The Technomancer

The Technomancer is a 2016 Action RPG that can still stress modern hardware in unexpected ways, and the combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 3600 with the Intel Arc B390 produces a very specific set of results. This pairing places 2500th out of 2825 tested combos for this title, putting it in the bottom 12% of all systems measured. That rank is driven almost entirely by the graphics side of the equation, as the Arc B390's benchmark profile shows it sitting at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, with an average 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. The Ryzen 5 3600, by contrast, is a much stronger component in general compute, sitting at the 71st percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 17035, but in this game, the GPU becomes the decisive bottleneck at every resolution. The data indicates a system that can handle the game's logic and physics without issue, but the frame rate is consistently capped by the integrated graphics solution.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 2500 out of 2825 is a clear signal that this configuration is far from optimal for The Technomancer. To put that in perspective, the GPU alone ranks at the 9th percentile among all tested graphics cards, which is a very low position. The nearest rivals for the Arc B390 in the benchmark database are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, GeForce 800M, GT 625 OEM, and GT 710, with average scores of 1463, 1460, 1446, and 1443 respectively. The Arc B390's score of 1482 is only 1.3% higher than the GT 520MX and 2.7% higher than the GT 710. This places it in a performance tier that is primarily associated with basic display output and very light gaming, not modern action RPGs. The CPU, on the other hand, is a much more capable part. The Ryzen 5 3600's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-1260P, Intel Core i5-11400, AMD EPYC 7573X, and AMD EPYC 7742, with delta percentages of 0.2%, -0.2%, -0.2%, and 0.2% respectively. This shows the CPU is essentially performance-equivalent to those parts in general benchmarks, which is a solid position for a desktop processor. However, because the GPU is so far behind, the overall combo rank suffers dramatically. The combination of a mid-range desktop CPU from 2019 with a low-end integrated graphics processor from 2026 creates a massive imbalance. The data shows that the GPU's low percentile ranking is the primary factor dragging the entire combo to the bottom of the rankings. For a game like The Technomancer, which relies on consistent frame pacing and GPU throughput, this rank reflects a system that will struggle to provide a smooth experience at most settings and resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured FPS data, the only playable experience is at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which produces an average of 79 FPS. This is the only tested configuration that approaches what most builders would consider a smooth frame rate. Moving up to Medium at 1080p drops the average to 61 FPS, with a minimum of 52 FPS and a maximum of 70 FPS, which is technically playable but will show noticeable dips during combat or when multiple effects are on screen. High settings at 1080p bring the average down to 52 FPS, which is borderline, while Ultra settings at 1080p produce an average of only 40 FPS, which is below the threshold for comfortable gameplay in an action RPG. Based on the data, the best experience is clearly at 1080p with Low settings. The jump from Low to Medium at 1080p costs 18 FPS on average, which is a substantial 22.8% drop, and the visual improvement from Low to Medium in most games of this era is not worth that performance hit on this hardware. At 2560x1440, the situation becomes more difficult. Low settings produce an average of 52 FPS, which is the same as High at 1080p, but Medium drops to 40 FPS, and High falls to 34 FPS. Ultra at 1440p is an unplayable 26 FPS. At 3840x2160, even Low settings only manage 28 FPS, making 4K effectively unusable for this game with this combo. The measured data strongly suggests that users should stick to 1080p and accept Low settings as the primary choice. If a user insists on Medium, they will have to tolerate frame rates that dip into the low 50s, which may be acceptable for slower exploration but will be problematic in combat. The conclusion from the benchmark results is that this combo is best suited for 1080p Low, with Medium as a secondary option only if the user prioritizes visual fidelity over frame rate consistency.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a system that is almost entirely GPU-limited. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 79 FPS at 1920x1080 to 52 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 34.2%. Going from 1440p to 4K at Low settings, the average drops from 52 FPS to 28 FPS, a further reduction of 46.2%. This pattern is characteristic of a GPU that is overwhelmed by pixel count. The Arc B390's performance is so low that even at 1080p Low, it is working hard, and the additional pixels at higher resolutions quickly exhaust its capabilities. At Medium settings, the scaling is similar. The average goes from 61 FPS at 1080p to 40 FPS at 1440p, a 34.4% drop, and then from 40 FPS to 22 FPS at 4K, a 45% drop. The minimum FPS at Medium also scales poorly, going from 52 at 1080p to 34 at 1440p, then to 19 at 4K. This consistent pattern across settings indicates that the limiting component is not the CPU. The Ryzen 5 3600, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, is more than capable of feeding frames to a GPU of this class. The CPU's benchmark scores, such as a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 15045 and a single-core score of 2124, show that it has ample headroom. The data points to the GPU being the sole bottleneck, as the frame rate drops are directly proportional to the increase in pixel count. For example, the pixel count from 1080p to 1440p increases by 77.8%, but the FPS at Low settings drops by 34.2%, which is less than the pixel increase, suggesting that other bottlenecks are also present, but the general trend is unmistakable. The 4K results are particularly telling, with all settings producing averages below 30 FPS, which is a clear indication that the GPU is simply not designed for high-resolution gaming. The conclusion is that this combo is a 1080p solution, and attempting to scale to higher resolutions will result in a linear degradation of performance that mirrors the GPU's limited processing power.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed picture of what to expect. At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: Low settings produce an average of 79 FPS, with no minimum or maximum recorded. Medium settings average 61 FPS, with a minimum of 52 and a maximum of 70. High settings average 52 FPS, and Ultra settings average 40 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 39 FPS, which is a massive 49.4% reduction from Low to Ultra. This tells us that the graphics presets have a significant impact on performance, and the GPU struggles to maintain playable frame rates at higher presets. At 2560x1440, Low settings average 52 FPS, Medium settings average 40 FPS with a minimum of 34 and a maximum of 46, High settings average 34 FPS, and Ultra settings average 26 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 26 FPS, a 50% reduction. At 3840x2160, the results are consistently poor. Low settings average 28 FPS, Medium settings average 22 FPS with a minimum of 19 and a maximum of 25, High settings average 19 FPS, and Ultra settings average 15 FPS. The minimum FPS values at Medium settings show that the system can experience significant frame drops, with the minimum at 4K Medium being 19 FPS, which is a 13.6% drop from the average. The data shows a clear hierarchy: 1080p Low is the only configuration that provides a consistently smooth experience above 70 FPS. 1080p Medium is playable but with noticeable dips. 1080p High is borderline, and everything above that is not recommended for action gameplay. The numbers also show that the gap between Low and Medium is larger than the gap between Medium and High at most resolutions, which suggests that the Medium preset includes certain rendering features that are particularly taxing on this GPU. For example, at 1080p, the difference between Low and Medium is 18 FPS, while the difference between Medium and High is only 9 FPS. This pattern is consistent at 1440p, where the Low to Medium gap is 12 FPS and the Medium to High gap is 6 FPS. This indicates that the game's Medium preset introduces a significant load increase, likely through effects like shadows or post-processing, that the Arc B390 handles poorly.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the dominant factor in this combo's performance, and its specifications explain why. The GPU has 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 render output units, with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. The pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 7.680 TFLOPS. These are very modest numbers for a modern GPU, especially one released in 2026. The memory configuration is entirely system-shared, meaning there is no dedicated VRAM, and the memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent." This means the GPU relies on the CPU's DDR4 memory, which in this case is dual-channel with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. This shared memory setup is a severe limitation for a game like The Technomancer, which likely requires fast access to textures and geometry. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 places the Arc B390 in the same performance tier as the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, which is a GPU from over a decade ago. The nearest rivals show delta percentages of 1.3% to 2.7%, meaning the Arc B390 is only marginally faster than those extremely old parts. The GPU's 12 RT cores are present, but ray tracing is not a factor in this game. The 24 ROPs are the key limitation for resolution scaling, as they determine the pixel fill rate. With a pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s, the GPU can only output a limited number of pixels per second, which explains why 4K performance is so poor. At 1080p, the GPU is able to maintain reasonable frame rates at Low settings, but as the resolution increases, the pixel fill rate becomes the bottleneck. The boost clock of 2500 MHz is relatively high, but the underlying architecture, Xe3-LPG, is designed for low-power integrated graphics, not high-performance gaming. The TDP of 80 W is also indicative of its limited capabilities. The data shows that this GPU is fundamentally unsuited for The Technomancer at anything above 1080p Low, and even at that setting, it is operating near its limits.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 3600 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Matisse, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz. It has a 32 MB shared L3 cache and supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. In general benchmarks, the CPU performs well, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 15045 and a single-core score of 2124. Its Passmark multithread score is 17700, and its Geekbench multicore score is 7372. These numbers show that the CPU is more than capable of handling the computational demands of The Technomancer. The game is not particularly CPU-intensive, and the Ryzen 5 3600's 12 threads provide ample parallelism for the game's logic, physics, and AI. The CPU's percentile ranking of 71 among all CPUs means it outperforms the majority of processors in the database. However, in this specific combo, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and geometry, and it does so without being a bottleneck. The measured FPS data shows that the frame rate is consistently tied to the GPU's capabilities, not the CPU's. For example, at 1080p Low, the CPU can easily push 79 FPS, but the GPU cannot go higher. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would see similar frame rates across different resolutions, but that is not the case. The FPS drops significantly as resolution increases, which is a classic sign of GPU limitation. The CPU's memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s is shared with the GPU's system-shared memory, which could theoretically be a secondary bottleneck, but the primary issue remains the GPU's low compute throughput. The CPU's nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i5-11400, have similar average scores, and all of them would perform similarly in this game if paired with the same GPU. The data indicates that the Ryzen 5 3600 is not the issue here; it is a capable mid-range CPU that is being held back by an extremely weak graphics solution. For builders, this means that upgrading the GPU would yield massive improvements in The Technomancer, while upgrading the CPU would have little to no effect on frame rates in this title. The CPU's 65 W TDP and 7 nm process node also make it an efficient part, but efficiency does not translate to higher frame rates when the GPU is the limiting factor. In summary, the CPU is ready to do its job, but the GPU cannot keep up, making this combo a textbook case of GPU-bound performance.