The Technomancer

The Technomancer presents a demanding workload for the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and Intel Arc B370 combination, with benchmark results indicating that this pairing is positioned at the lower end of the performance spectrum for this title. The measured data shows a system that can handle the game at lower resolutions and settings, but one that struggles significantly as graphical demands increase, revealing a clear performance hierarchy across the tested configurations.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data reveals a steep performance drop as resolution increases, indicating that the Intel Arc B370 is the primary limiting factor in this configuration. At 1080p with High settings, the system delivers an average of 47 FPS, but this falls to 31 FPS at 1440p, a reduction of 16 FPS or roughly 34%. Moving to 4K at the same High preset, the average plummets to 17 FPS, which represents a 64% decrease from the 1080p baseline. This pattern strongly suggests that the GPU's rendering capabilities are being saturated as pixel count rises, with the Arc B370's relatively modest compute resources unable to maintain performance at higher resolutions.

The scaling from Low to Ultra settings further emphasizes this GPU-bound behavior. At 1080p, the difference between Low (71 FPS) and Ultra (37 FPS) is 34 FPS, showing that the graphics card has headroom at lower settings but quickly becomes overwhelmed by the additional visual effects and shading work at higher presets. This trend is consistent across all resolutions: at 1440p, Low delivers 47 FPS while Ultra drops to 24 FPS, and at 4K, Low manages 26 FPS compared to just 13 FPS on Ultra. The proportional drop between settings remains relatively stable, which is characteristic of a system where the GPU is the bottleneck rather than the CPU.

The data indicates that the Ryzen 5 2600, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, is not the constraining factor in these tests. The consistent scaling pattern across resolutions points to the Arc B370's fillrate and shader throughput as the limiting components. The GPU's 20 ROPs and 40 TMUs, combined with a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s, explain why higher resolutions cause such dramatic FPS reductions. Each pixel at 4K requires significantly more processing than at 1080p, and the Arc B370's architecture simply does not have the raw throughput to sustain playable frame rates at that resolution.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, which are relatively modest figures for modern graphics hardware. The GPU features 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 render output units, along with 10 ray tracing cores. Its compute capabilities are rated at 6.144 TFLOPS for FP32 operations, which places it in the entry-level segment of the performance spectrum.

One of the most distinctive characteristics of this GPU is its memory configuration. The Arc B370 uses system shared memory, meaning it has no dedicated VRAM of its own. The memory type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent," which means the GPU relies on the system's main DDR4 memory for all graphics data. This arrangement can create performance bottlenecks, particularly at higher resolutions where larger texture and framebuffer data sets must be moved through the system memory bus. The Ryzen 5 2600's dual-channel memory support, offering a bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s, may not provide sufficient throughput for demanding 4K workloads.

The GPU's benchmark performance confirms its entry-level positioning. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the Arc B370 scores 1184 points, which places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, -0.2%), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, -0.5%), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, -0.7%). These comparisons indicate that the Arc B370 delivers performance roughly equivalent to older discrete graphics solutions, but it falls far short of modern gaming GPUs. The 25 W TDP and "IGP" slot width classification further underscore its integrated nature, designed for low-power systems rather than high-performance gaming rigs.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the specific context of The Technomancer, this CPU-GPU combination ranks 2603rd out of 2825 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 8% of all systems tested for this game. This ranking reflects the substantial performance limitations imposed by the Arc B370's integrated graphics, which cannot deliver the frame rates necessary for a smooth gaming experience at most settings. The data indicates that this combination is only marginally capable of handling the game at 1080p with Low settings, where it achieves 71 FPS, but even this result is below the threshold for high-refresh-rate displays.

The ranking position suggests that the vast majority of other tested combinations outperform this pairing in The Technomancer. The Ryzen 5 2600, while a capable processor in its own right with a 75th percentile ranking among all CPUs, cannot compensate for the GPU's limitations. The CPU's average benchmark score of 21484 places it near the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V (21440, 0.2% delta) and Intel Core i9-11900H (21367, 0.5% delta), showing that the processor is competitive with mid-range mobile and desktop chips. However, the Arc B370's 5th percentile GPU ranking means the overall system performance is dragged down significantly.

This combination's rank of 2603 out of 2825 indicates that users seeking to play The Technomancer would need to make substantial compromises. The measured FPS data shows that even at 1080p with Medium settings, the system only achieves 55 FPS on average, with minimums dipping to 47 FPS. For a game from 2016, this level of performance is below what most gamers would consider acceptable, suggesting that this hardware pairing is not well-suited for this title beyond the lowest settings.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run The Technomancer at 4K resolution?

A: The measured data shows that 4K performance is severely limited. At 4K with Low settings, the average FPS is 26, which drops to 20 FPS on Medium, 17 FPS on High, and 13 FPS on Ultra. These frame rates are not playable for a smooth gaming experience.

Q: What is the best resolution for this hardware combination?

A: The data indicates that 1080p is the most viable resolution. At 1080p, the system achieves 71 FPS on Low, 55 FPS on Medium, 47 FPS on High, and 37 FPS on Ultra. While not ideal, 1080p Low and Medium settings provide the most playable experience.

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

A: In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark, the Arc B370 scores 1184 points. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, -0.2%), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, -0.5%), and AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, -0.7%). These results show the Arc B370 performs similarly to older discrete GPUs.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 2600 a bottleneck in this configuration?

A: The data suggests the CPU is not the primary bottleneck. The Ryzen 5 2600 has a 75th percentile ranking among all CPUs and an average benchmark score of 21484, which is competitive with processors like the Intel Core i9-11900H (21367, 0.5% delta). The resolution scaling pattern points to the GPU as the limiting factor.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the system delivers an average of 36 FPS, with minimums of 30 FPS and maximums of 41 FPS. This is marginally playable but falls below the 60 FPS target most gamers prefer.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does this system have for graphics?

A: The Arc B370 uses system shared memory, and the Ryzen 5 2600 supports dual-channel DDR4 with a memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s. This shared memory arrangement means graphics performance is dependent on system memory speed and capacity.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 provides the computational foundation for this system, featuring 6 cores and 12 threads based on the Zen+ architecture. It operates at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and can boost up to 3.90 GHz, which are reasonable frequencies for a processor from its generation. The CPU is manufactured on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries and contains 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. Its cache hierarchy includes 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache.

In terms of raw processing power, the Ryzen 5 2600 performs well relative to its peers. Its Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 1248 points and single-core score of 157.3 points show solid performance for multi-threaded workloads. The Geekbench scores of 5648 (multi-core) and 1154 (single-core) further confirm its capabilities. The PassMark results are particularly strong in integer math (44518), floating point math (22942), and multi-threaded tasks (13160), indicating that the CPU can handle complex game logic and physics calculations without becoming a limiting factor.

The CPU's 75th percentile ranking among all CPUs demonstrates that it sits above the majority of processors in overall performance. Its average benchmark score of 21484 places it extremely close to the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V (21440, 0.2% delta) and slightly ahead of the Intel Core i9-11900H (21367, 0.5% delta). This positioning means that in a game like The Technomancer, the CPU should provide adequate processing power for game logic, AI, and physics, provided the GPU can keep up with rendering demands. The measured FPS data supports this assessment, as the performance degradation across resolutions follows GPU-bound patterns rather than CPU-limited behavior.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the most playable experience with this hardware combination is achieved at 1080p with Low settings, where the system delivers an average of 71 FPS. This is the only configuration that approaches the 60 FPS threshold that most gamers consider the minimum for smooth gameplay. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 55 FPS, which is still playable but with some noticeable frame rate variation, as indicated by the 47 FPS minimums. The High preset at 1080p yields 47 FPS on average, while Ultra drops to 37 FPS, both of which fall below the ideal playability threshold.

For users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate, 1080p Medium offers the best balance, providing 55 FPS average with minimums of 47 FPS and maximums of 63 FPS. This preset includes moderate visual enhancements without the severe performance penalties of High or Ultra. The data shows that the jump from Medium to High costs 8 FPS on average, while the jump from High to Ultra costs another 10 FPS, making Ultra the least efficient preset in terms of performance per visual gain.

At higher resolutions, the situation becomes more challenging. At 1440p, only the Low preset (47 FPS) approaches playability, while Medium (36 FPS) and High (31 FPS) fall below acceptable thresholds. The 4K resolution is not recommended at any setting, as even Low only achieves 26 FPS. Users should consider that the Arc B370's system shared memory may cause additional stuttering or frame time inconsistencies at higher resolutions, although the measured data does not capture these potential issues directly.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete set of measured FPS values provides a comprehensive view of this system's performance across all tested configurations:

At 1920x1080, the system achieves its best results. With Low settings, the average FPS is 71, providing the smoothest experience. Medium settings yield 55 FPS on average, with minimums of 47 FPS and maximums of 63 FPS. High settings produce 47 FPS on average, while Ultra settings drop to 37 FPS. These results show a clear progression of performance loss as graphical fidelity increases, with a total range of 34 FPS between the lowest and highest presets.

At 2560x1440, performance degrades significantly. Low settings deliver 47 FPS on average, which is the only preset at this resolution that remains marginally playable. Medium settings produce 36 FPS average, with minimums of 30 FPS and maximums of 41 FPS. High settings drop to 31 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 24 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 23 FPS, showing a slightly smaller absolute range than at 1080p but with all values shifted downward.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playable frame rates. Low settings achieve 26 FPS on average, Medium settings drop to 20 FPS with minimums of 17 FPS and maximums of 23 FPS, High settings fall to 17 FPS, and Ultra settings bottom out at 13 FPS. The 4K results demonstrate that this hardware combination is not suitable for high-resolution gaming, with even the lowest settings failing to reach 30 FPS. The data reveals a consistent pattern: each resolution step up from 1080p to 1440p to 4K costs roughly 30-40% of the previous performance, highlighting the Arc B370's limitations as an integrated graphics solution.