The Technomancer

The Technomancer, an Action RPG released in 2016, presents a unique set of performance demands on modern hardware. This analysis focuses on the combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D processor and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti graphics card. The recorded data from our measurements provides a clear picture of how this pairing handles the game across different resolutions and quality presets, revealing where the bottlenecks lie and which settings offer the most balanced experience.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a significant performance drop as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At the High preset, the average frame rate falls from 184 FPS at 1080p to 120 FPS at 1440p, then down to 66 FPS at 4K. This represents a 35% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and a further 45% reduction from 1440p to 4K. At the Ultra preset, the scaling is similarly steep: 144 FPS at 1080p, 94 FPS at 1440p, and 52 FPS at 4K. The frame rate drops by roughly 35% at each resolution step, which indicates that the rendering load is scaling as expected with pixel count.

The Low preset shows a different pattern. At 1080p, the system achieves 280 FPS, which drops to 183 FPS at 1440p and 101 FPS at 4K. The absolute drop from 1080p to 4K is 179 FPS, a 64% reduction. Interestingly, the percentage drop from 1080p to 1440p is 35%, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 45%. This suggests that at lower settings, where the CPU has less work to do per frame, the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor as resolution climbs. The game engine appears to be well-optimized for high frame rates at 1080p, but the sheer pixel throughput required at 4K overwhelms the GPU even at Low settings.

The Medium preset provides the only complete min/max FPS data in the database. At 1080p Medium, the average is 215 FPS with a minimum of 183 FPS and maximum of 248 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 141 FPS with min/max of 120/162 FPS. At 4K Medium, the average is 77 FPS with min/max of 66/89 FPS. The consistency of the frame pacing, as indicated by the narrow gap between minimum and maximum at each resolution, suggests that the system maintains stable performance without significant stuttering. The 66 FPS minimum at 4K Medium is exactly the same as the average at 4K High, which hints that the High preset might be the better choice for that resolution if visual quality is prioritized, as the average is the same but the visual fidelity is higher.

The scaling pattern across all presets indicates that this game is heavily GPU-bound at higher resolutions. The CPU, with its 12 cores and 24 threads, does not appear to be a limiting factor at any resolution tested. The frame rate reductions align closely with the increase in pixel count, which is a classic sign of a graphics-card bottleneck. At 1080p, the very high frame rates at Low and Medium settings suggest the CPU is still capable of feeding the GPU adequately, but the GPU's rendering ceiling is reached before the CPU's frame-generation limit.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 4K with Ultra settings?

A: The recorded average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 52 FPS.

Q: Does the combination achieve 144 FPS at 1440p?

A: No, the closest values are 141 FPS at Medium settings and 120 FPS at High settings. Ultra settings produce 94 FPS at 1440p.

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combination?

A: The highest average FPS is 280, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: How does the 1080p High preset compare to the 1440p Medium preset?

A: The 1080p High preset averages 184 FPS, while the 1440p Medium preset averages 141 FPS. The 1440p Medium preset has a minimum of 120 FPS, which is lower than the 1080p High average.

Q: Is there a significant difference between Low and Ultra at 4K?

A: Yes, the difference is 49 FPS. Low settings average 101 FPS, while Ultra settings average 52 FPS at 3840x2160.

Q: Which resolution and settings combination provides the most stable frame pacing?

A: The Medium preset at all resolutions includes min and max FPS data. The narrowest range is at 1440p, with a spread of 42 FPS between the 120 FPS minimum and 162 FPS maximum.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti is the dominant component in this pairing for The Technomancer. The GPU features 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 896.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is more than sufficient for the game's texture and geometry data at all tested resolutions. The 4K Ultra preset, which typically demands the most video memory, still achieved an average of 52 FPS, indicating that the 16 GB capacity did not introduce any stuttering or texture thrashing that would be visible in the average frame rate.

The GPU's clock speeds are recorded at a base of 2295 MHz and a boost of 2452 MHz. These clocks, combined with 8960 shading units, deliver the raw compute throughput needed for the game's rendering effects. The FP32 performance is 43.94 TFLOPS, which directly correlates with the frame rates observed. At 1080p Low, the GPU produces 280 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, the same hardware produces 52 FPS. This 5.4x reduction in frame rate against a 4x increase in pixel count (from 1080p to 4K) shows that the game's Ultra preset adds effects that scale super-linearly with resolution.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 49957, which is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 at 50001 (a delta of -0.1%). This close benchmark parity does not translate to identical in-game performance, as The Technomancer's engine favors the 5070 Ti's architecture. The RTX 5070 Ti also sits close to the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT, which has an average score of 50951 (a delta of -2%), and the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT at 48477 (a delta of 3.1%). These rivals underline that the 5070 Ti is positioned in a competitive mid-to-high performance tier, but its specific results in this game are dictated by how well the engine utilizes its Blackwell 2.0 architecture.

The data shows that the GPU's pixel rate of 235.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 686.6 GTexel/s are heavily taxed at 4K. The 4K Medium preset, with an average of 77 FPS, represents the point where the GPU's fill rate can still maintain smooth gameplay. The 4K Ultra preset drops to 52 FPS, which indicates that the additional shading and post-processing effects are pushing the GPU to its limits. The recorded data does not include ray tracing performance, so the RT cores' impact cannot be assessed for this title.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the most balanced experience appears to be the High preset at 1440p. This setting yields an average of 120 FPS, which provides a smooth experience for an Action RPG. The High preset at 1080p delivers 184 FPS, which is far above the refresh rate of most displays, making it a viable option for competitive play or for users with high-refresh-rate monitors. The 1440p High preset offers a better balance between visual fidelity and performance, as it maintains a 120 FPS average without requiring the lower visual quality of Medium.

At 4K, the High preset averages 66 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced action. The Medium preset at 4K averages 77 FPS with a minimum of 66 FPS, which is technically smoother than High but at a noticeable visual cost. The data suggests that users targeting 4K should consider the High preset, as the 66 FPS average is identical to the Medium preset's minimum frame rate, meaning the High preset's visual improvements do not come at a significant performance penalty in terms of average frame rate.

The Ultra preset is only recommended for 1080p, where it achieves 144 FPS. At 1440p, Ultra drops to 94 FPS, and at 4K, it falls to 52 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The Low preset, while achieving very high frame rates, removes too many visual details to be recommended for general play. The Medium preset at 1080p, with 215 FPS, is a strong option for users who prioritize frame rate over visual quality but still want some graphical effects enabled.

The complete min/max data for the Medium preset across all resolutions allows for a precise assessment of frame stability. At 1080p, the 183 FPS minimum and 248 FPS maximum show a 65 FPS range, which is expected at such high frame rates. At 1440p, the range narrows to 42 FPS, and at 4K, it narrows further to 23 FPS. This indicates that the game becomes more frame-rate consistent as resolution increases, likely because the GPU is the sole bottleneck and its workload is more predictable.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti ranks 354 out of 3696 tested combinations in The Technomancer. This places it in the top 9.6% of all recorded system configurations for this game. The rank reflects the overall average performance across all tested settings and resolutions, not just the peak frame rates.

The ranking is influenced by the GPU's position relative to its peers. The RTX 5070 Ti's average benchmark score of 49957 is 2% lower than the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT's score of 50951. This suggests that the 5070 Ti might not be the absolute top-tier GPU for this game, but its combination with the Ryzen 9 9900X3D's strong CPU performance pushes the combo into a high percentile. The CPU's 91st percentile ranking among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 54762, ensures that it is not leaving any GPU performance on the table. The nearest rival CPUs, such as the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF with an average score of 55093 (a delta of -0.6%), show that the 9900X3D is statistically tied with its closest competition in raw CPU benchmarks.

The combo's rank of 354 suggests that there are 353 other combinations that achieve higher average frame rates in this game. These likely include configurations with more powerful GPUs, such as the RTX 5090 or RX 7900 XTX, which are not in the provided rival list. The 5070 Ti's position in the GPU percentile (86th) and the CPU's position (91st) combine to produce a system that is very capable, but not the absolute best for this specific title. The gap between this combo and the top-ranked systems is likely driven by GPU raw performance, as the CPU has ample headroom based on its 1080p Low result of 280 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded FPS data provides a complete matrix of performance across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 280 FPS, which is the highest recorded value for this combination. The Medium preset at 1080p averages 215 FPS, with a minimum of 183 FPS and a maximum of 248 FPS. The High preset averages 184 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 144 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 136 FPS, showing that the quality presets have a substantial impact on frame rate at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves 183 FPS, which is exactly the same as the 1080p High preset's average. The Medium preset at 1440p averages 141 FPS, with a minimum of 120 FPS and a maximum of 162 FPS. The High preset at 1440p averages 120 FPS, which is the same as the Medium preset's minimum at this resolution. The Ultra preset at 1440p averages 94 FPS. The performance drop from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 89 FPS, which is a smaller absolute difference than at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is becoming the limiting factor.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 101 FPS, which is the only preset at 4K with an average above 100 FPS. The Medium preset at 4K averages 77 FPS, with a minimum of 66 FPS and a maximum of 89 FPS. The High preset averages 66 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 52 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 49 FPS, which is the smallest absolute difference across all resolutions. This confirms that at 4K, the GPU's rendering capabilities are the primary constraint, and even lowering settings to Low cannot double the frame rate, as it does at 1080p.

The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data at all three resolutions. At 1080p, the 183 FPS minimum still exceeds the 1440p High preset's average of 120 FPS. At 1440p, the 120 FPS minimum is exactly the same as the 4K High preset's average of 66 FPS, but at a higher resolution. This cross-referencing of data shows that the game scales predictably with both resolution and settings, and the recorded values are internally consistent.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D, with 12 cores and 24 threads, plays a supporting role in this game's performance. The CPU's base clock of 4.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.50 GHz, combined with its 128 MB of L3 cache, provide ample processing power for the game's logic and physics. The CPU's benchmark results are strong, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 47737 and a single-core score of 6739. The 3DMark max threads score is 13795, which indicates that the CPU can handle heavily threaded workloads.

In The Technomancer, the CPU's influence is most apparent at 1080p with Low settings, where the system achieves 280 FPS. This high frame rate requires the CPU to generate frames faster than the GPU can render them, or at least keep up with the GPU's output. The 1080p Low result of 280 FPS versus the 4K Low result of 101 FPS shows that the CPU is not the bottleneck at higher resolutions. The CPU's single-thread performance, as measured by a 3DMark single-thread score of 1269, is sufficient for the game's main thread, which typically handles game logic and draw call submission.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 91st among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 54762, puts it in the top tier for gaming. Its nearest rivals are all within a 2% delta of its average score, including the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF at 55093 (a delta of -0.6%). This close grouping indicates that for CPU-bound scenarios, the 9900X3D would perform nearly identically to its direct competitors. However, in this game, the CPU is rarely the limiting factor, as evidenced by the frame rate scaling patterns. The 1080p Ultra preset still achieves 144 FPS, which is a high frame rate that many CPUs would struggle to maintain, but the 9900X3D handles it without issue.

The CPU's memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s and dual-channel DDR5 support are adequate for feeding the GPU with data. The game's 2016 release date means it was designed for older hardware, and as such, it does not utilize the CPU's 24 threads efficiently. The data suggests that the CPU is essentially idle in this game, with the GPU doing the vast majority of the work. The 12-core configuration is overkill for this title, but it ensures that there are no CPU-induced frame drops, even at the highest settings and lowest resolutions.