The Technomancer

The Technomancer presents a demanding workload for the Intel Core i3-12100F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination, with measured performance indicating a severe bottleneck at higher resolutions. The data shows this pairing is positioned near the bottom of the database, ranking 1576 out of 1656 tested combos for this title, placing it in the bottom 5% of all configurations. While the CPU demonstrates strong synthetic benchmark scores relative to its class, the GPU’s limitations become the defining factor in real-world frame rates, particularly as resolution scales beyond 1080p.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average frame rate achievable with this combo in The Technomancer?

A: The highest measured average frame rate is 70.7 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only configuration in the dataset that approaches a truly smooth experience, as all other settings at this resolution fall below 50 FPS.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations for this game?

A: The combination ranks 1576 out of 1656 total tested combos. This places it in the bottom 80 positions, indicating that the vast majority of other hardware pairings deliver better performance in The Technomancer.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the primary limiting factor in this game?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The GTX 1650 sits at the 43rd percentile among all GPUs, while the Core i3-12100F ranks at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs. At 3840x2160, the frame rate drops to 13.8 FPS on High settings, demonstrating that the graphics card cannot sustain playable performance regardless of CPU headroom.

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

A: At 1920x1080, the average frame rate drops from 70.7 FPS on Low to 32.5 FPS on Ultra. This represents a 54% reduction in performance when moving from the lowest to the highest preset, showing that graphical settings have a massive impact on this hardware.

Q: Does increasing resolution from 1440p to 4K produce a proportional frame rate drop?

A: No, the drop is more severe than linear scaling. At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the combo achieves 35.7 FPS, but at 3840x2160 with the same settings, it falls to 19.2 FPS. The 4K resolution demands more than double the pixel throughput, which overwhelms the GTX 1650's 128.1 GB/s memory bandwidth.

Q: Which resolution provides the most balanced experience across all settings?

A: The data indicates 1920x1080 is the only viable resolution. Even at High settings, this resolution delivers 47.9 FPS, which is more than double the 23.4 FPS seen at 4K on Low settings. The 1080p resolution keeps the GPU within a range where the CPU's single-thread performance can still contribute to frame pacing.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the decisive component in this pairing, and its specifications explain the measured results. The GPU features 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s. This memory configuration is modest by modern standards, and the benchmark data shows it struggling to feed the rendering pipeline at higher resolutions. The GPU’s base clock of 1485 MHz and boost clock of 1665 MHz are relatively low, and its 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power is insufficient for the demands of The Technomancer at 1440p and above.

The GPU’s synthetic benchmark scores corroborate its mid-range positioning. It achieves a Passmark G3D score of 7880, placing it at the 43rd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile with a delta of -0.4% and the AMD Radeon 550X with the same delta, indicating that the GTX 1650 sits in a tightly contested performance bracket. In the context of this game, the GPU’s limitations are stark: at 3840x2160, even Low settings yield only 23.4 FPS, while Ultra settings produce 13.9 FPS. These numbers suggest the GPU is completely overwhelmed at 4K, with memory bandwidth and pixel fill rate acting as hard constraints.

At 1920x1080, the GPU begins to show more capability. The measured 70.7 FPS on Low settings indicates that the architecture can handle lighter workloads, but the drop to 47.9 FPS on High settings reveals a steep scaling curve. The 32.5 FPS on Ultra at 1080p suggests that the GTX 1650’s 32 ROPs and 896 shading units are insufficient for the game’s highest preset, even at the most common resolution. The GPU’s 4 GB memory capacity also appears to be a factor, as The Technomancer’s texture requirements at Ultra settings likely exceed this limit, causing performance to degrade beyond what raw compute differences would suggest.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i3-12100F provides a surprisingly strong foundation for this budget-oriented build. With 4 cores and 8 threads, the CPU runs at a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, built on Intel's Alder Lake architecture at a 10 nm process node. Its synthetic benchmarks reveal a capable processor: the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 11912 and single-core score of 1681 indicate solid performance for a quad-core part. The 3DMark single-thread score of 893 and max-threads score of 4023 show that the CPU can sustain high clocks without thermal throttling, thanks to its 58 W TDP.

The CPU’s 72nd percentile ranking among all CPUs places it well above the GPU’s 43rd percentile, confirming that the processor is not the primary constraint in this game. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, scores 13534 versus the i3-12100F’s 13516 average, a delta of only -0.1%, meaning the quad-core i3 performs comparably to a high-end workstation processor in aggregate benchmarks. In The Technomancer specifically, the CPU’s 12 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support (DDR4 and DDR5) likely help maintain stable frame delivery, but the measured FPS data shows that the GPU saturates before the CPU becomes a limiting factor.

At lower resolutions where the GPU has more headroom, the CPU’s single-thread performance becomes more relevant. The Passmark single-thread score of 3444 and Geekbench single-core score of 2224 suggest that the i3-12100F can handle the game’s physics and AI calculations without issue. However, the benchmark results show that at 1920x1080 Low, the system achieves 70.7 FPS, which is likely near the CPU’s practical limit for this title. The 3DMark 4-thread score of 2859 indicates that the CPU’s four physical cores are well-utilized, but adding more cores would not meaningfully improve frame rates in this scenario, as the GPU remains the bottleneck.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 1576 out of 1656 tested configurations, placing it in the bottom 4.8% of all hardware pairings tested for The Technomancer. This ranking reflects the GPU’s position in the 43rd percentile and is not significantly offset by the CPU’s stronger 72nd percentile standing. The data suggests that this combination is near the extreme low end of playable performance, and most other tested combos deliver superior results.

Comparing the individual components to their nearest rivals provides context for this rank. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 13516 is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX at 13534 (delta -0.1%) and slightly ahead of the Intel Core i7-7700K at 13280 (delta 1.8%). This indicates that the processor is not dragging down the combo’s ranking. Conversely, the GPU’s average score of 8713 is just below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile at 8746 (delta -0.4%) and the AMD Radeon 550X at 8749 (delta -0.4%), showing that the graphics card is the weak link.

The combo’s rank becomes more understandable when examining the measured frame rates. At 3840x2160, the best possible score is 23.4 FPS on Low settings, which is unplayable. At 2560x1440, the best is 46.2 FPS on Low, which is borderline. Only at 1920x1080 does the combo approach mainstream playability, with 70.7 FPS on Low and 50 FPS on Medium. These results place the combo firmly in the lower quartile of tested configurations, with the GPU’s memory bandwidth and compute capacity being the decisive factors.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience for this hardware is at 1920x1080 resolution with Medium settings, which delivers an average of 50 FPS. This configuration provides a reasonable balance between visual quality and smoothness, staying above the 30 FPS threshold for playability while offering better detail than Low settings. The jump from Medium to High at 1080p reduces the frame rate from 50 to 47.9 FPS, a minimal 4.2% drop, but the visual improvements may be marginal for the additional GPU load.

For users prioritizing smoothness over fidelity, the Low preset at 1920x1080 yields 70.7 FPS, which is the only configuration in the dataset that approaches a 60 FPS target. This setting is recommended for competitive play or for users sensitive to frame pacing issues. High settings at 1080p are also viable at 47.9 FPS, but this falls below the 50 FPS average seen at Medium, making the latter a more sensible choice for consistent performance.

At higher resolutions, the data strongly discourages usage. The 2560x1440 Medium setting produces 35.7 FPS, which is playable but noticeably less fluid than 1080p. The 3840x2160 resolution should be avoided entirely, as even Low settings only achieve 23.4 FPS, and Ultra drops to 13.9 FPS. The GPU’s 4 GB memory and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for the pixel throughput required at 4K, and no settings adjustment can compensate for this hardware limitation. The recommendation is to stick with 1080p and choose between Medium (50 FPS) and Low (70.7 FPS) based on personal preference for visual fidelity versus frame rate.