The Technomancer

The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X paired with the Intel Arc B390 ranks 2500th out of 2825 tested combos in The Technomancer, placing it in the bottom 12% of all systems measured. This is a decisive bottom-tier result, indicating that the combination struggles to deliver a competitive experience in this Action RPG. The ranking reflects a fundamental hardware mismatch for this specific title, where the CPU's strong processing capabilities are effectively neutralized by the GPU's limited rendering throughput.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's position at 2500 out of 2825 is a clear signal of underperformance. Benchmark results indicate that this pairing falls far behind the median tested system, placing it in the lowest percentile of all configurations. The data shows a stark contrast between the CPU's potential and the final outcome; while the Ryzen 5 9600X is a capable processor, the system's overall rank is dragged down by the graphics solution. This rank is not a reflection of the CPU but rather of the entire combo's inability to handle the game's graphical demands at playable levels.

In terms of the CPU's standing, the Ryzen 5 9600X holds an 81st percentile ranking against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29713. Its nearest rivals in synthetic tests show a tight cluster: the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE is just 0.2% ahead, while the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H trails by -0.5%, and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT is -0.6% behind. This indicates the processor is performing exactly as expected for its class. However, this strength does not translate to the gaming combo's rank, which is wholly defined by the GPU's output. The measured FPS data confirms that the system is bottlenecked by the graphics card, making the CPU's high percentile largely irrelevant for this game's performance profile.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the primary limiting factor in this combo. Its benchmark score of 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12) places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, a very low standing that directly correlates with the poor in-game results. The GPU's nearest rivals are all legacy or entry-level parts: the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX is a mere 1.3% faster, the GeForce 800M is 1.5% faster, the GeForce GT 625 OEM is 2.5% faster, and the GeForce GT 710 is 2.7% faster. This positions the Arc B390 at the very bottom of the performance spectrum, competing with hardware that is over a decade old.

The GPU's specifications reinforce its classification as a low-power, integrated-class part. It has 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operation units, with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. It features 12 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Crucially, its memory is "System Shared," meaning it has no dedicated VRAM. Memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," which means performance is contingent on the system's main memory speed and architecture. This dependency is a critical weakness, as the GPU must contend with the CPU for memory access, further reducing its effective throughput in a demanding game like The Technomancer.

The measured FPS data shows that the GPU's low pixel rate (60.00 GPixel/s) and texture rate (120.0 GTexel/s) are insufficient for high-resolution gaming. At 4K Ultra settings, the average FPS is a meager 15. This is not a case of a driver issue or a game-specific bug; it is a hardware limitation. The GPU simply does not have the raw computational power to render frames quickly enough, regardless of the CPU's ability to feed it data.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep performance cliff as resolution increases, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound system. At 1080p Low, the combo averages 79 FPS, which is the only playable result in the entire dataset. Moving to 1440p Low, the average drops to 52 FPS, a 34% reduction from the 1080p figure. At 4K Low, the average falls to 28 FPS, which is a 64% drop from the 1080p Low result and a 46% drop from the 1440p Low result.

This scaling pattern shows that the GPU is the primary bottleneck across all resolutions. A CPU-bound system would show a much smaller FPS delta between 1080p and 1440p, as the resolution increase would put more load on the GPU. Here, the FPS drops almost linearly with the increase in pixel count, indicating that the Arc B390 is saturated at every resolution tested. The data implies that lowering the resolution is the only way to gain meaningful performance, but even at 1080p, the GPU's limits are clear. The gap between 1080p High (52 FPS) and 1080p Low (79 FPS) is 27 FPS, showing that settings adjustments have a significant impact, but the ceiling is still low.

At 4K, the system is completely overwhelmed. The jump from Low (28 FPS) to Medium (22 FPS) to High (19 FPS) to Ultra (15 FPS) shows a consistent degradation, but even the lowest settings at 4K result in an unplayable experience. The data suggests that 4K is not a viable option for this combo, and even 1440p is only marginal at the lowest settings. The limiting component is unambiguously the GPU, as the CPU's strong single-threaded performance (Geekbench single-core score of 2923) cannot compensate for the GPU's lack of fill rate and memory bandwidth.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the only configuration that yields a consistently playable experience is 1080p with Low settings, which produces an average of 79 FPS. This is the "best experience" in the sense that it is the only setting combination that clears the 60 FPS threshold, which is generally considered the minimum for a smooth gaming experience. All other settings at 1080p fall below this threshold: Medium averages 61 FPS (with a minimum of 52 FPS), High averages 52 FPS, and Ultra averages 40 FPS.

At 1440p, the situation worsens. Low settings average 52 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced action. Medium averages 40 FPS, High averages 34 FPS, and Ultra averages 26 FPS. These are all in the range where frame pacing issues and input lag become noticeable. At 4K, every setting is below 30 FPS, which is generally considered the absolute minimum for a playable frame rate. Low averages 28 FPS, Medium averages 22 FPS, High averages 19 FPS, and Ultra averages 15 FPS.

The data suggests that users should prioritize resolution over graphical fidelity. The jump from 1080p Low to 1440p Low costs 27 FPS, which is a significant loss for a modest resolution increase. Conversely, the jump from 1080p Low to 1080p Medium costs 18 FPS, from 1080p Low to 1080p High costs 27 FPS, and from 1080p Low to 1080p Ultra costs 39 FPS. The most efficient trade-off is to stick with 1080p and only increase settings if the user can tolerate frame rates below 60 FPS. For a stable experience, 1080p Low is the recommended preset, as it provides the highest headroom above the 60 FPS target.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: Average 79 FPS. This is the highest measured frame rate in the entire dataset and the only one above 60 FPS.
• Medium: Average 61 FPS, with a minimum of 52 FPS and a maximum of 70 FPS. This is just at the edge of playability, with dips that could cause stutter.
• High: Average 52 FPS. This is a playable but not smooth experience, with noticeable drops during intense scenes.
• Ultra: Average 40 FPS. This is a significant drop from High, indicating that the extra graphical features are too demanding for the GPU.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: Average 52 FPS. This matches the 1080p High result, showing the resolution penalty.
• Medium: Average 40 FPS, with a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS. The minimum is near the threshold for unplayability.
• High: Average 34 FPS. This is a marginal experience, with frequent frame rate dips.
• Ultra: Average 26 FPS. This is below the playable threshold and will exhibit significant lag.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: Average 28 FPS. This is a poor experience, with constant stuttering.
• Medium: Average 22 FPS, with a minimum of 19 FPS and a maximum of 25 FPS. The frame rate is barely above a slideshow.
• High: Average 19 FPS. This is unplayable by any standard.
• Ultra: Average 15 FPS. This is the lowest measured result and represents the worst-case scenario for this combo.

FAQ

*Q: Can this combo run The Technomancer at 4K?*

A: No. Benchmark results show that at 4K, the average FPS ranges from 15 (Ultra) to 28 (Low), all of which are far below the 60 FPS target for a smooth experience. The GPU's low performance percentile (9th) makes 4K resolution impractical.

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this system?

A: The data indicates that 1080p with Low settings is the only configuration that achieves an average FPS above 60, hitting 79 FPS. All other tested combinations at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K fall below this threshold.

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

A: The Arc B390's benchmark score of 1482 is only slightly ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1.3% faster), the GeForce 800M (1.5% faster), the GeForce GT 625 OEM (2.5% faster), and the GeForce GT 710 (2.7% faster). This places it at the very bottom of the GPU performance hierarchy.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X the reason for this poor performance?

A: No. The CPU ranks in the 81st percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 29713. Its nearest rivals (AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE, AMD Ryzen 7 7840H, AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT) are all within 0.8% of its score. The frame rate data shows a GPU bottleneck, not a CPU one.

Q: What is the frame rate drop from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings?

A: At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 79 at 1080p to 52 at 1440p, a 34% reduction. This steep decline confirms that the GPU is the limiting component, as the resolution increase directly impacts its workload.

Q: What is the average FPS at 1440p Medium settings?

A: The average FPS is 40, with a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS. The minimum frame rate is very close to the threshold where stuttering becomes a serious issue, making this setting combination a marginal choice.