The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents a demanding workload for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 when paired with the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D. The measured data reveals a configuration that is heavily constrained by the graphics card, especially at higher resolutions and quality presets. The GTX 1650, positioned in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs, is the primary bottleneck, while the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, sitting in the 87th percentile, provides ample headroom. Analysis of the 4K, 1440p, and 1080p frame rates shows a clear pattern of GPU limitation, where the CPU's significant processing power cannot compensate for the graphics card's memory bandwidth and shader output.

Settings Recommendations

The benchmark data indicates that the optimal experience for this combination is found at 1920x1080 with the Low preset, which delivers an average of 70.8 FPS. This is the only preset across all tested resolutions that achieves a frame rate comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold, making it the sole configuration for smooth, responsive gameplay. Choosing the Medium preset at the same resolution drops the average to 54.2 FPS, a 16.6 FPS reduction that may still be acceptable for some, but the Low preset offers the most consistent performance headroom.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset yields 44.8 FPS, which is a playable frame rate for a slower-paced action RPG, but it represents a significant compromise in visual fidelity. The High preset at this resolution drops further to 30.5 FPS, which is the threshold for playability on many systems but can feel less fluid. The data clearly suggests that the 1920x1080 resolution is the target for this GPU, with Low being the recommended preset for a stable experience and Medium being a viable alternative for users who prioritize visual quality over a higher frame rate buffer.

The Ultra preset is not a viable option at any resolution, as it yields an average of 33.7 FPS at 1080p, 24.3 FPS at 1440p, and a nearly unplayable 13.4 FPS at 4K. The performance cost of Ultra settings is substantial, and the data shows that the GTX 1650 does not possess the raw throughput to maintain acceptable frame rates. Consequently, the best experience per the measured rows is unequivocally the 1080p Low preset, with 1080p Medium serving as a secondary recommendation for those who prefer higher texture detail.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run The Technomancer at 4K resolution?

A: The measured data shows that 4K performance is extremely poor. The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 25.6 FPS on the Low preset, with High, Medium, and Ultra presets yielding 17.8, 17.3, and 13.4 FPS respectively. These frame rates are below the threshold for a consistent gaming experience.

Q: What is the performance difference between the Low and Ultra presets at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 70.8 FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves only 33.7 FPS. This represents a significant performance drop of 37.1 FPS, or roughly 52%, when moving from the lowest to the highest quality settings.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rival, the RTX 3050 A Mobile?

A: Based on the average benchmark score, the GTX 1650 scores 8713, which is 0.4% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile's score of 8746. This indicates that the GTX 1650 performs nearly identically to that mobile part in synthetic benchmarks.

Q: Is the CPU a limiting factor in this game?

A: The benchmark results suggest the CPU is not the primary bottleneck. The AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D has a 3DMark max threads score of 7967 and is in the 87th percentile of all CPUs. The GPU, in the 43rd percentile, shows much lower relative performance, indicating that the graphics card is the limiting component.

Q: What is the best resolution for this configuration?

A: Based on the measured FPS, 1920x1080 is the only resolution that provides an average frame rate above 60 FPS, and it does so only on the Low preset. The 2560x1440 and 3840x2160 resolutions consistently produce sub-60 FPS averages across all settings.

Q: What kind of performance can be expected on the High preset at 1440p?

A: The data shows an average of 30.5 FPS for the High preset at 2560x1440. This is a playable but not smooth frame rate, suitable for a game that does not require fast, twitch-based reactions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the definitive performance bottleneck in this pairing. With a 4 GB GDDR5 memory buffer on a 128-bit bus, the GPU has a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s. This memory configuration is a limiting factor for a game like The Technomancer at higher resolutions, where the demand for texture data and frame buffer space exceeds the available capacity and speed. The GPU's core clocks, with a base of 1485 MHz and a boost of 1665 MHz, and its 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, are simply not sufficient to maintain high frame rates when the rendering load increases.

The GTX 1650's benchmark scores reflect its mid-range positioning. Its Passmark G3D score is 7880, placing it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs. It sits just 0.4% below the RTX 3050 A Mobile and 0.5% above the Quadro P2200, according to the average benchmark scores. This data confirms that the GPU is operating at a mainstream performance level, which is further evidenced by the measured FPS in The Technomancer. The GPU's DirectX 12 Passmark score of 35 is particularly low, indicating weak performance in modern API workloads.

The 4 GB VRAM is likely a major contributor to the significant FPS drops when moving to higher settings. The jump from Low to Medium at 1080p reduces the average FPS from 70.8 to 54.2, a 16.6 FPS decrease. This suggests that the increased texture detail and effects at Medium begin to saturate the memory bus and fill rate of the GTX 1650. The GPU's 32 ROPs and 56 TMUs are insufficient to handle the pixel and texture processing demands of The Technomancer at higher quality presets, leading to the sub-30 FPS results seen at 1440p and 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the performance envelope for this CPU-GPU combination. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 70.8 FPS, which is the only result in the entire dataset that is firmly in the "smooth" range. The Medium preset follows at 54.2 FPS, and High at 45.5 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1080p drops to 33.7 FPS, which is a 37.1 FPS difference compared to Low, demonstrating the high cost of the maximum quality settings.

At 2560x1440, all presets fall below the 60 FPS mark. The Low preset is the most playable at 44.8 FPS, followed by Medium at 37.1 FPS, High at 30.5 FPS, and Ultra at 24.3 FPS. The progression shows a consistent performance penalty for each step up in quality. The difference between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 20.5 FPS, showing that the resolution increase has compressed the performance range and made even the Low preset less viable for high-refresh-rate displays.

The 3840x2160 results show a severely constrained GPU. The Low preset averages 25.6 FPS, which is the highest score at this resolution. High and Medium presets are nearly identical, at 17.8 and 17.3 FPS respectively, suggesting that the GPU is likely hitting a hard limit related to memory bandwidth or pixel fill rate rather than the specific quality settings. The Ultra preset bottoms out at 13.4 FPS, making the game effectively unplayable. These results indicate that the GTX 1650 is not designed for 4K gaming in this title, regardless of the settings chosen.

Resolution Scaling

The performance scaling from 1080p to 4K clearly illustrates the dominance of GPU limitation. At the Low preset, the average FPS drops from 70.8 at 1920x1080 to 44.8 at 2560x1440, a 26 FPS decrease. Moving from 1440p to 4K, the frame rate falls further to 25.6, another 19.2 FPS decrease. The total drop from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is 45.2 FPS, which represents a 64% reduction in performance. This steep decline is characteristic of a system where the graphics card is the sole limiting factor.

The scaling pattern for the High preset shows a similar trend but with lower absolute values. The average FPS drops from 45.5 at 1080p to 30.5 at 1440p, and then to 17.8 at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is 61%, which is slightly less than the Low preset, but the frame rates are much lower in absolute terms. This suggests that the GPU is being pushed to its limits in all cases, and the relative performance loss is consistent as the pixel count increases.

The data indicates that the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is not contributing to the frame rate bottleneck. The CPU's high multi-threaded performance, evidenced by its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 29149, is far in excess of what is needed for this game. The consistent FPS drops across all settings and resolutions point directly to the GTX 1650's limitations in pixel throughput and memory bandwidth. The 4K results, where even the Low preset struggles to reach 26 FPS, confirm that the GPU is the definitive constraint, and any attempt to improve performance would require a graphics card upgrade.