The Technomancer

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 paired with the AMD Radeon 890M integrated graphics presents a specific performance profile in The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG. The measured data shows a system that is heavily constrained by its graphics solution, with the CPU’s substantial multi-threading capabilities providing a stable foundation that cannot overcome the GPU’s limitations at higher resolutions. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS across resolutions and settings, contextualizes the component roles, and ranks the combo within the broader test database.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent, revealing a classic GPU-bound scenario. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 70 at 1920x1080 to 46 at 2560x1440, and finally to 25 at 3840x2160. That represents a 34% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 46% reduction from 1440p to 4K. The scaling is not linear; it accelerates as resolution increases, which is a hallmark of a system where the rendering pipeline is saturated by pixel throughput rather than geometry or CPU logic.

At High settings, the same pattern emerges with even lower absolute numbers. The average FPS drops from 46 at 1080p to 30 at 1440p, then to 17 at 4K. The 4K result is below playable thresholds, while even 1440p High struggles to maintain fluid motion. The Medium preset, which includes min and max FPS data, shows a frame time consistency that degrades with resolution: at 1080p, the range is 46–62 FPS; at 1440p, it narrows to 30–41 FPS; and at 4K, it collapses to 16–22 FPS. The narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is becoming the sole bottleneck, with less variance because every frame is uniformly expensive.

The Ultra preset is the most demanding, yielding only 36 FPS at 1080p, 23 at 1440p, and 13 at 4K. The data clearly shows that 1080p is the only resolution where this combo can approach smooth gameplay, and even then, only at Low or Medium settings. The limiting component is unambiguously the integrated GPU; the CPU’s performance headroom, evidenced by its high benchmark scores, is not the constraining factor. The scaling curve suggests that any reduction in resolution yields disproportionate gains, which is typical for a system where fill-rate and memory bandwidth are the primary bottlenecks.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. Its benchmark results are formidable: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35314 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 20992 place it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. In The Technomancer, however, these capabilities are largely untapped. The game’s engine, released in 2016, does not scale perfectly with high core counts, and the measured FPS data shows that the CPU is not the performance limiter at any resolution or setting.

The single-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2044, is more relevant for older game engines that rely on a few fast cores. Even so, the FPS at 1080p Low (70) is respectable but not exceptional, suggesting that the GPU is already the bottleneck at that point. The CPU’s large 64 MB shared L3 cache and quad-channel LPDDR5X memory support theoretically provide ample bandwidth for feeding the integrated GPU, but the Radeon 890M’s system-shared memory architecture is still dependent on the system’s memory controller efficiency.

When comparing to nearest rivals, the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 sits within 2% of CPUs like the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX and Intel Core i9-14900K in average benchmark score. This indicates that the processor is not the weak link; it is a top-tier mobile part that can handle any CPU-bound workload. In this specific game, the data shows that the FPS differences between Low and Ultra settings at the same resolution are driven entirely by GPU load, not CPU scheduling or core utilization. The CPU’s role is to maintain a stable frame delivery, which it does, but it cannot compensate for the GPU’s inability to render at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 890M is an integrated graphics processor based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, featuring 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. Its boost clock reaches 2900 MHz, and it has no dedicated VRAM, instead using system-shared memory. The PassMark G3D score of 8076 places it in the 45th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Vega 8 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960, with delta percentages of -0.1% and -0.7%, respectively. This positioning confirms that the 890M is an entry-level graphics solution, competitive with older discrete GPUs but far from modern mid-range or high-end parts.

The GPU’s FP32 performance is rated at 5.939 TFLOPS, which is modest for gaming at high resolutions. In The Technomancer, the data reflects this: at 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 13, which is unplayable. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 590 further underscores its limited capabilities. The memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," meaning it shares the system’s LPDDR5X bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. This is a critical constraint because integrated GPUs rely heavily on fast memory to compensate for the lack of dedicated VRAM. At higher resolutions, the demand for memory bandwidth increases, and the data shows a sharp FPS decline that aligns with this bottleneck.

The GPU’s texture rate of 185.6 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 92.80 GPixel/s are theoretical peaks that are not achievable in real-world gaming. The measured performance in this game shows that even at 1080p Low, the GPU is working near its limits to produce 70 FPS. The presence of 16 RT cores and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate is irrelevant for a 2016 title that likely uses DirectX 11 or earlier, meaning the GPU’s modern features provide no benefit here. The data suggests that the 890M is best suited for 1080p gaming at lower presets, with any resolution above that requiring significant reductions in graphical fidelity to maintain acceptable frame rates.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS achieved by this combo in The Technomancer?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 70, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 CPU a bottleneck in this game?

A: No, the data indicates the CPU is not the limiting factor. The FPS scaling with resolution and settings points directly to the GPU as the primary constraint.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 890M compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The 890M has a PassMark G3D score of 8076, which is 0.1% lower than the AMD Radeon Vega 8 and 0.7% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960.

Q: Can this combo run the game at 4K resolution?

A: At 4K, even Low settings yield only 25 FPS, while Ultra drops to 13 FPS. These results indicate that 4K is not a viable resolution for this game with this hardware.

Q: What is the average FPS at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 35, with a measured range of 30 to 41 FPS.

Q: Does the CPU’s high multi-core score translate to better gaming performance here?

A: No, the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35314 is high, but the game’s performance is dominated by the GPU’s output, so the CPU’s multi-threading capabilities do not improve FPS in this scenario.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience is achieved at 1920x1080, as it is the only resolution where the average FPS exceeds 60. At this resolution, the Low preset delivers 70 FPS, which is the smoothest result. The Medium preset at 1080p yields 54 FPS, which is still playable but with a lower margin, and the min FPS of 46 indicates occasional dips that could be noticeable. High settings at 1080p produce 46 FPS, which is borderline for a smooth experience, while Ultra drops to 36 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target for competitive or fast-paced action.

For users prioritizing frame rate, the Low preset at 1080p is the clear choice, offering the highest average and likely the most consistent frame pacing. If visual fidelity is more important, Medium at 1080p is a reasonable compromise, sacrificing 16 FPS on average compared to Low but providing a better visual presentation. At 1440p, the data shows that even Low settings only reach 46 FPS, which is below the ideal threshold, and Ultra falls to 23 FPS, making it unsuitable for action gameplay. The 4K results are uniformly poor, with no preset reaching 30 FPS, so they should be avoided entirely.

The recommendation is to play at 1920x1080 with the Medium preset as a balanced choice, as it maintains an average above 50 FPS while providing better textures and effects than Low. For users with a preference for competitive frame rates, Low at 1080p is the only preset that ensures a 70 FPS average, which is optimal for reducing input lag. Ultra settings should be reserved for static screenshots or exploring the environment, not for actual gameplay, given the 36 FPS average at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS data for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and AMD Radeon 890M combo in The Technomancer is as follows. At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 70 FPS, High averages 46 FPS, Medium averages 54 FPS with a range of 46–62 FPS, and Ultra averages 36 FPS. At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 46 FPS, High averages 30 FPS, Medium averages 35 FPS with a range of 30–41 FPS, and Ultra averages 23 FPS. At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 25 FPS, High averages 17 FPS, Medium averages 19 FPS with a range of 16–22 FPS, and Ultra averages 13 FPS.

The data shows a consistent pattern: for every preset, the FPS approximately halves when moving from 1080p to 4K. For example, at High settings, the FPS drops from 46 to 30 to 17 across the three resolutions. At Low settings, the drop is from 70 to 46 to 25. The Medium preset is the only one with full min/max data, revealing that the frame range tightens as resolution increases, indicating a more consistent but lower level of performance. The Ultra preset has the lowest scores, with a 4K average of 13 FPS, which is effectively a slideshow.

This breakdown confirms that the combo’s performance is strictly tiered by resolution. The 1080p results are usable, 1440p results are marginal, and 4K results are not playable. The lack of min/max data for most presets limits the analysis of frame pacing, but the available data for Medium suggests that the frame times are relatively stable, with the gap between min and max FPS being 16 at 1080p, 11 at 1440p, and 6 at 4K. This narrowing gap is a sign of a fully saturated GPU.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of tested combinations for The Technomancer, this particular combo ranks 2667 out of 2825 total combos. This places it in the bottom 6% of all configurations tested, which is consistent with the measured FPS data showing sub-60 FPS performance at all but the lowest settings and resolution. The rank reflects the integrated GPU’s limitations, as the CPU is a high-end part, but the overall system performance is dragged down by the graphics solution.

The rank of 2667 out of 2825 indicates that the majority of tested combos outperform this one, likely due to the presence of discrete GPUs with dedicated VRAM and higher raw compute power. The 890M’s nearest rivals in the GPU benchmark, such as the AMD Radeon Vega 8 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960, are older or lower-tier parts, and their presence in the same performance bracket suggests that this combo is comparable to systems from several years ago. The high CPU rank (95th percentile) does not compensate for the GPU’s 45th percentile ranking in the grand scheme of game performance.

The data indicates that this combo is suitable for 1080p gaming at low to medium settings, but it is not a competitive choice for higher resolutions or demanding titles. The rank of 2667 serves as a quantitative measure of this limitation, placing it in the lower quartile of all tested systems. For users with this hardware, the expectation should be set for 1080p gaming with reduced graphical fidelity, as the hardware cannot sustain higher loads. The combination of a powerful CPU with a weak integrated GPU creates a bottleneck that is not easily overcome by settings adjustments, as the data has shown.