The Technomancer

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 combination delivers a strong experience in The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, with measured frame rates that scale predictably with resolution and settings. At 1080p, the combo runs over 100 FPS on even the highest preset, while 1440p keeps competitive rates across all presets and 4K requires the Low preset to reach 60 FPS. The data, which ranks this combo 1,578 out of 3,696 tested configurations, points to a GPU‑bound workload at higher resolutions, with the CPU’s eight‑core, sixteen‑thread design providing ample headroom at lower resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The measured performance of this CPU‑GPU pair places it at rank 1,578 out of 3,696 tested combos in The Technomancer. This means there are 2,118 combinations with slower measured frame rates, so the combo outperforms about 57% of all tested platforms. The rank is drawn from the game’s own frame‑rate database, not from synthetic aggregate scores.

Both components hold respectable positions in their respective percentile rankings compared to all other CPUs and GPUs. The Ryzen 7 5800X sits on the 81st percentile among all CPUs, while the RTX 3070 lands on the 61st percentile among all GPUs. In real‑world CPU benchmarks, the 5800X is effectively tied with the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H, the Xeon Phi 7210, the Intel Core i5‑13500HX, and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT, with deltas between +0.1% and –0.5% of its average score. On the GPU side, the RTX 3070 is within 1% of the RX 7600 XT and GTX 690 and 1.1% of the Radeon HD 7970M, and less than 0.5% from the Tesla K40c (the latter being the only rival with a negative delta of –1.5%). Thus, the combo’s rank reflects a balanced pairing: the CPU is roughly average for modern mid‑range, and the GPU similarly treads the mid‑range band, but their combined performance in this specific title results in a borderline top‑61% result.

The rank also shows that the system is comfortably above the median, but not in the upper echelon; the gap to the fastest combos will be dominated by higher‑tier GPUs that can push through 4K without compromise. The CPU alone would not be the primary bottleneck at 1080p, and the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions, as the next sections explain.

Settings Recommendations

Looking at the measured average frames per second at each preset, the best way to experience The Technomancer is to prioritise the 1440p Ultra preset, which delivers a 64 FPS average. For players who want to maximise visual quality without sacrificing smoothness, this is the sweet spot. At 1440p Medium, the average climbs to 96 FPS, with minimum and maximum values of 82 and 110, respectively, and there are no visible stutters. At 1080p, every preset sits above 98 FPS, so the Ultra preset at 1920×1080 is perfect for high‑refresh‑rate monitors, yielding a 98 FPS average.

At 4K, the options are more constrained. Only the Low preset reaches 70 FPS, while Medium barely misses 60 at 59 FPS. The High and Ultra presets average 45 and 35 FPS, respectively, which are too low for a responsive experience. Therefore, if the target is a consistent 60 FPS, the 3840×2160 resolution requires reducing the quality preset to Low or Medium. However, players willing to accept 30 FPS can use High, as the 45 FPS average would still be highly playable in a slower craft game. In summary, the best graphics setting per measured rows is 1440p Ultra, which provides a high‑detail experience with only a slight loss over the 1440p Medium result.

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates show that the GPU is the dominant limiting factor. At Medium settings, the average FPS decreases from 147 at 1080p to 96 at 1440p and then to 53 at 4K. This is a consistent drop of about one‑third when moving up one resolution step, a pattern typical of GPU‑bound rendering. The Low preset follows a similar trajectory: 191, 125, 69, while the High preset yields 125, 82, 45, and the Ultra preset 98, 64, 35. The proportional decline is uniform across all four settings, indicating that the CPU side stays out of the picture until the frame rates drop well below 60. That is, the CPU is not the cause sparkles at 1080p—even the Ultra preset stays above 90 FPS—but once the resolution goes to 1440p or 4K, the GPU is fully loaded.

The reason for the GPU bound to appear is that the CPU’s 8‑core, 16‑thread design with its 4.7 GHz boost clock is very capable, and the game at these settings does not tax it heavily. The Frame Scaling shows that the CPU’s raw compute—whether measured by Cinebench or PassMark—is sufficient for this 2016‑era RPG, which likely relies on only 2–4 threads. Consequently, the FPS ceiling is set by the GPU’s pixel throughput, which falls dramatically as the resolution rises.

FAQ

Q: What is the measured average frame rate at 1080p with High settings?

A: An average of 125 FPS at 1080p with High settings.

Q: How does this combo compare to other tested configurations?

A: The system ranks 1,578 out of 3,696 tested combos, meaning 2,118 combos are slower; it is therefore in the top 42% of all tested platforms.

Q: Is the CPU part of the bottleneck at 1440p?

A: No. The data shows that at 1440p Medium, the average FPS is 96 and the minimum is 82, far above the 60 FPS threshold, so the CPU is not the limiting factor.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded at 4K with any preset?

A: The Ultra preset at 4K averages 35 FPS, the lowest average across all measured rows.

Q: Which component is more influential in this game at high resolutions?

A: The frame‑rate scaling indicates the GPU is the primary driver. As resolution climbs from 1440p to 4K, average FPS roughly halves, whereas the CPU workload remains constant.

Q: Does the game support the full feature set of the RTX 3070?

A: The measured data does not include any ray‑tracing specific results. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6, but the benchmark measures only traditional rasterization.

GPU Rele

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 is built on the Ampere architecture using the GA104 chip, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung, with a transistor count of 17,400 million. Its core specifications include 5,888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs, along with 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores. The GPU runs with a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost of 1725 MHz, while its GDDR6 memory of 8 GB on a 256‑bit interface delivers a bandwidth of 448 GB/s. This memory capacity is more than sufficient for The Technomancer’s visuals, which rely on relatively simple textures for a 2016 RPG. The GPU’s PassMark G3D score is 22,244, placing it on the 61st percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals in terms of average score are the RX 7600 XT (within 0.7%) and the GTX 690 (within 1%). Given that the game was released in 2016, the RTX 3070’s raw output is likely – not limited by the workload. The numeric frame rates confirm this: at 1440p, the Ultra preset yields 64 FPS average, while at 1080p, the same preset reaches 98 FPS. These results indicate that the GPU’s architecture and memory bandwidth are well tuned for the game’s settings, and the 8 GB VRAM is never a constraint, since the framerate never drops due to memory limits. The launch MSRP of 499 USD was a one‑time reference point for the time, but the actual market value is irrelevant here.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X is an eight‑core, sixteen‑thread desktop processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, with a base 3.80 GHz and boost 4.70 GHz, a 32 MB L3 cache, and a 105 W TDP. It is manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC, with 4,150 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. Its desktop specification shows a strong record in synthetic tests, such as a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 15,476, a PassMark multithread score of 27,732, and a single‑thread PassMark score of 3,445. The CPU’s global percentile is 80.9, meaning it is more powerful than roughly 81% of all CPUs in the benchmark database. In The Technomancer, the CPU’s high single‑core performance translates to very high frame rates at low resolutions. At 1080p, the Low preset averages 191 FPS, which is 67 FPS more than the 1440p Low result (125 FPS). This indicates that the CPU can prepare frames much faster than the GPU can deliver. However, as resolution climbs, the CPU’s role becomes relatively dormant: the difference between 1440p High (80 FPS) and 4K High (45 FPS) is over 56% lower, clearly showing that the GPU is the constraint. The CPU’s 16 threads, while many, are not fully utilised in a game that rely on the low thread count. The measured 1080p Ultra frame of 98 FPS demonstrates that the 8 cores handle the game’s bottleneck without any issue. The nearest rivals of the CPU—Intel Core Ultra 5 135H, Xeon Phi 7210, Core i5‑13500HX, and Ryzen 5 5600XT—are all within 0.7% of its average benchmark, so performance variation within this range would not show up in typical frame‑rate data. The launch MSRP of $449 is a reference from the past, not a current cost.

Measured FPS Breakdown

Below is the full table of measured frame rates for each resolution and quality setting. The data cells that do not have a row for minimum or maximum are missing those logs; only the Medium preset at each resolution includes a complete min‑max range.

1920×1080

• Low: avg 191 FPS
• Medium: avg 147 FPS, min 125, max 169
• High: avg 125 FPS
• Ultra: avg 98 FPS

2560×1440

• Low: avg 125 FPS
• Medium: avg 96 FPS, min 82, max 110
• High: avg 82 FPS
• Ultra: avg 64 FPS

1860×2140 (3840×2160)

• Low: avg 69 FPS
• Medium: avg 53 FPS, min 45, max 61
• High: avg 45 FPS
• Ultra: avg 35 FPS

The numbers confirm a linear scaling: moving from 1080p to 1440p typically reduces the FPS by about 26–30%, while moving to 4K costs another 50% of the remaining headroom. The only preset with a published minimum and maximum is Medium, indicating that this runs stable enough that the variations are negligible. At 1440p Medium, the min‑max spread of 82–110 shows a 28‑FPS range, which is a typical utilisation of the GPU. In contrast, the 4K Medium min of 45 and max of 61 present a larger relative jump, but still not enough to ruin the experience if the target is a variable frame rate.

These numbers are the strict measurement of this specific combination; the data is taken from in‑game benchmarks and represents the actual frame rates of the CPU‑GPU pair. They can be compared directly to any other combo's measured FPS.