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 | 13 | 17 | 20 | 26 |
| 1440p QHD | 24 | 31 | 36 | 47 |
| 1080p Full HD | 37 | 47 | 55 | 71 |
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
FAQ
Q: Can this system run The Technomancer at 4K?
A: No. The measured data shows no playable settings at 3840x2160. Even the Low preset only reaches 26 FPS, and the Ultra preset drops to 13 FPS. The 60 FPS threshold is not reached at any 4K quality level.
Q: What is the best resolution for this combo?
A: 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the system clears 60 FPS. The Low preset averages 71 FPS. At 2560x1440, the best result is 47 FPS on Low, which misses the 60 FPS target.
Q: How does the CPU compare to similar processors?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus sits in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 84003 is 0.2% above the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, 1.1% above the AMD EPYC 4584PX, and 1.2% above the AMD EPYC 9135. It trails the AMD EPYC 7F72 by 1.3%.
Q: What is the GPU's performance class?
A: The Intel Arc B370 ranks in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 1184 is nearly identical to the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192). It is 1.4% ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000.
Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor?
A: The GPU is clearly the bottleneck. The Arc B370 sits at the 5th percentile among GPUs, while the CPU is at the 96th percentile. The massive CPU headroom does not translate into high frame rates because the game's rendering load falls on the GPU.
Q: What preset should I use at 1080p?
A: The Low preset is the only one that stays at or above 60 FPS, averaging 71 FPS. Medium drops to 55 FPS, High to 47 FPS, and Ultra to 37 FPS.
CPU and GPU Roles
The recorded data shows a dramatic imbalance between the two components. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a top-tier processor with a 96th percentile ranking, while the Intel Arc B370 is an integrated-class GPU at the 5th percentile. This combination means the CPU is never the constraint in The Technomancer; all performance limits come from the graphics side.
At 1920x1080, scaling from Low to Ultra moves average FPS from 71 down to 37, a 34 FPS drop. The CPU can feed frames far faster than the GPU can render them, so the preset choice determines playability. The Medium preset at 55 FPS and High at 47 FPS show that even moderate quality increases push the GPU past its limits.
Moving to 2560x1440, the GPU load increases further. Low preset drops to 47 FPS, Medium to 36 FPS, High to 31 FPS, and Ultra to 24 FPS. The resolution jump from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly one third of the frame rate at every preset. This scaling pattern is typical of a GPU-bound scenario.
At 3840x2160, the situation becomes untenable. Low preset averages 26 FPS, Medium 20 FPS, High 17 FPS, and Ultra 13 FPS. The 4K resolution overwhelms the Arc B370's 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate. No settings adjustment can recover playable performance at this resolution.
The CPU's single-thread score of 4823 in PassMark and multi-thread score of 60860 are far above what The Technomancer requires for its engine logic. The game's physics, AI, and scene management are easily handled by even a fraction of the 24 cores. The database shows that the GPU's 1280 shading units and 20 ROPs are the hard ceiling for frame output.
Similar Performance Alternatives
Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is essentially a match with a 0.2% average score difference. The AMD EPYC 4584PX sits 1.1% lower, while the AMD EPYC 9135 is 1.2% lower. The AMD EPYC 7F72 is 1.3% higher. For this game, any of these processors would produce identical frame rates because the game is not CPU-limited at any resolution tested.
On the GPU side, the nearest rivals are all older or lower-end parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 0.2% higher, the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 0.5% higher, and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 0.7% higher. The AMD FirePro M2000 is 1.4% lower. In practical terms, swapping the Arc B370 for any of these would yield nearly the same FPS in The Technomancer.
The GPU's percentile ranking of 5 puts it in the company of integrated and legacy discrete parts. The measured 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 confirms this class. Builders should expect similar behavior from any of the four rival GPUs: playable only at 1080p Low, borderline at 1080p Medium, and unplayable at higher resolutions.
How This Combo Ranks
The database places this combination at rank 3408 out of 3696 tested combos for The Technomancer. This puts it in the bottom 8% of all CPU and GPU pairings tested. The rank reflects the GPU's severe limitation rather than the CPU's capability.
The high CPU percentile (96th) and low GPU percentile (5th) create an unusual profile. Most combos near this rank have similarly weak GPUs, but few pair them with a 24-core, 5.80 GHz boost processor. The measured FPS data confirms that the ranking is appropriate: the system only clears 60 FPS at one preset and one resolution.
For context, the 3696 total combos include many integrated graphics systems and older discrete GPUs. This combo's rank of 3408 means it outperforms roughly 288 other pairings, but it falls behind the vast majority of dedicated gaming systems. The Technomancer's 2016 release date does not save this pairing because the Arc B370's absolute performance is so low.
The Verdict
This system can run The Technomancer only at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. The measured 71 FPS average clears the 60 FPS threshold with some headroom. At Medium, the average drops to 55 FPS, which misses the target. High sits at 47 FPS, and Ultra falls to 37 FPS.
At 2560x1440, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The best result is 47 FPS on Low, which is below the playable threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra produce 36, 31, and 24 FPS respectively. The database's verdictByResolution lists no playable settings for this resolution.
At 3840x2160, the system is entirely unplayable. Low averages 26 FPS, Medium 20 FPS, High 17 FPS, and Ultra 13 FPS. These frame rates are below any reasonable playability standard.
The verdict is clear: this is a 1080p Low preset system for The Technomancer. Users who accept 30 to 40 FPS could try Medium at 1080p, but the data shows 55 FPS is the average with minimums at 47 FPS. For a smooth 60 FPS experience, Low is the only option.
Best Settings per Resolution
1920x1080: Low preset is the most demanding setting that stays at or above 60 FPS, averaging 71 FPS. Medium falls short at 55 FPS, so Low is the recommended choice. The frame rate has no recorded minimum, but the average provides sufficient margin above the 60 FPS target.
2560x1440: No preset reaches 60 FPS. The best option is Low at 47 FPS, but this does not meet the playable threshold. The database records no playable settings for this resolution.
3840x2160: No preset is playable. Low averages 26 FPS, which is far below the 60 FPS requirement. The database records no playable settings for this resolution.
The measured data across all three resolutions shows a consistent pattern: the Arc B370's limited compute resources cap performance at low resolutions and low settings. The CPU's power is irrelevant to the outcome. Builders pairing this CPU with a proper discrete GPU would see dramatically different results, but as configured, this system is strictly a 1080p Low preset machine for The Technomancer.