The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents a demanding workload for the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination. The data shows a system that is consistently bound by the graphics card, with performance scaling that reveals the limitations of the GTX 1650’s 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory interface. This analysis breaks down the measured frames per second (FPS) across resolutions and settings to characterize the experience.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 produces a steep performance cliff, indicating a severe GPU bottleneck. At High settings, average FPS drops from 42.6 at 1080p to 27.7 at 1440p, a 35% reduction, and then plummets to 17.4 at 4K, a further 37% drop from 1440p. This non-linear scaling is typical of a card whose memory bandwidth (128.1 GB/s) and 4 GB frame buffer are overwhelmed by the pixel throughput required at higher resolutions.

The most telling data point is the Ultra preset. At 1080p, Ultra yields 37.5 FPS, which is only 12% lower than High. However, at 4K, Ultra collapses to 9.7 FPS, a 44% reduction from the High preset's 4K score. This is a clear sign that the Ultra settings are not just increasing shader complexity but are likely exceeding the card's memory capacity, forcing spillover that cripples performance. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 4K (23.7 FPS to 9.7 FPS) shows a 59% performance spread, versus a 43% spread at 1080p (65.3 FPS to 37.5 FPS), confirming that the higher resolutions amplify the cost of every graphical feature.

The data suggests that the CPU (AMD Ryzen 7 7700X) is not the limiting factor at any resolution. The Ryzen 7 7700X, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, is more than capable of feeding the GTX 1650. The benchmark results indicate that the GPU’s fillrate and memory subsystem are the primary constraints, particularly as resolution scales. The 4K results are largely academic, as they fall well below playable thresholds, but they serve to highlight the extreme pressure placed on the GTX 1650’s 4 GB of GDDR5 memory.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal experience for this combination is at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. This configuration achieves an average of 65.3 FPS, which is the only setting that provides a consistently smooth, high-refresh-rate experience. The Low preset at 1080p offers a 25.7% performance advantage over Medium (51.9 FPS) and a 42.7% advantage over High (42.6 FPS), making it the clear choice for fluid gameplay.

For users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, the High preset at 1080p (42.6 FPS) is the highest quality setting that remains technically playable. The jump from Medium to High costs 9.3 FPS (18% reduction) but provides a moderate visual uplift. The Ultra preset at 1080p (37.5 FPS) is not recommended, as it only offers a 5.1 FPS improvement over High while consuming significantly more GPU resources, as evidenced by its performance collapse at 1440p and 4K.

At 2560x1440, the situation is more constrained. The Low preset (44.2 FPS) is the only playable option, while Medium (31.7 FPS) and High (27.7 FPS) fall into a stutter-prone territory. The data shows that 1440p is the practical ceiling for this GPU, and even then, only with the lowest graphical settings. The 4K resolution is not viable for gameplay, as even the Low preset (23.7 FPS) fails to reach a consistent 30 FPS threshold. In summary, the best experience per the measured rows is 1080p/Low for performance and 1080p/High for visual quality at the edge of playability.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the decisive component in this pairing. Its role is defined by its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The benchmark results indicate that this memory configuration is the primary bottleneck in The Technomancer. The core clocks (base 1485 MHz, boost 1665 MHz) are adequate, but the card’s 896 shading units and 32 ROPs are insufficient to handle the pixel fill requirements of higher resolutions.

The data shows a clear relationship between VRAM pressure and performance. The 4K Ultra result of 9.7 FPS is a catastrophic drop that cannot be explained by shader complexity alone. It is indicative of the GPU exceeding its memory capacity, leading to severe performance degradation. The 4 GB frame buffer is simply too small for the texture and geometry data required at 4K Ultra, a limitation that is masked at 1080p but becomes crippling as resolution increases.

The GTX 1650's position in the market is reflected in its percentile rank of 43, placing it below the median GPU. Its nearest rivals, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (deltaPct -0.4) and AMD Radeon 550X (deltaPct -0.4), show that it is competitive with entry-level mobile parts, but it is far outclassed by modern desktop mid-range options. In this game, the GPU’s 4 GB memory and 128-bit bus are the hard limits; the CPU’s potential is never fully utilized. The GPU is the sole arbiter of the frame rates observed.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the performance envelope. At 1920x1080, the card delivers 65.3 FPS on Low, 51.9 FPS on Medium, 42.6 FPS on High, and 37.5 FPS on Ultra. This shows a predictable scaling pattern where each preset tier reduces performance by roughly 10-15 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops significantly. The Low preset yields 44.2 FPS, Medium drops to 31.7 FPS, High to 27.7 FPS, and Ultra to 20.7 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium at this resolution is 12.5 FPS, a larger absolute drop than at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is starting to struggle with the increased pixel count.

At 3840x2160, the results are largely unplayable. Low produces 23.7 FPS, Medium 21 FPS, High 17.4 FPS, and Ultra collapses to 9.7 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is a massive 14 FPS, or a 59% reduction, highlighting the exponential cost of high settings at this resolution. The data shows that the GTX 1650 is only capable of delivering a consistent 60 FPS experience at 1080p with the Low preset, and even at 1440p, it struggles to maintain a playable frame rate on anything other than Low.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 1623 out of 1656 tested combos in The Technomancer, placing it in the bottom 2% of all configurations. This rank reflects the severe imbalance of the pairing: a high-end, modern CPU is hamstrung by a low-end, legacy GPU. The combo's performance is a direct reflection of the GPU's capabilities, not the CPU's.

The CPU’s benchmark scores are strong, with an average benchmark score of 34313 and a percentile rank of 89, placing it near the top of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals, the Intel Core i5-13500 (deltaPct 0.4) and Intel Core i7-12800HX (deltaPct 0.5), show that the Ryzen 7 7700X is a top-tier performer. However, the GPU’s average benchmark score of 8713 and percentile rank of 43 drag the overall gaming experience down.

The data shows that this combo is fundamentally GPU-limited. The high rank (1623) indicates that most other tested combinations, even those with weaker CPUs, will outperform it in this game because they are paired with more capable graphics cards. The Ryzen 7 7700X is effectively wasted in this configuration for The Technomancer, as it spends most of its time waiting for the GTX 1650 to render frames. The combo's rank reflects the fact that in gaming, the GPU is the primary determinant of performance, and a 4 GB entry-level card cannot support a flagship CPU's potential in a demanding title.