The Technomancer

Resolution Scaling

The Technomancer presents a steep performance curve when moving from 1080p to 4K with this AMD Ryzen 5 8400F + Intel Arc B390 combination. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the measured average is 52 FPS. Stepping up to 2560x1440 at the same preset drops that to 34 FPS, a reduction of 18 FPS. At 3840x2160 High, the average falls further to 19 FPS. The scaling pattern from 1440p to 4K shows a 15 FPS loss, which is proportionally larger than the 1080p-to-1440p step.

The Low settings row tells a similar story. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 79 FPS average. At 1440p Low, that drops to 52 FPS. At 4K Low, the average sinks to 28 FPS. The delta between 1080p and 1440p Low is 27 FPS, while the delta between 1440p and 4K Low is 24 FPS. These near-uniform drops across resolution tiers indicate that the limiting factor scales consistently with pixel count.

Looking at Medium settings, the measured rows include min and max values. At 1080p Medium, the average is 61 FPS with a min of 52 and max of 70. At 1440p Medium, the average is 40 FPS with a min of 34 and max of 46. At 4K Medium, the average is 22 FPS with a min of 19 and max of 25. The min-to-max spread narrows as resolution increases — 18 FPS at 1080p, 12 FPS at 1440p, and 6 FPS at 4K — which suggests that at higher resolutions the frame pacing becomes more constrained.

Ultra settings produce the lowest figures across the board. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 40 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, it drops to 26 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the average is 15 FPS. The gap between Ultra and High at 1080p is 12 FPS; at 1440p it is 8 FPS; at 4K it is 4 FPS. This compression of differences at higher resolutions points to the GPU becoming the dominant bottleneck as pixel throughput demands increase.

The data indicates that this system is heavily GPU-limited at 4K across all settings. Even dropping from Ultra to Low at 4K only recovers 13 FPS (from 15 to 28), which remains below playable thresholds. At 1080p, the same settings swing yields 39 FPS (from 40 to 79), showing far more headroom. The resolution scaling behavior suggests the Intel Arc B390's shared memory architecture cannot sustain fill-rate demands at 4K regardless of quality preset.

How This Combo Ranks

In The Technomancer, this CPU+GPU pairing ranks 2500 out of 2825 tested combinations. That places it in the bottom 11.5 percent of all tested combos for this game. The percentile position is consistent with the measured FPS data, which shows sub-60 averages at most settings above 1080p Low.

The combo's rank reflects the GPU's standing more than the CPU's. The Intel Arc B390 sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 1482. Its nearest rivals in synthetic testing are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (score 1463, 1.3% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (score 1460, 1.5% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (score 1446, 2.5% slower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (score 1443, 2.7% slower). These are all entry-level or legacy mobile parts, which contextualizes the Arc B390's position as a low-end integrated graphics solution.

The CPU, by contrast, performs far better in the broader benchmark landscape. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F sits at the 77th percentile among all CPUs. Its average benchmark score is 25005. The nearest CPU rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (score 24964, 0.2% faster), the Intel Core i7-11850H (score 24935, 0.3% faster), the Intel Core i7-13620H (score 24911, 0.4% faster), and the AMD EPYC 9474F (score 25103, 0.4% slower). The CPU's percentile is roughly 68 points higher than the GPU's, indicating a massive imbalance in this pairing.

In game-specific terms, the 2500/2825 rank means the vast majority of tested combos deliver higher frame rates in The Technomancer. The data shows that the GPU is the binding constraint — a stronger discrete GPU paired with this same CPU would likely move the combo substantially higher in the rankings, while swapping the CPU would yield little benefit given the GPU's ceiling.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is built on Intel's Xe3-LPG architecture, using the Panther Lake chip on a 3 nm process. Its base clock is 300 MHz with a boost clock of 2500 MHz. The GPU features 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units. It also includes 12 ray tracing cores. The pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s, the texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, and FP32 throughput is 7.680 TFLOPS. FP16 performance is 15.36 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio.

Memory is entirely system-shared. The memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent." This is a critical detail for interpreting The Technomancer's performance. The GPU's memory clock is also "System Shared," meaning there is no dedicated VRAM. The TDP is 80 W, and the bus interface is IGP, meaning this is an integrated graphics processor rather than a discrete card.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score for the Arc B390 is 1482. That places it at the 9th percentile among all GPUs. The nearest rival scores — 1463, 1460, 1446, and 1443 — are all within 2.7% of the B390's result, clustering this GPU in a very narrow performance band alongside parts like the GeForce GT 710 and GT 625 OEM.

In The Technomancer, the GPU's limitations manifest clearly. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 15, which is effectively a slideshow. Even at 1080p Low, the 79 FPS average is the only measured row that approaches smooth gameplay. The shared memory architecture means the GPU competes with the system for bandwidth, and the measured FPS data shows that higher resolutions exacerbate this bottleneck. The 24 ROPs and 120 GTexel/s texture rate are simply insufficient for 4K workloads in this title.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full settings ladder is available. Low produces an average of 79 FPS. Medium produces an average of 61 FPS, with a minimum of 52 and maximum of 70. High produces an average of 52 FPS. Ultra produces an average of 40 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 39 FPS drop, with each settings tier costing between 9 and 12 FPS on average.

At 2560x1440, the averages are lower across every preset. Low delivers 52 FPS. Medium delivers 40 FPS, with a minimum of 34 and maximum of 46. High delivers 34 FPS. Ultra delivers 26 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 26 FPS, which is tighter than the 1080p spread. The min/max data for Medium at 1440p shows a 12 FPS range, compared to an 18 FPS range at 1080p Medium.

At 3840x2160, the performance collapses. Low averages 28 FPS. Medium averages 22 FPS, with a minimum of 19 and maximum of 25. High averages 19 FPS. Ultra averages 15 FPS. The total spread from Low to Ultra is just 13 FPS. The Medium preset's min/max range narrows to 6 FPS, indicating that the GPU is saturated at 4K regardless of quality settings.

Comparing the same preset across resolutions reveals the scaling cost. High settings: 52 FPS at 1080p, 34 FPS at 1440p, 19 FPS at 4K. Low settings: 79 FPS at 1080p, 52 FPS at 1440p, 28 FPS at 4K. Medium settings: 61 FPS at 1080p, 40 FPS at 1440p, 22 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings: 40 FPS at 1080p, 26 FPS at 1440p, 15 FPS at 4K. The 1080p-to-1440p penalty averages around 45-50% across presets, while the 1440p-to-4K penalty averages around 42-45%.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of what this combo can and cannot do in The Technomancer. At 4K, no preset achieves a playable average — the highest is 28 FPS at Low, which is below 30 FPS. The 4K Medium row shows a min of 19 FPS, confirming that even the middle ground is not viable at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, Low is the only preset that breaks 50 FPS, averaging 52. Medium averages 40, which is borderline. High averages 34, and Ultra averages 26. For 1440p, Low settings provide the most consistent experience, with Medium as a compromise if the user accepts lower average frame rates.

At 1920x1080, the options improve significantly. Low averages 79 FPS, which is smooth. Medium averages 61 FPS with a min of 52, which is also playable. High averages 52 FPS, which is acceptable for an action RPG. Ultra averages 40 FPS, which dips below the 60 FPS threshold but remains functional. The data suggests that Medium at 1080p offers the best balance, providing 61 FPS average while retaining quality improvements over Low. For users prioritizing frame rate, Low at 1080p delivers the highest average at 79 FPS.

Given the measured rows, the recommended experience is 1080p Medium (61 FPS average, 52 FPS minimum) for a quality-oriented setup, or 1080p Low (79 FPS average) for maximum smoothness. At 1440p, Low (52 FPS average) is the only preset that avoids sustained sub-40 performance. At 4K, no settings combination from the data yields a playable result, so users should avoid this resolution entirely with this hardware.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in The Technomancer?

A: The measured data shows 1920x1080 is the only resolution where any preset averages above 60 FPS. Low hits 79 FPS and Medium hits 61 FPS at 1080p. At 1440p, the best average is 52 FPS (Low), and at 4K the best average is 28 FPS (Low).

Q: Can this system play at 4K in The Technomancer?

A: No preset at 3840x2160 achieves a 30 FPS average. The highest 4K average is 28 FPS at Low settings. Ultra averages 15 FPS, High averages 19 FPS, and Medium averages 22 FPS with a minimum of 19 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1482, placing it at the 9th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% slower), GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% slower), GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% slower), and GeForce GT 710 (1443, 2.7% slower).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The GPU is clearly the limiting factor. The CPU sits at the 77th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU sits at the 9th percentile. The measured FPS drops consistently with resolution increases, and the GPU's shared memory architecture cannot sustain 4K performance.

Q: What settings preset gives the highest average FPS at 1080p?

A: Low settings at 1920x1080 produce the highest average at 79 FPS. Medium averages 61 FPS, High averages 52 FPS, and Ultra averages 40 FPS.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 8400F compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: The Ryzen 5 8400F has an average benchmark score of 25005. The nearest rivals are the Ryzen 5 7500F (24964, 0.2% faster), Core i7-11850H (24935, 0.3% faster), Core i7-13620H (24911, 0.4% faster), and EPYC 9474F (25103, 0.4% slower).

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 8000 series, built on the Zen 4 architecture with the Phoenix codename. It uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The base clock is 4.20 GHz with a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The TDP is 65 W, and it fits the AMD Socket AM5. Memory support is DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. The PCIe interface is Gen 4 with 20 lanes.

The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU has no integrated graphics, which is notable because the GPU in this combo is an integrated part — meaning the system relies on the Arc B390 as the sole display output. The processor's launch MSRP is $170.

In synthetic benchmarks, the Ryzen 5 8400F shows strong multi-threaded performance. Cinebench R23 multicore scores 20851, while single-core scores 2943. Cinebench R20 multicore is 8757 and single-core is 1236. Cinebench R15 multicore is 2101 and single-core is 296. The 3DMark results show 6091 for 16 threads, 5275 for 8 threads, 3563 for 4 threads, 1874 for 2 threads, 6165 for max threads, and 951 for single thread. Passmark results include 24389 for multithread, 3685 for single thread, 74021 for integer math, 46217 for floating point math, 288158 for data compression, and 16646 for data encryption.

The CPU's 77th percentile ranking places it well above the GPU's 9th percentile. In The Technomancer, the CPU's headroom is not the constraint — the measured FPS data shows performance collapsing at 4K regardless of settings, which is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck. The CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads at up to 4.70 GHz boost are sufficient for this 2016 action RPG's demands. The nearest CPU rivals are all within 0.4% in average score, indicating that the 8400F performs in line with similar mid-range parts.

The imbalance between CPU and GPU capability means that in this game, the CPU's strong single-thread and multi-thread scores are largely wasted. The 52 FPS average at 1080p High is the ceiling for this pairing — a more capable GPU would allow the CPU to demonstrate its full potential. The data shows the CPU is not the bottleneck at any resolution tested.