The Technomancer

The Technomancer, an Action RPG from 2016, is benchmarked here with an AMD Ryzen 5 9600X + AMD Radeon RX 6600 system. The measured FPS data cover three resolutions and four quality presets, and the combination ranks 2872 out of 3696 tested combos in this game, placing it in the lower quartile of the benchmark pool. This analysis breaks down where the CPU and GPU each contribute, how resolution scaling behaves, and which settings offer the most usable results.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 5 9600X is a 6-core, 12-thread Zen 5 processor from the Granite Ridge architecture, capable of scaling from 3.90 GHz base to 5.40 GHz boost. It has 8,315 million transistors on a 4 nm TSMC node, with 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 29713, putting it at the 81st percentile of all CPUs. Single-thread performance is especially strong: PassMark reports a 4570 score, 3DMark single-thread reaches 1253, and Cinebench R23 single‑core 2183.5. Multi‑core results are equally forthright: Cinebench R23 multi is 17528.5, Geekbench multi 14438, and PassMark multithread 30027.

In The Technomancer, the CPU’s work is done behind the scenes. At 1080p Low, the system averages 130 FPS — the highest frame rate recorded in this dataset. If the processor were the primary bottleneck, we would expect more flat scaling across resolutions; instead, the FPS drops markedly when higher resolutions are used. For example, 1080p Low goes to 1440p Low (85 FPS) and to 4K Low (47 FPS) while the same preset at 4K still holds above 30. The CPU’s single‑thread advantage is a good match for a 2016 game engine that was designed before per‑core scaling became the norm. It appears to have ample headroom to feed the GPU at all tested settings, and the 65 W TDP and AM5 socket make it a practical modern choice.

The nearest CPU rivals from the benchmark data are AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE (avg 29656, 0.2% higher), AMD Ryzen 7 7840H (avg 29868, -0.5% lower), and AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT (avg 29879, -0.6% lower). These close scores confirm the 9600X sits right in a dense performance cluster; no single‑thread speed advantage changes the game’s FPS numbers, because the decisive factor is the GPU.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 6600 is a Navi 23 GPU on a 7 nm node with 11,060 million transistors. It has 8 GB of GDDR6 VRAM on a 128‐bit bus, delivering a 224.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, and its clock speeds are 1626 MHz base, 2044 MHz game, and 2491 MHz boost. The card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1492, and it encodes 17.86 TFLOPS FP16 compute (2:1) and 8.928 TFLOPS FP32.

The GPU lands at the 63rd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19036. Its nearest rivals include NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (avg 19030, delta0%), GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile (avg 19049, delta -0.1%), and Tesla K20p (avg 19089, delta -0.3%). These are all in a similar class, but the RX 6600’s 8GB VRAM and RDNA 2 features are enough to play older titles without capacity problems. In The Technomancer the GPU is the component that demonstrably limits the FPS, as shown by the sharp resolution scaling. For a 2016 game, the RX 6600 has more than enough shader power; the issue is the memory bus width and raw bandwidth, which we see reflected in the 1080p, 1440p and 4K numbers.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data across 1080p, 1440p and 4K show a consistent pattern: doubling the pixel count results in a proportional frame‑count reduction. At 1080p Low the system reaches 130 FPS; at 1440p Low it drops to 85 FPS; at 4K Low it falls to 47 FPS. Medium settings do the same: 100 FPS at 1080p, 65 at 1440p, 36 at 4K. High settings produce 85 at 1080p, 56 at 1440p, and 31 at 4K, while Ultra yields 67, 44, and 24 respectively.

The relative drop is steady across presets. For example, High at 1080p gives 85 FPS; High at 4K gives 31 FPS, which means the 4K display can only about one‑third of the frames of 1080p. Medium and Low show a similar ratio: 100 to 36, and 130 to 47. The pattern is classic for a GPU-limited scenario — the CPU does not care about resolution, and the GPU has to process far more pixels. At 4K Ultra, the system dips to 24 FPS, which is unusable for smooth gameplay, and 4K High sits at 31 FPS — borderline for many titles.

The scaling also shows that the 8GB VRAM and 128‑bit bus are enough for space‑filling world textures at these resolutions; the frame collapse is due to the computing units being saturated, not missing memory. The 4K Medium result (36 FPS) is typical of a GPU at its limit with a moderate preset.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured FPS, the ideal preset depends on the display target. For 1080p, the High preset provides 85 FPS average, while Ultra gives 67. The gap between Medium and High is only 15 FPS (100 vs 85), so High feels smoother and still keeps high visual quality. At 1440p, Medium yields 65 FPS and High drops to 56; both are playable, but Medium gives more margin against dips. At 4K, the only presets that reach above 30 FPS are Low (47) and Medium (36). High at 4K produces merely 31, which is the borderline. Ultra at 4K gives 24 — not genuinely playable.

The most balanced choice is the Medium preset: it delivers 100 FPS at 1080p, 65 at 1440p, and 36 at 4K. These numbers are high enough for a typical 60 FPS monitor in all three resolutions, and visual downgrade from High is small. For technical purists, Low at 4K still offers 47 FPS, which is a playable experience if sacrifice visuals. Ultra is recommended only for 1080p where it holds 67 FPS, but it costs 33% of the frame rate from High for a small graphical bump. The data suggests that Medium is the best middle path for this hardware combination.

FAQ

Q: Can this setup run The Technomancer at 1080p on a high refresh rate?

A: Yes. At 1080p Medium you get 100 FPS, High 85 FPS, Ultra 67 FPS. A 144Hz panel would be playable on Medium or High, and a 60Hz panel easily handled on Ultra.

Q: Does the CPU limit the system in this game?

A: No. Single-threaded scores are high (PassMark 4570, 3DMark multi‑core 2190), and the FPS scales heavily with resolution. If the CPU were the bottleneck, frame rates would stay the same when changing resolution, which is not the case.

Q: Is 1440p gaming enjoyable on the RX 6600?

A: Yes. At Medium the system hits 65 FPS, and High reaches 56. These are both within the 55‑60 FPS range that many players consider smooth, and Low provides 85 FPS for competitive play.

Q: Can the RX 6600 handle 4K at all?

A: At 4K, Low averages 47 FPS, Medium 36, and High 31. Medium is the playable alternative, while High stays above 30 but with no headroom. Ultra is not recommended at 24 FPS.

Q: Why does the FPS drop so much from 1080p to 4K?

A: The drop is a classic GPU-bound behavior. The CPU maintains the same logic load, but each pixel requires more shading/power. The measurements show 4K requires roughly 4x the pixel count of 1080p, and the RX 6600 is performing accordingly.

Q: Is the 8GB VRAM enough for this game?

A: The data don’t show memory capacity issues. The 8 GB/bus bandwidth, combined with the game’s age, is enough for all tested settings, and the frame differences come from compute performance rather than a memory bottleneck.

Measured FPS Breakdown

| Resolution | Settings | Avg | Min | Max |

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

| 3840×2160 | High | 31 | – | – |

| 3840×2160 | Low | 47 | – | – |

| 3840×2160 | Medium | 36 | 31 | 41 |

| 3840×2160 | Ultra | 24 | – | – |

| 2560×1440 | High | 56 | – | – |

| 2560×1440 | Low | 85 | – | – |

| 2560×1440 | Medium | 65 | 56 | 75 |

| 2560×1440 | Ultra | 44 | – | – |

| 1920×1080 | High | 85 | – | – |

| 1920×1080 | Low | 130 | – | – |

| 1920×1080 | Medium | 100 | 85 | 115 |

| 1920×1080 | Ultra | 67 | – | – |

These numbers come from the measured data, with only the Average FPS in the high fraction. The frame rate targets for a 60Hz monitor (Medium 100/65/50) are all above the refresh rate show by the cursor. For a smooth 4K experience on this GPU, the Medium preset at 36 FPS is the best option, and 1080p Medium at 100 FPS is the overall sweet spot in terms of visual quality and playability. The system’s CPU strength never gets tested, and the GPU is the limiting component at every setting pair. This combination is best suited for 1080p gaming and can acceptably handle 1440p, but 4K remains only for lighter presets or low FPS tolerance.