The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 action RPG, is the focus of this benchmark page, which examines the measured performance of an AMD Ryzen 7 5700 processor paired with an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 graphics card across 12 distinct configurations. Data has been captured at three resolutions—1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160—under Low, Medium, High, and Ultra preset levels, with average FPS recorded for all settings and minimum/maximum FPS recorded for Medium presets. The combination places 3568th out of 3696 tested combos in this game, indicating a generally low-performance pairing, though its behavior varies strongly with load type.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo achieves?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 68, obtained at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded?

A: The lowest average FPS is 13, observed at 3840x2160 on Ultra settings.

Q: How many processor cores does the Ryzen 7 5700 have?

A: The CPU has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

Q: What is the combo's rank among tested combinations?

A: The combo ranks 3,568th out of 3,696 tested combinations, meaning only 128 tested combos score lower in this game.

Q: How much VRAM does the GTX 1650 feature?

A: The GPU includes 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, with a 128-bit bus and 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: At which preset at 2560x1440 does the combo deliver a minimum FPS of 29?

A: At Medium settings, the 1440p run shows an average FPS of 34, with a minimum of 29 and maximum of 39.

GPU Role

The GTX 1650 forms the foundation of this combo's visual performance. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 VRAM is a significant factor; while this is modest by modern standards, it aligns with the 2016-era title The Technomancer, which relies heavily on texture streaming. The GPU's base clock runs at 1485 MHz, boosting to 1665 MHz, and its memory operates at 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The memory interface is 128 bits wide, delivering 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. Architecturally, the Turing-based TU117 chip contains 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The pixel rate is 53.28 GPixel/s and texture rate is 93.24 GTexel/s, while FP32 performance reaches 2.984 TFLOPS. DirectX 12 support is present at 12_1, alongside OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, making it adequate for a game released in 2016.

The GPU's global standing is that the 40th percentile of all GPUs (percentileVsAllGpus: 40), with an average benchmark score of 7472. When compared to its nearest rivals, the GTX 1650 sits within a narrow band: it trails the AMD Radeon HD 8850M by 0.3%, equals the Intel UHD Graphics 750’s margin at 0.4% slower, and is 0.6% above the AMD Radeon R7 350; it also sits 1% above an Intel Arc A310. These rival comparisons underscore that the GTX 1650 is a low-end card even among its contemporaries, and its role in The Technomancer is that of a bare-minimum drawing executor, not a high-fidelity performer.

In practice, the impact of the GPU is clearly visible across the resolution scaling. At 4K with High settings the average FPS drops to 16 and at Ultra to 13, almost certainly because the 4 GB VRAM and limited shading throughput cannot sustain the tessellation and shadow complexity of that title. The GTX 1650 is the primary hold on frame delivery; the CPU later shows it is not the constraint, so the experience in this benchmark is overwhelmingly drawn by the GPU's limitations.

How This Combo Ranks

The composite rank in The Technomancer places this pairing at 3,568th out of 3,696 combos, i.e., in the low 96.6th percentile overall. This means the Ryzen 7 5700 and GTX 1650 combination is nearly in the bottom 3% of all tested setups. The ranking is dominated by the GPU side, as the CPU is a much better performer. The CPU's percentile is 78% among all processors, and its average score of 25,517 is within a fourthtenth of a percent of rival Xeon D-2752TER (which scores 25,530), AMD Ryzen 5 7640U (25,485), AMD Ryzen 5 6600H (25,550), and AMD Ryzen 7 5825U (25,446). That yields a deltaPct of -0.1, +0.1, -0.1, and +0.3, respectively, showing a well-balanced mid-range CPU. The GPU, however, is in the 40th percentile with a loose slot of competitors such as the HD 8850M and R7 350. When these two are placed together, the ratio of CPU capability far exceeds GPU horsepower, so the game’s overall rank suffers greatly, as the measured frames are effectively GPU-limited.

The deep rank shows the tandem is not built for this title at any resolution except the lowest. For reference, being 128th from the bottom of the list says that most combos encountered today will likely provide a better frame average in The Technomancer. The combo ranking is a clear statement that the GTX 1650 restricts the experience to modest settings and resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured average FPS values, derived from the test data, are as follows. At 1920x1080, Low settings produce 68 average FPS, Medium 52 (with a 44–60 range), High 45, and Ultra 35. At 2560x1440, Low yields 44, Medium 34 (29–69), High 29, and Ultra 23. At 3840x2160, the numbers descend markedly: Low 24, Medium 19 (16–22), High 16, and Ultra 13. The 1440p and 4K resolution both have Medium setting ranges that are below the smooth threshold: 1440p Medium min is only 29 FPS, and 4K Medium min is merely 16 FPS, including frame drops experienced. This shows a steep cutoff as resolution climbs, with only the 1080p Low scenario and 1080p Medium actually exceeding the 45–60 range.

The specific values at each setting allow a direct evaluation of playability. At 1080p Medium the scale covers 44–60 FPS, which is the sweet spot of responsiveness, while High perhaps drops to 35 as an average. At 1440P, the Low preset sits at 44 FPS, but Medium is nearly 34 with a minimum of 29, which can induce noticeable irregularity. At 4K, even Low only reaches 16 FPS, which is not viable for interactive gaming. The data confirms that this hardware combination is boundary: it can maintain competitive framerates only at 1080p with reduced settings, and any attempt to run The Technomancer at high visual qualities must drop to average 35 frames or under, which is far from a fluid experience. The GPU is the force behind this.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate changes from 1080p to 1440p and then to 4K are large enough to expose the limiting component. At 1080p Low the combo delivers 68 FPS, which drops by 35% to 44 FPS at 1440p Low, and then drops to 24% of that raw value to 16 FPS at 4K Low (i.e., average 16). Comparing final numbers from 1080p High (20 FPS drop at 1440p to 29), then 16 Frames at 4K High yields only 16. The ratio at 1080p High is a ~35% performance when the resolution is quadrupled (since 1440 to 4k is from quad to six ). Overall, the data is clear: frame rate falls dramatically at each higher resolution, with the 1080p-to-1440p giving a 15% penalty for every of the average on Low and 32% on High.

This relationship matches the behavior of a GPU-bound system. Because the CPU has ample capacity on its side, it does not demonstrably interfere; the frame rate reduction nearly followsthe nature of pixel output. The GTX 1650's limited shading units, ROPs, and modest 128.1 GB/s memory bandwidth become the bottleneck when the raster resolution rises. At 4K the pixel throughput demand is roughly four times higher than 1080p, and the results show the GPU cannot keep up robustly, with Low settings at 4K only achieving 16 FPS, which is 24% of the 1080p performance. The scaling behavior strongly suggests the CPU does not limit at any resolution, because if CPU bound, the resolution would not change FPS so drastically, nor would the 1080p Low reach 68, which requires 8 full frames at two-dimensional overheads that the CPU could not maintain.

Thus, the GPU is the bottleneck across the board, and in resolution scaling, it amplifies the disadvantages.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 is responsible for feeding the GPU geometry and any CPU-Side logic. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, based on the Zen 3 architecture (code Cezanne), manufactured on a 7nm TSMC process with 10,700 million transistors and a 180 mm² die. The base clock is 3.70 GHz with a boost to 4.60 GHz, and the CPU draws a 65W TDP. The compatible memory channel is DDR4 dual-channel with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth; a 16 MB L3 cache. As for raw compute benchmarks, the processor scores 20655 in Cinebench R23 multicore, 2916 in single-core, and a Geekbench multicore of 9959 with a single-core of 1907. In 3DMark 16-thread is 6628, 2-thread 1762, 4-thread 3382. PassMark multithread is a high 24303 with single thread 3296.

In context, the core has a percentile of 78 among CPUs, with nearest rivals: Xeon D-2752TER (at -0.1%), Ryzen 7640U (at 0.1%), Ryzen 5 6600H (at -0.1%), Ryzen 7 5825U (at 0.3%). That puts the Ryzen 7 5700 well above the low end GPU. It clearly has enough stronger thread throughput to handle this game and the CPU requires no more than 4 to have extra headroom. Even in the lowest mix at 1080p Low, the game achieves 68 FPS, and the CPU must be delivering frames without trouble. The fact the maximum 8-thread and 16-thread performance is strong matches the demands of open-world RPG geometry calculations. There is no indication of CPU-bounded issues; near all performance loss after the resolution increases can be attributed to the GPU. In short, the Ryzen 7 5700 lives up to its 78th‑percentile standing, but it does nothing to salvage the GPU-limited final experience.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured FPS for each resolution and preset, the most comfortable experience occurs at 1920x1080 with the Medium preset. There the average reaches 52 FPS, with a minimum of 44 and maximum of 60, which are above the typical 30 FPS visual floor and keep the action smoothly. In High, the average falls to 45 FPS—still usable but lower and narrower—and for a more responsive feel, the Low preset at 63 becomes a compelling option, but at the cost of shader quality. However, the highest Ultra at 1080p yields 35 FPS, which is borderline and may feel jerky in combat heavy segments. The best optimization for 1080p is clearly Medium because it manages a 44 FPS floor.

At 1440p, the target should be Medium if the user prioritizes visual quality over frame stability. At Medium, average 34 FPS with minimum 29, while Low 44 FPS and High 29 and Ultra 23. Since minimum of Medium is only 29, a smooth 1440p gaming is not available—instead Low at 44 is the only 1440p preset that kept all-time average above 40, and even though it has full denotation quality, it remains the only comfortable setting. High and Ultra fall to the low 20s.

At 4K, none of the presets deliver an playable 30 FPS average. Low produces 16, Medium 19 (min 16), High 16, Ultra 13. A push for any 4K gaming with this combo would require scaling: essentially impossible. The data suggests that the only realistic setting that yields a fluid feel is 1080p Medium; any raising of the resolution or quality preset is discouraged solely by performance since the measured 128.1 GB/s of GPU bandwidth is insufficient for The Technomancer’s HD output. Users aiming for a stable 60 FPS should select 1080p Low; medium will provide a fancier look for a modest minority added. Overall, the best experience per measured rows is 1080p Medium, followed by 1080p Low when requested to guarantee frame stability.