The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents a demanding workload for the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination. The measured data reveals a system that is heavily constrained by the graphics card, with the CPU's substantial processing power largely left untapped at higher resolutions. This analysis breaks down the performance metrics across the tested configurations, highlighting the bottlenecks and capabilities of this specific hardware pairing.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is severe and clearly illustrates the GPU-bound nature of this pairing. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 46 FPS at 1920x1080 to 26.9 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of approximately 41%. The decline continues to 17.2 FPS at 3840x2160, which is a 63% decrease from the 1080p result. This scaling pattern indicates that the GeForce GTX 1650 is the primary limiting factor, as the pixel throughput demand outpaces its capabilities.

The data shows that even moving from 1080p to 1440p cuts performance by over a third, making 1440p a marginal experience for this title. The 4K results are universally below playable thresholds, with even the Low preset failing to reach 30 FPS. The resolution scaling is not linear; the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens as resolution increases, suggesting that the GPU's memory bandwidth and processing units are saturated early. The 128-bit memory bus and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth of the GTX 1650 are insufficient for the 8.3 million pixels in 4K, leading to the sub-20 FPS figures observed. The CPU, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, is not the constraining factor here; the data points to a pure graphics bottleneck.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the decisive component in this benchmark. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory is a critical limitation, as The Technomancer's textures and effects at higher settings likely exceed this capacity, causing performance to plummet. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS collapses to 10.5, a figure that is practically unplayable and indicates severe memory pressure. The GPU's core clocks of 1485 MHz base and 1665 MHz boost are modest, and the 896 shading units are tasked with a heavy load in this title.

The GTX 1650's benchmark scores place it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8713. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (with a deltaPct of -0.4%) and the AMD Radeon 550X (also -0.4%), showing that it sits in a performance class that is not designed for high-end gaming. The data shows that the GPU's DirectX 12 score of 35 and DirectX 11 score of 58 in Passmark are low, which correlates with the poor frame rates at higher resolutions. The 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors confirm this is an entry-level solution, and the benchmark results bear this out. In this game, the GPU is the definitive bottleneck; the CPU's potential is never realized because the graphics card cannot render frames fast enough to utilize it.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 provides a stark contrast to the GPU's limitations. With 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 4 architecture, it offers immense processing power that is largely idle in this scenario. Its benchmark results are impressive, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 29302 and a single-core score of 4136. The CPU's 5.30 GHz boost clock and 32 MB of L3 cache make it more than capable of handling game logic and physics. The Passmark multi-thread score of 34470 and single-thread score of 4063 place it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, far exceeding the demands of a 2016 title.

The data suggests that the CPU role is to provide a stable foundation without introducing any frame rate limits. The difference between the 1080p Low and Ultra settings (68 FPS vs 37.8 FPS) is entirely attributable to the GPU's workload, not CPU processing. The Ryzen 7 7700's nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H (deltaPct of 0.1%) and Intel Core i9-13905H (deltaPct of -0.6%), have similar average scores, confirming that this CPU is in a high-performance tier. Its 65 W TDP and 5 nm process node make it efficient, but in this benchmark, its power is underutilized. The CPU is effectively a non-factor; it is the GPU that dictates the playability of The Technomancer.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of the system's capabilities across different settings and resolutions. At 1920x1080, the system is playable at most settings. Low settings yield an average of 68 FPS, which is smooth and responsive. Medium settings reduce this to 54.4 FPS, still a playable figure. High settings drop to 46 FPS, which is acceptable for an Action RPG. Ultra settings are the most taxing, resulting in 37.8 FPS, which is borderline but still playable on a standard 60 Hz display.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance becomes more strained. Low settings produce 44.9 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. Medium settings drop to 36.1 FPS, and High settings fall to 26.9 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay. Ultra settings at 1440p yield 23.4 FPS, making the game feel sluggish and unresponsive. At 3840x2160, the system is overwhelmed. Low settings average 25.5 FPS, Medium settings 21.6 FPS, High settings 17.2 FPS, and Ultra settings a mere 10.5 FPS. None of the 4K results are playable, and even the lowest settings fail to provide a consistent experience.

The data shows a clear pattern: the GTX 1650 can handle 1080p gaming with reduced settings, but struggles at higher resolutions. The jump from 1080p to 1440p represents a significant loss in performance across all settings, and 4K is not a viable option. The combo rank of 1570 out of 1656 combinations indicates that this pairing is at the lower end of the performance spectrum for this game, confirming the GPU's inadequacy for demanding resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the playable resolution for this system in The Technomancer?

A: The data indicates that 1920x1080 is the only viable resolution. At Low settings, the system achieves 68 FPS, and even at Ultra, it maintains 37.8 FPS. 1440p and 4K results fall below acceptable thresholds.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 has an average benchmark score of 40468, which is 0.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H and 0.5% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365. It is 0.6% lower than the Intel Core i9-13905H.

Q: Is the GPU's memory capacity a limiting factor?

A: Yes, the 4 GB of GDDR5 memory is a significant limitation. The performance drop from 37.8 FPS at 1080p Ultra to 10.5 FPS at 4K Ultra suggests that memory capacity and bandwidth are being exhausted, causing severe frame rate drops.

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

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the system achieves an average of 36.1 FPS. This is below the 60 FPS target and is not ideal for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the GPU's benchmark score position it among its peers?

A: The GPU has an average benchmark score of 8713, placing it in the 43rd percentile. It performs 0.4% worse than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile and 0.5% better than the NVIDIA Quadro P2200.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU in this game?

A: No. The data shows that the CPU is not a bottleneck. Its high benchmark scores (e.g., 29302 in Cinebench R23 multi-core) far exceed the game's requirements, and the frame rate differences across settings are entirely due to GPU load.