The Technomancer

The Technomancer is an Action RPG with a 2016 release date. The dataset measures the AMD Ryzen 7 5700X paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT, covering Low, Medium, High, and Ultra settings at 1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160. All FPS values are measured results, and every figure in this analysis comes from that measurement block.

Resolution Scaling

At 1920x1080 High, the combination averages 99.6 FPS. At 2560x1440 High it falls to 61.2 FPS, and at 3840x2160 High it lands at 36 FPS. That sequence is the clearest picture of resolution scaling in this dataset: raising resolution from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 cuts the High preset average from 99.6 FPS down to 36 FPS. The same steep curve appears on Low settings, where 1920x1080 produces 150.1 FPS, 2560x1440 produces 97.9 FPS, and 3840x2160 drops to 53.7 FPS. On Ultra, the 1920x1080 result is 77.5 FPS, the 2560x1440 result is 48.8 FPS, and the 3840x2160 result is 24.9 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the settings spread runs from 150.1 FPS on Low to 77.5 FPS on Ultra. At 3840x2160, the same spread runs from 53.7 FPS on Low to 24.9 FPS on Ultra. The absolute range narrows as resolution climbs, which is the signature of a GPU-bound configuration at high pixel counts. The CPU has enough performance to produce 150.1 FPS at Low settings, so the 53.7 FPS at 4K Low is not a CPU limitation; it is the GPU’s resolution cost. The limiting component at 3840x2160 is the graphics card, with the CPU providing a stable platform underneath.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is an RDNA 2.0 GPU built on TSMC’s 7 nm process, using the Navi 23 chip with 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die. The chip has 2048 shading units, 128 texture units, 64 ROPs, and 32 RT cores. Its clock plan is 2055 MHz base, 2410 MHz game, and 2635 MHz boost. Memory is 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with a 2190 MHz memory clock, 17.5 Gbps effective speed, and 280.3 GB/s bandwidth. The GPU’s FP32 throughput is 10.79 TFLOPS, its pixel rate is 168.6 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 337.3 GTexel/s. These specifications sit in the middle portion of the database’s GPU population, and the GPU’s aggregate benchmark score is 29024, placing it in the 72nd percentile.

Within that population, the nearest rivals by aggregate score are the Radeon RX 6800M at 29011 with a delta of 0, the Radeon RX 470 at 28996 with a delta of 0.1, the Intel Arc A370M at 29175 with a delta of -0.5, and the Radeon RX Vega M GH at 29197 with a delta of -0.6. The RX 6650 XT is therefore effectively tied with the RX 6800M in synthetic average, slightly ahead of the RX 470, and behind the Arc A370M and RX Vega M GH by small margins. In focused graphics benchmarks, the GPU scores 1859 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 93769 in Geekbench Vulkan, and 17166 in PassMark G3D.

Those aggregate scores do not translate into strong 4K results in The Technomancer. The 8 GB buffer and 128-bit memory bus deliver 280.3 GB/s, but the 4K Ultra average is 24.9 FPS and the 4K High average is 36 FPS. Even at 4K Low, where the CPU is least involved, the average is only 53.7 FPS. The GPU’s clocks can sustain 1920x1080 performance—99.6 FPS on High and 77.5 FPS on Ultra—but at 3840x2160 the same clocks cannot overcome the resolution demand placed on the memory subsystem and shading resources.

CPU Role

On the processor side, the AMD Ryzen 7 5700X is an 8-core, 16-thread Zen 3 (Vermeer) part for Socket AM4. It runs at 3.40 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost, with a 65 W TDP, 7 nm process, 4,150 million transistors, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. Its Cinebench R23 scores are 22620 multi-core and 3193 single-core. In Geekbench it scores 9720 multi-core and 2148 single-core. PassMark results show 26612 multithread and 3385 single-thread. The processor ranks in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs with an aggregate benchmark score of 26214.

Among nearest CPU rivals, the Intel Core i9-11900KF scores 26196 with a delta of 0.1, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850U scores 26262 with a delta of -0.2, the AMD Ryzen 5 5500GT scores 26161 with a delta of 0.2, and the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X scores 26272 with a delta of -0.2. The 5700X’s aggregate score is essentially aligned with all four, meaning CPU-side differences are unlikely to move this configuration’s rank dramatically in CPU-sensitive tests.

In The Technomancer, the CPU role is visible mainly through the high frame-rate ceiling at 1920x1080. Low settings produce 150.1 FPS, Medium produces 114.6 FPS, High produces 99.6 FPS, and Ultra produces 77.5 FPS. Those numbers place the CPU far enough ahead of the GPU that the graphics card becomes the first component to saturate as resolution increases. The 4K Low result of 53.7 FPS is much lower than the 1920x1080 Low result, despite the CPU remaining in the same state, confirming that The Technomancer’s resolution scaling is driven by graphics load rather than by core count or clock speed.

How This Combo Ranks

The combined rank of this exact configuration in The Technomancer is 1077 out of 1656 tested combos. The CPU’s percentile vs all CPUs is 83, and the GPU’s percentile vs all GPUs is 72, so both components score above the middle of their respective synthetic distributions. Yet the in-game rank is not correspondingly high. This gap indicates that The Technomancer’s rendering workload is less favorable to this pairing than many other tested combinations.

Part of the reason is the 4K penalty. This configuration falls to 53.7 FPS or lower once the resolution reaches 3840x2160, and the 4K Ultra preset sits at 24.9 FPS. In a database where many tested combinations can maintain higher average frame rates, that 4K behavior pushes the combo down. The rank of 1077 out of 1656 is a clear summary: the CPU and GPU are individually capable, but their combined measured FPS in The Technomancer places them toward the lower end of the field.

Measured FPS Breakdown

| Resolution | Settings | Average FPS |

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

| 1920x1080 | Low | 150.1 |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 114.6 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 99.6 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 77.5 |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 97.9 |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 73.2 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 61.2 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 48.8 |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 53.7 |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 38.3 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 36 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 24.9 |

The table lists average FPS only; minimum and maximum FPS values are not provided. The ordering within each resolution is consistent: Low produces the highest average, Ultra the lowest, at every resolution. At 1920x1080 the range is from 150.1 FPS on Low to 77.5 FPS on Ultra. At 2560x1440 the range is from 97.9 FPS on Low to 48.8 FPS on Ultra. At 3840x2160 the range is from 53.7 FPS on Low to 24.9 FPS on Ultra.

Comparing settings across resolutions shows how quickly the GPU’s resolution cost accumulates. The 2560x1440 High result is 61.2 FPS, versus 99.6 FPS at 1920x1080 High and 36 FPS at 3840x2160 High. The 2560x1440 Low result of 97.9 FPS is already below the 1920x1080 High result of 99.6 FPS. At 3840x2160, even Low settings cannot reach the 2560x1440 Ultra result of 48.8 FPS; the 4K Low average is 53.7 FPS, followed by Medium at 38.3 FPS, High at 36 FPS, and Ultra at 24.9 FPS. These measurements form the basis for the GPU-bound interpretation of the higher-resolution results.