The Technomancer

The Technomancer is an Action RPG released in June 2016, and the pairing of the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 delivers a comprehensive measured-FPS dataset across three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160) and four settings levels (Low, 0fps…). The data covers 12 measured scenarios, with average FPS values ranging from 43 at 4K Ultra up to 233 at 1080p Low, and includes minimum/maximum values for the Medium preset at each resolution. This analysis walks through the resolution scaling, the GPU and CPU contributions, the exact FPS breakdown, how this combination ranks relative to others, and which settings deliver the best experience, all using measured data only.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS across resolutions shows a very consistent pattern of decline when moving from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, regardless of the settings preset. At the Low preset, the average FPS drops from 233 at 1080p to 152 at 1440p, and further to 84 at 4K — a reduction of roughly 64% between 1080p and 4K. At Medium, the average falls from 179 (1080p) to 117 (1440p) to 64 (4K), again a drop to approximately 35% of the 1080p value. The High preset moves from 153 at 1080p down to 100 at 1440p and 55 at 4K, while Ultra goes from 119 to 78 to 43. In all four presets, the 1080p-to-4K retention sits close to 36% of the original value — a figure that suggests the rendering load scales with pixel count as expected for a GPU-bound scene.

The difference between 1080p and 1440p is smaller than the 1440p-to-4K step, which is what one would expect since the pixel count increases by 2.25× from 1080p to 1440p and another 2.25× from 1440p to 4K. The data shows the average retains about 65–66% of the 1080p score at 1440p — the drop from 233 to 152 (Low), 179 to 117 (Medium), 153 to 100 (High), and 119 to 78 (Ultra) — all close to 65% retention. When moving from 1440p to 4K, the retention drops to about 55% again (152→84, 117→64, 100→55, 78→43), which means the GPU is doing proportionally more work per pixel at 4K, as expected.

The scaling pattern indicates that the limiting component is uniformly the GPU rather than the CPU. The 1080p Low FPS of 233 is 133, 128, and – the frame rate at 1080p is so high that meeting 60 FPS at 4K on High needs almost 4× the GPU throughput. At the Ultra preset, the 4K average is 43, and at High it is only 55; the Medium preset at 4K averages 64, but its minimum 55 shows that even 4K Medium cannot maintain a stable 60 FPS. So the resolution scaling is steep and predictable, and every preset at 4K falls below the typical 60-FPS target except Medium at 64, which is still punctuated by 55 FPS minimums.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm process and a chip size of 294 mm²; its 12 GB of GDDR6X memory is connected over a 192-bit bus with a memory bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s and an effective memory rate of 21 Gbps. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1920 MHz and a boost clock of 2475 MHz, and it runs a 200 W TDP. Its 5888 shading units, with 64 ROPS and 184 TMUs, feed a pixel rate of 158.4 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 455.4 GT/s. The FP32 throughput is 29.15 TFLOPS.

Looking at the actual payload of a 2016 Action RPG, the GPU is heavily exercised. At 1080p, increasing from Low to Ultra produces an average of 233 → 179 → 153 → 119 frames per section, which is a 1.6× gap between the lowest and highest settings. At 1440p the same sequence is 152 → 117 → 100 → 78, and at 4K it is 84 → 64 → 55 → 43. The fact that 12 GB of GDDR6X memory is present, with a bandwidth above 500 GB/s, is more than adequate for a 2016 release; there is no evidence of memory capacity being the constraint here. The 504.2 GB/s bandwidth, the 192-bit bus, and the 12 GB capacity all appear ample for the game, given that performance degrades smoothly and predictably with resolution.

The GPU percentile ranking is 81, meaning it outperforms roughly eight out of ten GPUs in the benchmark suite. The three nearest rivals from the GPU benchmark data: NVIDIA Tesla P4 (.1% higher score at 37628), AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37507, 0.4% higher), and AMD Radeon PRO W6400 (37157, 1.3% lower). The fact that the RTX 4070 sits within a 1.3% margin of these alternatives in the synthetic set, yet delivers 233 FPS at 1080p Low, implies that the game itself is not heavily VRAM- or bandwidth-bound. The card's 12 GB is, for this 2016 Action RPG, not a limiting factor, and the boost clock of 2470 MHz suggests the GPU is running near its rated peak in most moments.

The GPU core's Temp and power behavior cannot be directly observed in the provided rows, but the measured FPS at 4K Medium with 55 FPS minimum versus the 4K High and Ultra results (55 and 43) shows the GPU core is performance of its own with many settings. The transition from 179 FPS at 1080p Medium to 64 at 4K Medium is typical of a GPU that is reaching its shading and raster limits at 3840×1400.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X is an 8-core, 16-thread Zen 4 processor code-named Raphael, built on a 5 nm TSMC process, with a base clock of 4.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. It has a 9th through 85th percentile CPU score from the synthetic benchmark, averaging 35909 points in the aggregated test set. That puts it 0.3% above the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 (score 35802), 0.5% above the Intel Core 7 250H (35728), 0.5% above the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 (35719), and 0.7% above the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H (35670) — so it leads all four nearest rivals in the synthetic score.

In the measured FPS, the CPU's role is most evident at the high-end – at 1080p Low, the system achieves 233 FPS, which is above what the GPU might be able to produce at that setting. This 233 FPS ceiling is likely a 0x() limit or a CPU thread limit. That the 1080p Low and 1080p Medium frames stay above 170, with a maximum 206′, and the 1080p Ultra sits at 119, is a pattern that heavily depends on the CPU completing 23–25 ms of render work per frame. The Ryzen 7 7700X's two-thread 3DMark of 7057 (8 threads) tracks a high core count, and the multi-thread Passmark of 35686 is in the same league.

Yet the fact the same CPU produced 119 FPS (1080p Ultra) and 43 FPS (4K Ultra) in the same preset — a 2.76× drop — indicates that the CPU is not the primary cutoff in this title; resolution scaling is the driver. In the 1080p Low case, the liftoff may be latent CPU capability: the CPU's single-thread Passmark is 4190, and the 3DMark single-thread score is 1090, which are both top-quartile values for a 2022 processor. The boost of 5.40 GHz would put this chip at the high end of the desktop processor curve, which would not bottleneck a 2016 action RPG.

The contrast with the 4K Ultra numbers (18–43 FPS) shows that adding 4K ~ 16× more pixels than 1080p sends the GPU into full-bound operation, leaving the CPU to minimize 5% of the load. None of the measured data suggests a CPU bottleneck, because each settings/resolution pair falls off exactly with resolution; a CPU limitation would cause 1080p Low FPS to be flat or only marginally higher than 1080p Medium, but the data shows a 54 FPS difference (233 vs 179) between Low and Medium at 1080p. That 54 FPS differential is a GPU signature.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The full set of 12 measured rows is as follows. At 1920×2160, the Low preset averages 233 FPS; the Medium preset averages 179 FPS with a minimum of 152 and a maximum of 206; the High preset averages 153 FPS; the Ultra preset averages 119 FPS. At 2560×1440, Low shows 152 FPS; Medium shows 117 FPS with a minimum of 99 and a maximum of 134; High shows 100 FPS; Ultra shows 78 FPS. At 3840×2160, Low shows 84 FPS; Medium averages 64 FPS with a minimum of 55 and a maximum of 74; High averages 55 FPS; and Ultra averages 43 FPS. The data does not provide maximum/minimum values for the other preset levels, only the average.

Each resolution shows the same relative ordering: Low > Medium > High > Ultra. The corresponding delta between Low and 0 – from 233→179 at 1080p (54 FPS), 152→117 at 1440p (35 FPS), 84→64 at 4K (20 FPS) – means that performance penalty from turning down the settings is multiplicative in resolution, not additive. In percentage, the cost of Medium over Low is roughly 23, Medium over High is 13–15, and High over Ultra is 14–15 in each resolution. More specifically, at 1080p the difference from Medium to High is 26 FPS (179→153), and from High to Ultra is 34 FPS (119→119? actually 119). In table form, the numbers are consistent.

The impact of resolution is most punishing when going from 1440 to 4K: the 4K Low (84) is below the 1080p Ultra (119) — meaning even Low at 3840×2160 runs slower than Ultra at 1920×1080. That shift is due to the raw pixel load. Comparing the same settings, 4K Medium (64) is about 55% of the throughput of 1440p Medium (117). The minimums at Medium (152, 99, 55) fall around 80% of the average in each case, indicating slight frame spikes — e.g., at 1080p the minimum is 152 vs 179 average, at 4K the minimum is 55 vs 64 average.

The Combo Ranks

Composite summary: This specific CPU+GPU combination ranks 847 th out of 3696 tested combinations for The Technomancer (the dataHasMeasured field is true). Since 3696-847 = 2849, this combo is positioned higher than approximately 2849 combos; 847 of 3696 rank above it. That places the combo in the top 23% of all tested pairings. In percent terms, 847 / 3696, about 22.9% — so 77.1% of the tested combinations score lower, though the exact percentile is not given. The combination uses an AMD CPU that ranks at the 85th percentile among CPUs and an NVIDIA GPU at the 81st percentile among GPUs, so the marginal percentiles are close. The gap between the 85th CPU percentile and 81st GPU percentile suggests the GPU is the slightly weaker relative link.

When the same data is studied, a high ranking and result — the 1080 / 233 High (I need to be accurate) — The shows that the two components are well matched for this game: the combo rank of 847 out of 3696 means that 2849 other pairings are lower, which is broadly consistent with a mid-high-end pairing. The fact that the GPU has only the 0.0/0.1-1.3% distribution of the nearest GPU rivals, and CPU 0.3-0.7% areas, shows this is a sweet-spot tier system; the rank is impressive because this is an old title with a monolithic load that stresses only a fraction of available cores.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured rows, at 1920×1080 the best experience per the data is to use the Ultra preset, which delivers 119 average FPS (above the 60 target) and is only 34 FPS below High. The GPU headroom at 1080p is so large that Ultra is comfortable, even though Low at 233 FPS would be overkill for the viewing scenario. For a 60-FPS-capable monitor at 1080p, Ultra is the recommended choice.

At 2560×1440, the Ultra preset yields 78 FPS — under the 80-FPS belt — and is the highest measured setting above the 60 target, so Ultra is recommended for 1440p users. High at 1440 gives 100 frames, good for 10 monitors, but Ultra still holds 78 and so is viable. The 4K row is the hardest decision: 4K High averages 55 FPS, 4K Ultra stays at 43, while 4K Medium gives 64 average but to a minimum of 111 short (a min of 55). That means 4K Medium is the only 4K setting that on average exceeds the 60 target; its min of 55 shows that does not guarantee a stable 60 on every moment. For streamers who import, the pair (Medium+min 77) means Medium at is not fully stutter-free, but it's the best option for 4K UHD.

At 4K, the data shows respectively. With Ultra at 43 making an option for screeners, Medium is the sweetest spot for ~2000-fps. So recommendation: 1080 Ultra, 1440 High (or U), 4K Medium — each is the highest preset that keeps the measured average above 60 FPS, except for the 4K Medium min which is 27%). Alternatively, 4K High is 55 average, not recommended for VR.

We'll note that no preset at 4K delivers both 64 avg and max 74, so no preset gives a guaranteed 60 perpetual envelope.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1920×1080 with the Ultra preset?

A: The measured average for the 2560×1080 Ultra preset is 119 FPS.

Q: Can this combo reach 60 FPS at 3840×2160?

The 4K Medium setting averages 64 FPS, which is above 60, but its minimum drops to 55 FPS. The 4K High preset averages 55 FPS and 4K Ultra 43 FPS. So the only 4K setting that exceeds 60 on average is Medium, and it does not hold 60 minimum.

Q: Does the resolution scaling show CPU or GPU limiting?

The FPS falls to 84 (4K Low) from 233 (1080p) for about 64% drop; the same relative drop occurs in Low, Medium, High, Ultra. Because lowering the pixel count increases frame rate so dramatically, the GPU is the limiting component in this game.

Q: Which settings give the highest FPS overall?

A: 1080p Low measures 233 FPS, which is the fastest recorded. At 4K, the highest average is 84 (Low), and at 1440 it is 152 (Low).

Q: How does the RTX 4070 compare to its rival GPUs in the synthetic score?

A: The GPU's nearest measured rival, NVIDIA Tesla P4 with 37628, is 0.1% higher, and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 is 0.4% higher (37507), while the RTX 4080 Mobile shows 1.3% higher (38135), and the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 is 1.3% lower (37157). The overall RTX 4070 average benchmark is 37648.

Q: How close is the Ryzen 7 7700X to the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 in average score?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700X averages 35909 compared with 35802 for the Ryzen 7 PRO 5845, which is a difference of 0.3%.

Q: A combos rank?

A: In the measured test of The Technomancer, the 7700X + 4070 combination is ranked 847 out of 3696 tested combinations.

Q: It appears 55 min at 4K medium — if the minimum suggests stutter.

A: Yes, 65 (–64 average) and minimum 55, so there is a ~9 FPS gap, indicating frame time variance at 4K Medium. At lower resolutions the gap is smaller (1080p Medium 152 minimum against 179 average).