th percentile of GPUs. In this title, the GPU is the limiting component at every resolution and preset.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: this PC cannot run The Technomancer at a playable level for most users. The verdict by resolution shows no playable settings at 3840x2160 or 2560x1440. At 1920x1080, only the Low preset clears the 60 FPS threshold, with an average of 71 FPS. Medium at 1080p falls short at 55 FPS, and High and Ultra are worse at 47 and 37 FPS respectively.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is not the problem. It is a high-end desktop processor with a 94th percentile ranking and a multi-thread score of 58,594 in Passmark. The Intel Arc B370, however, is an integrated graphics solution with a 5th percentile ranking and a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1,184. This GPU is simply not designed for demanding 3D rendering, and The Technomancer, being an Action RPG with substantial geometry and effects, overwhelms it.

For a user who insists on running this game, 1080p Low is the only viable option. It will hold an average of 71 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold, but the visual quality will be minimal. There is no headroom for higher settings or resolutions. This system is borderline playable at best, and only in the most forgiving configuration.

Best Settings per Resolution

The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at each resolution is as follows:

• 3840x2160: No preset reaches 60 FPS. The best average is 26 FPS at Low.
• 2560x1440: No preset reaches 60 FPS. The best average is 47 FPS at Low.
• 1920x1080: Low is the only playable preset, with an average of 71 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below 60 FPS, at 55, 47, and 37 FPS respectively.

The 1080p Low setting is the sole configuration that satisfies the playable threshold. It is importantly the margin above 60 FPS is 11 FPS, so there is some buffer, but not enough to justify a move to Medium, which would drop the average by 16 FPS to 55.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for The Technomancer, this system ranks 3,408th out of 3,696 total combos. That places it in the bottom 8% of all tested configurations. The rank is driven almost entirely by the GPU, as the CPU's percentile ranking is 94, while the GPU's is 5. This is a highly imbalanced pairing: a top-tier processor paired with a bottom-tier graphics solution.

The practical implication is that many other systems, even those with much older or weaker CPUs, would outperform this combo in this game because they have a more capable GPU. The rank of 3,408 suggests that only a small fraction of tested systems are slower. This is consistent with the measured FPS data, which shows sub-60 performance at most settings and resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table summarizes all recorded frame rate measurements. Minimum and maximum values were only captured for Medium settings; other presets have only average values.

3840x2160:

• Ultra: Average 13 FPS
• High: Average 17 FPS
• Medium: Average 20 FPS, minimum 17 FPS, maximum 23 FPS
• Low: Average 26 FPS

2560x1440:

• Ultra: Average 24 FPS
• High: Average 31 FPS
• Medium: Average 36 FPS, minimum 30 FPS, maximum 41 FPS
• Low: Average 47 FPS

1920x1080:

• Ultra: Average 37 FPS
• High: Average 47 FPS
• Medium: Average 55 FPS, minimum 47 FPS, maximum 63 FPS
• Low: Average 71 FPS

The data shows a consistent downward trend as resolution and preset quality increase. The delta between 1080p Low and 1080p Ultra is 34 FPS, which is a substantial range. At 4K, the entire preset range spans only 13 FPS, from 13 to 26, indicating that the GPU is saturated even at the lowest settings. The Medium preset frame ranges show that the system can hold a reasonably stable frame rate, but the averages are too low for smooth play at 1440p and 4K. The only configuration where the minimum frame rate stays above 60 is 1080p Low, though the recorded minimum for that setting was not captured.