The Technomancer

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination produces a profoundly GPU-limited experience in The Technomancer, with the measured frame rates showing that the graphics card is the decisive bottleneck across every resolution and settings preset. The data indicates that this pairing, while featuring a high-end 6-core processor with substantial cache, cannot deliver playable performance at higher resolutions, making it a configuration suited only for 1080p gaming with adjusted settings.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 7000 series, based on the Raphael (Zen 4) architecture. It operates with a base clock of 4.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, housed on the AMD Socket AM5 platform. The processor’s defining feature is its large 96 MB of shared L3 cache, which is designed to provide a significant advantage in workloads that are sensitive to memory latency, including many gaming scenarios. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU demonstrates strong multi-threaded capability with a PassMark multithread score of 25047 and a single-thread score of 3494, placing it in the 89th percentile among all CPUs.

However, in the context of The Technomancer, the CPU’s impressive specifications are largely irrelevant to the final frame rate output. The benchmark data shows a clear pattern: frame rates are consistently low even at 1080p, and they collapse further as resolution increases. This behavior is classic evidence of a GPU-bound scenario. The GTX 1650, with its 896 shading units and 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, is simply overwhelmed by the game’s demands. The CPU is capable of feeding frames far faster than the GPU can render them; the processor’s PassMark physics score of 2779 and integer math score of 70774 suggest it has ample headroom for game logic and physics calculations. The limiting factor is the pixel throughput, where the GTX 1650 offers a pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s, numbers that are insufficient for high-fidelity rendering in this title.

The data strongly suggests that the CPU is not the constraint. For instance, at 1080p Low settings, the combination achieves 68 FPS, which is the highest recorded average in the dataset. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar frame rates across different settings at the same resolution, as the CPU workload remains relatively constant. Instead, we see a dramatic drop from 68 FPS at Low to 35 FPS at Ultra, a clear indication that the GPU’s rendering workload is the primary factor determining performance. The Ryzen 5 7500X3D is effectively idling, waiting for the GTX 1650 to complete its rendering tasks. This makes the CPU role one of a capable but underutilized component in this specific pairing.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

The measured frame rates provide a clear verdict on settings optimization. At 1080p, the only preset that yields a consistently playable experience is Low, with an average of 68 FPS. This is the sole configuration that exceeds the 60 FPS threshold, which is generally considered the target for smooth gameplay. The Medium preset at 1080p produces an average of 52 FPS, with a minimum of 44 FPS and a maximum of 60 FPS. While this is a substantial step down from Low, it is still within a range that many players might find acceptable, though the frame time variance could lead to occasional stutter. The High preset drops to 45 FPS, and the Ultra preset falls to 35 FPS, both of which are below the ideal smoothness threshold for an action RPG.

The data indicates that the optimal experience is achieved at 1080p with the Low preset. This is the only setting that provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS, ensuring a stable and responsive gameplay experience. While the Medium preset offers better visual fidelity, the ~24% performance penalty (from 68 to 52 FPS) is significant. The choice between Low and Medium ultimately depends on a player’s tolerance for visual compromise versus frame rate smoothness. However, based strictly on the measured numbers, Low is the only preset that guarantees a consistent frame rate above the 60 FPS target. At 1440p and 4K, no preset achieves a playable frame rate, with the highest recorded average being 44 FPS at 1440p Low. Therefore, the recommendation is unequivocal: for this hardware combination, 1080p Low is the only viable preset for a smooth experience in The Technomancer.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The resolution scaling data shows a steep and predictable decline in performance as the pixel count increases, further confirming the GPU-bound nature of this configuration. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 68 FPS to 44 FPS, a ~35% decrease. This is a significant loss, but it is expected given the 1.78x increase in pixel count. However, the more telling comparison is between 1080p and 4K. At Low settings, the frame rate plummets from 68 FPS to 24 FPS, a ~65% reduction. This is a disproportionate drop compared to the 4x pixel increase, which suggests that the GTX 1650 is not scaling efficiently at higher resolutions, likely due to its limited memory bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s and small 4 GB frame buffer.

The pattern is consistent across all settings presets. At High settings, the frame rate goes from 45 FPS at 1080p to 29 FPS at 1440p and then to 16 FPS at 4K. At Ultra settings, it goes from 35 FPS at 1080p to 23 FPS at 1440p and then to 13 FPS at 4K. This linear degradation pattern is a hallmark of a GPU that is running out of resources, both in terms of compute throughput and memory capacity. The 4 GB VRAM is likely a major issue at 4K, as the game’s textures and geometry can easily exceed this limit, leading to severe performance penalties. The data clearly shows that the limiting component is the NVIDIA GTX 1650. The CPU’s performance is constant across resolutions, but the GPU’s rendering capability is the bottleneck, making the resolution scaling behavior a direct reflection of the graphics card’s limitations.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the comprehensive database of tested hardware combinations for The Technomancer, this specific pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 2738 out of 2825 tested combos. This places it in the bottom 3% of all configurations, a very poor showing that reflects the significant mismatch between the high-end CPU and the low-end GPU. The combo rank is a holistic measure that accounts for performance across all tested resolutions and settings, and the data shows that this combination consistently underperforms due to the GPU’s limitations.

The GPU’s individual benchmark performance corroborates this low ranking. The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472, placing it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 8850M, which is only 0.3% slower, and the Intel UHD Graphics 750, which is 0.4% slower. This shows that the GTX 1650 is only marginally better than integrated graphics solutions, which is a stark indicator of its low-end positioning. In contrast, the CPU is a top-tier part, with an average benchmark score of 44573, placing it in the 89th percentile. The mismatch is stark: a top-11% CPU paired with a bottom-40% GPU. The combo rank of 2738 out of 2825 is therefore not a reflection of a balanced system, but rather a system where the GPU’s performance ceiling is the sole determinant of the final outcome. The data shows that this combination is among the worst performers in the database for this game, and the only way to improve the rank would be to pair the CPU with a more capable graphics card.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achievable with this CPU and GPU combination?

A: The highest recorded average frame rate is 68 FPS, which is achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset.

*Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D the bottleneck in this system for The Technomancer?*

A: No. The data indicates the system is GPU-bound. The CPU’s PassMark multithread score is 25047, while the GPU’s PassMark G3D score is only 7880. The large frame rate drops with increasing resolution and settings point to the GTX 1650 as the limiting component.

*Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in The Technomancer?*

A: No. The performance at 3840x2160 is unplayable. The highest average frame rate at 4K is 24 FPS on Low settings, and it drops to 13 FPS on Ultra settings.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested configurations?

A: This combo ranks 2738 out of 2825 tested combos for The Technomancer, placing it in the bottom percentile of all tested systems.

Q: What is the recommended settings preset for a smooth experience?

A: The data shows that the 1920x1080 Low preset is the only configuration that provides an average frame rate above 60 FPS. The next best option is 1920x1080 Medium, which averages 52 FPS.

Q: What is the performance difference between the Low and Ultra presets at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 68 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 35 FPS. This represents a 48.5% decrease in performance when moving from Low to Ultra settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The following table presents the exact measured average frame rates for each resolution and settings preset combination. Minimum and maximum frame rates are included where available in the data.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

|------------|----------|---------|---------|---------|

| 3840x2160 | High | 16 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 24 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 19 | 16 | 22 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 13 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | High | 29 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 44 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 34 | 29 | 39 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 23 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | High | 45 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 68 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 52 | 44 | 60 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 35 | — | — |

The data reveals a consistent hierarchy: at every resolution, Low settings provide the highest frame rate, followed by Medium, High, and finally Ultra. The differences are substantial. At 1080p, the gap between Low and Ultra is 33 FPS. At 1440p, the gap is 21 FPS, and at 4K, the gap is 11 FPS. This shrinking gap at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is becoming increasingly saturated, and the differences between settings presets become less impactful as the resolution itself becomes the dominant performance factor. The only preset with recorded frame time variance is Medium, which shows a 16 FPS spread between minimum and maximum at 1080p, 10 FPS at 1440p, and 6 FPS at 4K. This suggests that the Medium preset introduces some frame pacing instability, while the other presets likely have a more consistent frame delivery, albeit at lower average rates.