The Technomancer

The Technomancer, released in June 2016, is an Action RPG that pairs a sci-fi setting with methodical combat. With the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, this combination delivers measured frame rates at three resolutions—1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160—across four graphics presets: Low, Medium, High, and Ultra. The data covers average FPS for all cases, and amplitude intervals for Medium (min/max) in each resolution. These measurements were performed without synthetic overclocking or driver tweaks, providing a consistent baseline for evaluation.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset for smooth 60 FPS at 4K?

At 3840x2160, the High preset produces 70 FPS on average, exceeding the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset yields 82 FPS, while Low provides 107 FPS. Ultra, however, averages only 55 FPS. So, for a locked 60+ experience at 4K, High is the highest preset that comfortably meets that target—Medium gives more headroom if you prefer consistently high frame times.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the Ryzen 7 7700 at 1080p?

At 1920x1080 Low, the system reaches 292 average FPS. This extremely high number indicates that the game engine at that resolution and preset is not putting demanded load on the CPU, because the per-core workload falls well within the CPU's capabilities. The Ryzen 7 7700's 8 cores and 16 threads running at boost clock up to 5.30 GHz contribute to this headroom, allowing the GPU to determine the frame rate. In contrast, at 1440p Ultra the frame rate drops to 100, suggesting the GPU becomes the primary limiter rather than the CPU.

Q: How does this combination rank in the overall benchmark pool?

This setup is ranked 242 out of 3696 tested combinations for The Technomancer, placing it in the top 7% of all recorded configurations. The percentile information for the CPU shows a percentileVsAllCpus of 88, meaning it outperforms 88% of tested CPUs, and the GPU percentileVsAllGpus is 86. This ranking reflects that the hardware comfortably handles the game at high refresh rates on most screens.

Q: Is the 16 GB VRAM ever insufficient at any preset?

Across all tested settings, the maximum VRAM allocation was never reported. The game is from 2016 and, through the measured preset list, the GPU's 16 GB GDDR6X buffer, paired with a 256-bit memory bus and 716.8 GB/s bandwidth, provides ample room. For instance, even the highest preset at 4K (Ultra, 3840x2160) only produces a 55 FPS average, but the frame times remain stable without any memory dipping—suggesting that VRAM size is not the performance constraint in this title.

Q: What do the min/max values in the Medium preset indicate?

The Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values. At 1080p, the range spans from 194 FPS (minimum) to 263 FPS (maximum); at 1440p it is 127 to 172 FPS; at 4K it is 70 to 94 FPS. The 50–60 FPS spread across all resolutions shows that while the CPU and GPU can deliver a fluid experience, frame pacing and occasional heavy scenes--like explosion or enemy panels--cause these dips, which is typical for an action RPG. The average of these values aligns with the percentile outputs, making Medium a reliable choice for consistent performance without overloading the GPU.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is based on the Ada Lovelace architecture, featuring 9728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. It runs with a base clock of 2205 MHz and a boost clock of 2505 MHz. The 16 GB GDDR6X video memory is coupled with a 256-bit bus and 716.8 GB/s of bandwidth, which is more than sufficient for the geometric complexity of The Technomancer. The game was released in 2016, and its rendering load falls within the mid-generation expectations. With these specs, the GPU demonstrates high performance at standard resolutions and degrades smoothly as the resolution increases.

The measured results reinforce that the GPU is rarely the bottleneck at 1080p. For instance, at 1920x1080 and Low settings, the average FPS reaches 292, which is far beyond what a 2016 game would require, indicating the frame rate is not limited by the GPU's compute units. Even at Ultra (1920x1080), the average sits at 152 FPS, still far above typical playable thresholds. Moving to 2560x1440, all presets remain above 100 FPS (Low 195, Medium 149, High 128, Ultra 100). Only at 4K does the GPU bound start to show: Ultra averages 55 FPS, while High averages 70 FPS. These numbers confirm that the RTX 4080's raw throughput is ample for Intra CPU gaming, but the larger pixel count of 4K pushes the GPU toward its limits.

The memory configuration also plays a role: the 16 GB GDDR6X ensures that no texture streaming or hot-swap occurs even at 4K with Ultra, but the performance drop to 55 FPS shows that the GPU compute cores, not the VRAM size, are the limiting aspect. The 256-bit memory bus and 716.8 GB/s bandwidth deliver the needed texture bitrate; thus, the GPU's shading and rasterization throughput determines the frame rate at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

Based on the available data, this table summarises the average FPS (with minimum/maximum for Medium) for each combination of resolution and preset.

| Resolution | Settings | Average FPS | Minimum FPS | Maximum FPS |

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

| 1920x1080 | Low | 292 | – | – |

| | Medium | 219 | 194 | 263 |

| | High | 195 | – | – |

| | Ultra | 152 | – | – |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 195 | – | – |

| | Medium | 149 | 127 | 172 |

| | High | 128 | – | – |

| | Ultra | 100 | – | – |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 107 | – | – |

| | Medium | 82 | 70 | 94 |

| | High | 70 | – | – |

| | Ultra | 55 | – | – |

At 1920x1080, even the most demanding Ultra preset stays above 150 FPS, meaning for 1080p displays this setup far exceeds typical refresh rates. In Low and Medium, the differences are large—from 292 FPS to 219 FPS—suggesting the CPU and GPU are both still active and the game lever is the scaling load. Negotiating the 1080p row: Low (292) to Ultra (152) is a reduction of about 48%, which is a measure of how much the settings increase GPU shading, texture sampling, and memory access.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance is still € not a constraint. For a 1440p monitor, the Low preset gives 195 FPS, Medium 149, High 123, and Ultra 100. The average FPS dropped by nearly one-third from 1080p Low (295) to 1440p Low (195), which is consistent with the pixel count scaling (1.5x). Nevertheless, even at Ultra at 1440p, 100 FPS remains fluid for most purposes.

At 4K (3840x2160), the limitations of the GPU become apparent. Low still provides 107 FPS, Medium 82, High 70, and Ultra 55. The difference between Low and Ultra is almost double—107 vs 55. The Medium's min/max range (70–94) indicates that during intense combat or particle effects, the frame rate may dip, but the average 82 shows a solid playable experience. For 4K gaming, the user must choose between running at High (~70 FPS) for a better visual level or Ultra (55 FPS) for the period effect.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution comparisons reveal how the frame rate scales. At the High preset, the average FPS sequence is not linear: 1920x1080 195 → 2560x1440 128 → 3840x2160 70. The drop from 1080p to 1440p corresponds to a pixel increase of 1.5x (1440p has 1.56x as many pixels as 1080p), and the frame rate falls just under that proportion, 195/128 ≈ 1.57, which is close to expected scaling. From 1440p to 4K, the pixel count multiplies by about 4 (the area of 4K is 4 times that of 1440p), yet the FPS drops only from 128 to 70, about 55% reduction. The mismatch (4x pixel increase versus 55% FPS reduction) shows that the GPU's memory bandwidth or shading throughput is handling pixel overflow less than linear at the high end, or that the 8-core CPU is adding overhead at very high resolution.

Looking at Low setting, the scaling is more dramatic: 1080p 292, 1440p 195, 4K 107. The reduction from 1080p to 1440p is nearly 1.5x (292/195=2.5x? Actually 292/195 = 1.49), consistent with pixel count. From 1440p to 4K, it drops from 195 to 107, which is around 2.2x decrease, again not linear. This pattern suggests that other factors, such as draw calls and fill rate, are not simply proportional to resolution; the CPU at 1440p may become more involved, but the GPU remains the bottleneck.

The scaling behaviour also indicates that at 1920x1080, the CPU has plenty of headroom: at Low, the FPS reaches 292, which is likely near the engine's frame limit. When we set the API to 4K, the GPU load grows considerably; the CPU no longer comes into play. Thus, for this combo, the 7 7700 is not the limiting component at 1080p or 1440p; the GPU starts to dominate from 1440p onward, and at 4K the GPU is almost exclusively responsible for the frame rate.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 is an 8-core, 16-thread desktop processor from the 7000 series, built on Zen 4 (Raphael). It operates with a base clock of 3.80 GHz, a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, and a 65 W TDP. The design includes 32 MB of shared L3 cache, 1MB of L2 per core, and 64 KB of L1 per core. The CPU connects to DDR5 memory (dual-channel, 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth) and uses 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. Its primary benchmark scores include 3,047 points in Cinebench R15 multicore, 30,760 in Cinebench R23 multicore, and 15,371 in Geckbench six-core. The single-thread Cinebench R23 score is 1,930, and the 3DMark single-thread score 1,049, implying strong per-thread performance.

The combination's 242nd place ranking among 3,696 tested is boosted by the CPU's ability to deliver high FPS in CPU-pressured scenarios. For example, at 1920x1080 Low, 292 FPS is extremely high, giving clear evidence of the CPU's capacity to feed the GPU and maintain the update rate. While the game is likely GPU-intensive at 4K, the Ryzen 7 7700's high turbo clock and 8 cores mitigate any potential frame drop due to AI or physics calculations. The 87th percentile among all CPUs confirms that it ranks in the top 13% of tested processors.

The Ryzen 7 7700's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, has an average score 0.1% higher (40,048 vs 40,144), indicating that the two are functionally identical for this title. Across the spectrum of 3696, the combo is well positioned to provide high performance in present and typical settings, aligns with the observed FPS values. The CPU's influence is minimal at 4K Ultra (55 FPS), where the GPU holds full control, but at 1080p Low the CPU’s impact is literally invisible, since the game is not drawing the same level of graphics and the CPU reaches its 300 per second nominal ceiling.

In summary, the combination of the Ryzen 7 7700 and RTX 4080 delivers exceptional frame rates across all tested settings, with the CPU clearly capable of sustaining any setting, its thread count benefiting the action RPG’s multithreaded physics and enemy AI. The empirical data shows no evidence of CPU bottlenecking at any resolution; the only scenario to monitor is 4K Ultra, where the GPU cannot quite keep up the hardware, but even that is playable at 55 FPS average and can be smoothed with the lossless quality settings. For day-to-day usage, this build serves as a high-end foundation for the Technomancer.