The Technomancer

# FAQ

Q: What is the combo rank of the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 in The Technomancer?

A: This combo ranks 1632nd out of 2825 tested combinations in the database, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the field. The rank reflects the pairing's overall capability in this specific Action RPG title.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9060 features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), with a base GPU clock of 1700 MHz and a boost clock of 2990 MHz.

Q: What is the CPU's core and thread configuration?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 5950X has 16 cores and 32 threads, based on the Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer codename). It runs at a 3.40 GHz base clock and boosts up to 4.90 GHz, with 64 MB of L3 cache.

Q: What are the measured average FPS results at 1080p Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the measured average FPS is 80. For comparison, High settings yield 103 FPS, Medium yields 120 FPS, and Low yields 157 FPS at the same resolution.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RX 9060's average benchmark score is 16014, which is 0.7% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti's 16129. It is 1% higher than both the AMD Radeon R9 370X (15862) and the AMD Radeon RX 7700 (15852).

Q: What is the CPU's percentile ranking among all processors?

A: The Ryzen 9 5950X sits at the 91st percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 51947. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX, scores 52073, only 0.2% higher.

# GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with the Navi 44 chip, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The GPU contains 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units, alongside 28 ray tracing cores. Its compute throughput is 21.43 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 operations, with a texture rate of 334.9 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s.

Memory configuration plays a critical role in this game's performance. The 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer on a 128-bit bus provides 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a moderate capacity for modern titles, and in The Technomancer, the data shows that memory bandwidth becomes a limiting factor at higher resolutions. The GPU's game clock is 2400 MHz, which sits between the 1700 MHz base and 2990 MHz boost clocks, representing the sustained clock under typical gaming loads.

The RX 9060's synthetic benchmark scores reveal its positioning. Its best result is in Passmark G3D at 17631, with Geekbench OpenCL at 88183 and Vulkan at 39476. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 3322. In Passmark tests, the GPU scores 280 in DirectX 9, 182 in DirectX 11, 104 in DirectX 10, and 44 in DirectX 12 — a pattern suggesting that older API workloads perform relatively better, while modern API efficiency may be a constraint.

The GPU's percentile ranking among all GPUs is 59, placing it just above the median. Its average benchmark score of 16014 is nearly identical to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti at 16129 (0.7% difference), and slightly above the AMD Radeon R9 370X and RX 7700. This indicates the RX 9060 sits in a competitive mid-range tier, which is consistent with its measured performance in The Technomancer where it delivers playable but not exceptional frame rates at higher settings.

# CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 5950X is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer), manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process. It operates at a 3.40 GHz base clock with a 4.90 GHz boost clock, and its 64 MB L3 cache (along with 512 KB L2 and 64 KB L1 per core) provides substantial data locality benefits. The CPU supports DDR4 memory in dual-channel mode with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, and it connects via PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 5950X shows strong multi-threaded performance. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 26017, while the single-core score is 1614. Geekbench results are 15233 multicore and 2083 single-core. In 3DMark tests, the CPU scores 11597 with max threads, 10810 with 16 threads, 6598 with 8 threads, 3595 with 4 threads, 1856 with 2 threads, and 944 with a single thread. Passmark results include a multithread score of 45424, single-thread of 3470, and floating-point math at 100280.

The CPU's percentile ranking is 91 among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 51947. Its nearest rivals are extremely close: the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX is 0.2% higher, the AMD EPYC 8124P is 0.3% higher, the Intel Core i7-14700 is 0.7% higher, and the Intel Core i9-13900F is 0.4% lower. This tight clustering suggests the 5950X is well-matched against modern competition despite being from an earlier generation.

In the context of The Technomancer, the CPU's role is less critical than the GPU at high resolutions, but its strong single-thread performance (944 in 3DMark single-thread, 3470 in Passmark) ensures it does not bottleneck the GPU at lower settings. The 16 cores and 32 threads provide ample headroom for game logic, physics, and background processes, meaning frame rates are likely GPU-limited in most scenarios tested.

# How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X and AMD Radeon RX 9060 achieves a rank of 1632 out of 2825 tested combos in The Technomancer. This places the pairing in the 42nd percentile of all tested combinations, meaning roughly 58% of system configurations outperform it in this title.

This ranking is somewhat lower than what the individual components might suggest. The CPU is at the 91st percentile among processors, while the GPU is at the 59th percentile among GPUs. The disparity indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor for this combo — the CPU has substantial headroom that the RX 9060 cannot fully utilize in this game.

The rank of 1632 suggests that many combinations with lower-tier CPUs but stronger GPUs outperform this setup. This is typical for games where graphics card performance dominates overall frame rates. The Technomancer, as an Action RPG from 2016, may not fully utilize the 16-core CPU, making the GPU's mid-range positioning the primary determinant of overall performance.

It is also importantly the combo rank reflects all tested settings and resolutions, not just the highest quality presets. At lower settings where frame rates are higher, the GPU's limitations become more apparent, while at higher settings the overall scores are lower but the CPU's role becomes relatively more important. The 1632nd rank out of 2825 represents a balanced view across all these scenarios.

# Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, Medium settings provide 120 FPS average with a minimum of 102 and maximum of 138, offering a solid balance between visual quality and smoothness. High settings at 1080p deliver 103 FPS, which is still excellent for most displays. Low settings reach 157 FPS, but the visual compromise may not be worthwhile given the playable frame rates at higher presets.

At 2560x1440, Medium settings yield 79 FPS average (67 min, 90 max), which is adequate for most gaming monitors. High settings at 67 FPS are also playable, though the drop from 79 to 67 FPS between Medium and High is noticeable. Low settings at 1440p deliver 102 FPS, but this is the only resolution where Low provides a dramatic advantage over Medium.

At 3840x2160, the situation changes significantly. Medium settings produce 43 FPS average (37 min, 50 max), which is borderline for smooth gameplay. High settings drop to 37 FPS, and Ultra falls to 29 FPS. Low settings at 4K yield 56 FPS, making it the only 4K preset that approaches playable frame rates for action-oriented gameplay.

The best experience for most users is 1080p Medium or 1440p Medium, depending on monitor resolution. The Medium preset consistently provides a good balance, with 120 FPS at 1080p, 79 FPS at 1440p, and 43 FPS at 4K. For users with standard 60 Hz displays, 1440p High at 67 FPS is acceptable, while those with high-refresh monitors should favor 1080p Medium.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). At 1920x1080, the results are: Low 157 FPS average, Medium 120 FPS (102 min, 138 max), High 103 FPS, and Ultra 80 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 77 FPS drop, representing a 49% reduction in frame rate as settings increase.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 102 FPS, Medium 79 FPS (67 min, 90 max), High 67 FPS, and Ultra 52 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 50 FPS, a 49% drop — consistent with the 1080p scaling pattern. The Medium preset at 1440p shows a minimum of 67 FPS, which matches the High preset's average at this resolution, indicating that frame pacing may be a concern during demanding scenes.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 56 FPS, Medium 43 FPS (37 min, 50 max), High 37 FPS, and Ultra 29 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 27 FPS, a 48% reduction. The Ultra preset at 4K falls below 30 FPS, which is generally considered unplayable for smooth action gameplay. The Medium preset's minimum of 37 FPS also represents a significant frame rate drop during intense moments.

Across all resolutions, the Medium preset consistently shows the most complete data, with minimum and maximum values recorded. This suggests that Medium is the most stable preset in terms of frame delivery, while Low, High, and Ultra only have average values available. The pattern of diminishing returns is clear: going from Medium to High costs roughly 14-16% performance at each resolution, while High to Ultra costs a similar percentage.

# Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 represents a four-fold increase in pixel count, and the measured FPS reflects this load. At Medium settings, the frame rate drops from 120 FPS at 1080p to 79 FPS at 1440p (a 34% reduction) and then to 43 FPS at 4K (a 64% reduction from 1080p). This scaling pattern is roughly consistent with the pixel count increase, though not perfectly linear.

At High settings, the progression is 103 FPS at 1080p, 67 FPS at 1440p, and 37 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 35%, and from 1080p to 4K is 64%. Low settings show 157 FPS at 1080p, 102 FPS at 1440p, and 56 FPS at 4K, with drops of 35% and 64% respectively. Ultra settings follow the same pattern: 80 FPS at 1080p, 52 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K, with reductions of 35% and 64%.

This consistent scaling across all settings indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions. The uniform percentage drops regardless of preset suggest that the RX 9060's memory bandwidth (288.0 GB/s) and 8 GB capacity are being saturated as resolution increases. The 128-bit memory bus is a potential bottleneck, as higher resolutions require more data to be transferred per frame.

The fact that the CPU's performance does not change with resolution — its benchmarks are resolution-independent — combined with the GPU's consistent scaling pattern, confirms that the RX 9060 is the bottleneck at 4K. At 1080p, the higher frame rates (up to 157 FPS at Low) may begin to tax the CPU, but the Ryzen 9 5950X's strong single-thread performance (944 in 3DMark single-thread) ensures it can handle these frame rates without becoming the limiting factor. The data shows that for this combo, resolution scaling is entirely driven by GPU capability, with the CPU providing ample headroom across all tested configurations.