The Technomancer

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT combination delivers playable performance in The Technomancer across most resolution and quality presets, but it does not dominate the field. Measured data shows this pairing ranks 1,938th out of 3,696 recorded combos — a spot just below the exact midpoint of the database. At 1080p the system produces triple-digit frame rates on Medium and High, while Ultra settles at 87 FPS. At 1440p, only the Medium preset keeps its average above 60 FPS, and at 4K the frame rate falls to the 40–47 FPS range on Mid-to-High and 31 FPS on Ultra. The CPU and GPU both contribute meaningfully to these results, but resolution scaling reveals a clear shift in which part becomes the bottleneck.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination ranks 1,938 out of 3,696 tested combos in The Technomancer, which puts it in the 52nd percentile of the measured population. That is a mid-pack outcome, not a top performer. For reference, the Radeon RX 6700 XT alone sits at the 72nd percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Ryzen 7 9700X reaches the 84th percentile among CPUs. The game-specific ranking is lower than either component’s standalone percentile, suggesting that this title’s performance profile is not perfectly matched to the hardware pair. The CPU’s nearest rivals in average benchmark score include the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 (34222, delta +0.1%) and the Intel Core i5-13450HX (34333, delta -0.2%), so the 3700X’s overall processing power is typical for a mid-range chip. The GPU’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile with an identical average score of 27435 and a delta of 0.0%, meaning the 6700 XT is essentially equal to that laptop part in raw synthetic performance. Neither extreme is close: the RTX 3090 is 0.5% ahead, but the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 is 1.5% ahead, so the 6700 XT sits slightly below the top tier.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows show that Medium is the sweet spot for this pair in The Technomancer. At 1920x1080, Medium averages 131 FPS with a range of 111–151 FPS, while High delivers 112 FPS and Ultra drops to 87 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is 19 FPS, but going from High to Ultra costs another 25 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset imposes a steep frame hit with no corresponding benefit in the measured data. At 2560x1440, Medium still holds an average of 86 FPS (73–98 FPS), while High drops to 73 FPS and Ultra to 57 FPS. At 3840x2160, Medium falls to 47 FPS (40–54 FPS), High averages 40 FPS, and Ultra is 31 FPS. Because the database only measures a single run per preset, the only floor margins come from the Medium measures, but the pattern is consistent: Medium always returns the highest frame counts among the non-“Low” presets at any resolution. The “Low” preset delivers the absolute highest FPS at each resolution, but it does so without any indication of what visual features are removed. For those seeking the smoothest motion, Low excels (171 FPS at 1080p, 111 FPS at 1440p, 61 FPS at 4K), but the data shows that Medium offers a strong midpoint between strict performance and the quality that the Medium label implies. Given that a 60 Hz monitor is a minimum bar for smooth motion, the Medium preset at 1080p and 1440p exceeds that threshold, while the High preset only meets it at 1080p. The Ultra preset is never within 60 FPS at any resolution, and the 4K Ultra result (31 FPS) is unplayable for fast action. Thus, the data recommends High as the highest playable setting for 1080p, and Medium as the highest playable setting for 1440p. At 4K, no preset reaches 60 FPS; the closest is Low with 61 FPS, so for 4K, Low is the only option to approach smooth motion.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 2560x1440 on Ultra?

A: The average is 57 FPS, with measured minimum and maximum not recorded for that preset.

Q: Does the combination reach 60 FPS at 3840x2160 on any settings?

A: Yes, the Low preset averages 61 FPS. The other available presets (Medium, High, Ultra) all average below 60 FPS, with Ultra at 31 FPS.

Q: How does the GPU’s average benchmark score compare to its nearest rival?

A: The Radeon RX 6700 XT’s average benchmark score is 27,425, which is exactly equal to that of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile (27,435, delta 0.0%), and 0.5% ahead of the RTX 3090 (27,565). The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 is 1.5% ahead at 27,839.

Q: What is the CPU’s boost clock?

A: The Ryzen 7 3700X has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz.

Q: How the CPU ranks against a rival like the Intel Core i5-13450HX in the database?

A: The 3700X’s average benchmark score is 34,260, which is 0.1% higher than the rival’s score of 34,333 (delta = -0.2%) — so they are essentially evenly matched.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the GPU?

A: The RX 6700 XT has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The table below lists every measured result in the fact pack. The only rows with recorded minimum and maximum frames are the Medium entries; all other rows only report an average.

| Resolution | Settings | Average FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

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

| 3840x2160 | High | 40 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 61 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 47 | 40 | 54 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 31 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | High | 73 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 111 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 86 | 73 | 98 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 57 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | High | 112 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 171 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 131 | 111 | 151 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 87 | — | — |

The data shows a consistent gap between Medium and Ultra at each resolution. At 1080p, the Medium-to-Ultra delta is 44 FPS (131 to 87), while 1440p drops from 86 to 57 (a 29 FPS gap) and 4K drops from 61 to 31 (a 30 FPS loss). The relative delta between Medium and Ultra increases as resolution rises: 1080p loses 33% of Medium’s score, 1440p loses 34%, and 4K loses 34%. The High preset falls between Medium and Ultra at all resolutions, though at 4K High (47) is 13% lower than Medium (47), while at 1440p High (73) is 15% lower than Medium (86), and at 1080p High (112) is 14% lower than Medium (131). These percentages show that each preset step costs roughly the same relative performance across resolutions, suggesting that the game scales the graphical load evenly at each tier.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is the primary rendering unit here, and its specifications are central to the frame rates. The GPU has a base clock of 2321 MHz, a boost clock of 2581 MHz, and a “game” clock of 2424 MHz. Its memory subsystem is 12 GB of GDDR6 with a 192-bit bus and 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. In terms of pixel throughput, the card achieves 165.2 GPixel/s and a texture rating of 413.0 GTexel/s, which correspond to 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. It also has 40 RT cores, marking it as RDNA 2.0.

The GPU’s average benchmark score is 27,425, placing it at the 72nd percentile among all GPUs. This is a strong position: the nearest rival in the database is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile with a score of 27,435 (delta 0.0%), meaning the two are statistically tied. The next nearest is the RTX 3090 with 27,565 (0.5% higher), and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 is 1.1% ahead at 27,839. The RX 6700 XT’s measured FPS in The Technomancer aligns with this mid-high standing: it maxes out a hardware but the CPU still has headroom at lower resolutions.

With 12 GB of VRAM, this card has enough memory for the textures in this 2016 title, even at Ultra settings. The database’s FPS results show that the card is often the limiting factor above 1080p. For instance, at 1440p the average FPS on Medium is 86, while at 4K it drops to 47 — a 45% reduction. The GPU’s bandwidth of 384 GB/s is likely to be sufficient for the game’s asset load, but the compute millions do not scale to 4K. The lack of measured minimums means we cannot test for stutter, but the average frame rates indicate that at 4K the card is stressed, particularly on Ultra where it averages 31 FPS.

The nearestRivals data for the GPU includes only the average scores and deltas; no clock or memory specifications are provided there, so we rely on the main file. The card’s DirectX support includes 12 Ultimate, and it supports OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, making it fully compatible with the modern rendering engine used in this title.

CPU Payload

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is an 8-core, 16-thread processor from the Zen 2 architecture. Its base clock is 3.60 GHz and its boost clock is 4.40 GHz. It has a 32 MB L3 cache and 24 lanes of PCIe Gen 4. The chip sits at the 84th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 34,260. This score is marginally higher than that of the AMD Ryzen AI 350 (34,222, +0.1%) and the AMD EPYC 4244P (34,220, +0.1%), while being 0.2% lower than the Intel Core i5-13450HX (34,333). In practice, these results show the 3700X is a very well-rounded mid-range CPU for its generation.

MT-specific benchmarks from the CPU data: Cinebench R15 multicore scores 2092, Geekbench multicore 8899, and Passmark multithread 22,458. Single-thread scores include Cinebench R15 single-core 204, Geekbench single 1593, and Passmark single 2656. Its base and boost clocks are high for the time, but the measured FPS in The Technomarger indicates that the CPU is rarely the limiting factor. At 1080p, the combination delivers 171 FPS on Low and 112 on High. These high frame rates suggest the CPU can feed the GPU adequately, and at the higher resolutions, where GPU work becomes dominant, the CPU’s thread count doesn’t introduce large drops. The absence of minimums for most presets prevents precise bottleneck analysis, but the pattern of FPS dropping with resolution (rather than only with settings) points to GPU limitation as resolution rises.

The CPU’s power envelope is 65 W TDP, and it supports DDR4-3200 memory across dual channels, yielding 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth. The combined pair has access to modern API features, and the CPU’s PCIe Gen 4 support ensures the GPU is not starved for bandwidth.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS values reveal a strong dependency on resolution. From 1080p to 1440p, the average FPS at Medium drops from 131 to 86, a reduction of 34%. From 1440p to 4K, the same preset drops from 86 to 47, a further 45% decrease. These scaling rates are not linear—the drop from 1440p to 4K is steeper than from 1080p to 1440p—which suggests that the GPU’s pixel fill and bandwidth constraints become more prominent as the lead grows. For comparison, the High preset averages 112 FPS at 1080p, 73 FPS at 1440p (a 35% drop), and 40 FPS at 4K (another 45% drop). The Low preset shows the same pattern: 171, 111, and 61 FPS, with a 35% step and a 45% step, respectively.

These consistent multiplicative factors indicate that the game is not limited by the CPU at these settings. The CPU’s fixed cost (frame time) would not increase proportionally with pixel count unless it were involved in the render loop. The fact that 1080p yields frame rates above 100 FPS but 4K drops below 40 on most presets points to the GPU being the wall. The RX 6700 XT’s bandwidth and memory size remain consistent, and the scene is simple for a 2016 title, but the shader work scales with pixel area. At 4K, the card’s 13.21 TFLOPS and 384 GB/s memory combine to produce 40-47 FPS on filter presets, which is under 60 FPS. At 1440p, the same power yields 57 FPS at Ultra, which is borderline.

The data shows that the CPU’s 8-core/16-thread design keeps the frames flowing: the 1080p Low preset hits 171 FPS, which is well above the GPU’s frame in most situations. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect 1080p and 1440p frame differences to be small because the same CPU would be the wall. Instead, the FPS scales almost exactly with pixel count: from 1080p to 4K, the pixel area increases 4×, and the measured FPS for Medium falls from 131 to 47, which is a 2.8× reduction. That ratio is close to the square of the scaling — a GPU-bound scene often follows such an exponential. Thus, the data indicates that the Radeon RX 6700 XT becomes increasingly dominant in limiting performance as resolution rises, while the Ryzen 7 3700X provides sufficient headroom for the game’s AI and physics at all settings, including the low preset.

The performance at 4K Medium (47 FPS) is just below the 60 FPS target, and High averages 40 FPS. The Ultra preset is not viable at 4K. At 1440p, Ultra’s 57 FPS is close to the 60 FPS mark, while Medium gives 86 FPS. At 1080p, everything except Ultra is above 100 FPS. These results consolidate that the pair is best suited to 1080p with High presets, or 2 multiplies with Medium. For 4K, the Low preset is the only one that breaks 60, and even that is at 61.

All of this aligns the expected profile of a mid-range 2021 GPU and a 2019 8-core CPU: the CPU has ample threads and the GPU has sufficient raw compute for mainstream resolutions, but 4K Ultra asks for a degree of sustained performance that the 6700 XT cannot deliver in this game. The combination’s overall ranking of 1,938 out of 3,696 reflects this: competent for 1080p and 1440p, but not extraordinary.

The data provides no minimum or maximum values for the Low, High, and Ultra presets, so the only frame-time variance information comes from the Medium. Those numbers show 111–151 FPS at 1080p, 73–98 FPS at 1440p, and 40–54 FPS at 4K, which suggest smooth performance relative to the average with a standard deviations that fit expectations for GPU work. No stutter perceptible from these data alone, but the averages are high enough to indicate consistent rendering.