The Technomancer

The Technomancer is an Action RPG from 2016, and the database pairs Intel Core i5-10400F (6 cores, 12 threads, 2.90 GHz base, 4.30 GHz boost) with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (4 GB GDDR5, 128-bit memory bus). Of the 3696 tested combos, this one ranks 3636th, meaning only 60 combinations perform worse. The GPU itself sits in the 25th percentile among all GPU-class entries, while the CPU hits the 68th percentile — a clear sign that the graphics card dictates the overall score in this title.

How This Combo Ranks

The rank of 3636 out of 3696 places this pairing at the very bottom of the database. Only 60 combos score lower, and those are typically paired with even weaker graphics hardware or older integrated solutions. The core reason is the GPU: the GTX 1050 Ti carries an average benchmark score of 4193, putting it in the 25th percentile of all GPUs. Meanwhile, the Core i5-10400F averages a 14185 benchmark score, which lands in the 68th percentile of CPUs, ahead of 68% of processors in the system. The gap between the two component percentiles (68 CPU vs 25 GPU) explains why the overall combo ranking is low: the i5 has enough compute headroom, but the GTX 1050 Ti cannot keep up.

The CPU is so far ahead of the GPU that its own nearest rivals show nearly identical CPU scores. The Xeon 6756E sits 0.2% higher (14163 vs 14185), the Core 7 160UL is 0.3% lower, and the EPYC 7552 is 0.5% higher — all within negligible deltas. This tells us the i5-10400F is a steady mid-range performer that doesn't shift the needle between these combos. The GPU, however, is far behind its own nearest rivals: the Radeon R5 M330 is 0.6% higher (4170), the Quadro K2100M is 1% higher (249, and the Quadro K3000M is 1.1% lower (4241). None of these are exactly strong, but the 1050 Ti is stuck at the low end of the graph.

Given that the CPU is not a limiter, the observed frame rates derive almost entirely from the GTX 1050 Ti. The game uses more GPU resources than CPU, and the data below indicates that resolution scaling has the expected effect: as the pixels needed by the display increase, the frame rate drops in step, but the CPU does not intervene at any stage. So the ranking reflects the GPU's limited ability to handle The Technomancer's rendering workload.

GPU Role

The GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is a Pascal-based card built on the GP107 chip, with a base clock of 1291 MHz and a boost clock of 1392 MHz. Its memory runs at 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective) across a 128-bit bus, delivering a theoretical bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s. The card has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 DOPs, producing a pixel rate of 44.54 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 66.82 GTexel/s.

In The Technomancer, this hardware clearly becomes the bottleneck at every resolution and setting. The card's average OpenCL score in synthetic tests (18129) and a DirectX11 PassMark score of 45 indicate that it excels only at basic APIs, but the title still asks for historically mainstream 64-bit computing. The GTX's FP32 throughput is 2.138 TFLOPS, which is hardly a modern number. Compare that to what the CPU can offer on 3D-mark 16-thread tests — the difference is large. Still, the measured FPS show melting: the GTX 1050 Ti yields the same performance class as the Radeon R5 M330 and, importantly, its percentile of 25 means that 75% of all GPUs score higher. That is the reason the VRAM and see that the apparent 4GB is more than enough capacity but the raw spirit is lacking.

Resolution Scaling

To understand the limitation, comparing the same settings across resolution widths is helpful. Take Low settings: at 1080p the card delivers 55 FPS, at 1440p it falls to 36 FPS, and at 4K it drops to 20 FPS. That is a 65% reduction in FPS from 1080p to 4K while pixel count multiplies (1090x1090 vs 3820x2160, about 4x). The scaling is roughly linear with absolute pixel count: a 4K frame has 4.0× the pixels of 1080p, and the 55→20 is 36% of the original FPS. Even the best-case ratio (1.8× drop in FPS for 4× pixels) shows the GPU is severely strained.

The High preset pattern is similar: 1080p high is 36 FPS, 1440p high is 24 FPS, and 4K high is 13 FPS. The Ultra preset: 28 → 18 → 10. The relative gaps between 1080p and 1440p (0.6×) and 1440p to 4K (0. functions) show a consistent ~.5 drop as the pixel load grows. Because the CPU was (68th percentile) and the GPU (25th percentile) have such different headroom, the limiting component is clearly the graphics.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The table below lists all 12 measured FPS values from the FACT PACK. The GTX 1050 Ti with the i5-10400F never reaches a stable 60 FPS even at 1080p Low, and 4K Ultra sits at single-digit FPS. Only the Medium preset notes have recorded min/max; other entries left blank in the database.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg | Min | Max |

|--------------|----------|-----|-----|-----|

| 3840x2160 | High | 13 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 20 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 15 | 13 | 17 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 10 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | High | 24 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 36 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 28 | 23 | 32 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 18 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | High | 36 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 55 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 42 | 36 | 49 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 28 | - | - |

Looking at the Medium row holds the only interval data: at 1080p it fluctuates between 36 and 49 FPS, at 1440p 23–32 FPS, and at 4K 13–17 FPS. That makes the Medium 1080p preset the only combination with a minimum above 30 FPS, which is still below the typical 60 FPS target. The data beyond that is sparse, but the pattern is uniform: every specular bump of resolution or raised quality drops the average by roughly 10–20%, building the narrative of a GPU that runs out of shader power quickly.

##%Frequency Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q: What is the highest average frame rate this combo can produce?

A: According to the dataset, the best case is 55 FPS at 1920x1080 Low settings. That is also the only measurement that clears 50 FPS.

Q: Does the Ultra preset ever match the Low preset at any resolution?

A: No. At each resolution, Ultra drops by a consistent margin: at 1080p Ultra averages 28 FPS versus Low’s 55 FPS; at 1440p Ultra averages 6% vs Low’s 36; at 4K Ultra stays at 10 FPS against Low’s 20.

Q: Which settings are included with min/max frame information?

A: Only the Medium preset has min/max data. At 4K Mobile, the average is 15 with a min() of 13 and max of 17; at 1440p Medium, 23–32 average 28; and at 1080p Medium, 36–49 average 42. All other presets have only an average.

Q: How does the GTX 1050 Ti’s VRAM affect this game?

A: The card has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s. The dataset does not indicate whether the game even hits that capacity, but the average FPS at hight and ultra sizes fails to preserve at lower resolutions; thus the bandwidth is a limiting factor.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bigger bottleneck in this combo?

A: The CPU performs well - 6 cores with 12 threads, boosting to 4.30 GHz, and a 68th percentile ranking overall. The GPU sits in the 25th percentile, and the FPS scaling across resolutions indicates the GPU is the limiting element. For example, raising the resolution by base doubles the pixel count while dropping FPS by, but the CPU remains unchanged; so the GPU is the constraint.

Q: Screenshot: which setting is more playable at 1080p?

A: Low achieves 55 FPS, Medium 42 FPS, High 36 FPS, Ultra 28 FPS. Low is the only average above 50. The database does not include any lowest frame times for those, so the context of the 42 FPS Medium (min 36, max 49) is the only one with a full framerate distribution.

CPU Role

The Core i5-10400F delivers its compute through 6 physical cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost up to 4.30 GHz. It works on the Comet Lake architecture built on Intel’s 14 nm process and connects via Socket 1200. The CPU has a 12 MB shared L3 cache, 64 KB of L1, and 256 KB of L2 per core, with dual-channel DDR4 memory support providing a peak bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The CPU’s 65 W TDP indicates a modest power draw.

Synthetic benchmarks position it well above the GPU. It scores a Cinebench R23 multi-core of 10283 points and a single-core of 1451, with Geekbench multicore reaching 6257 and single-core 1420. In PassMark, it gets 12115 multiple threads and 2541 single-thread. Those are strong numbers. The CPU is ranked in the 68th percentile of all processors, and its average benchmark score of 14185 is only 0.2% off the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C, its closest rival above it, and 0.3% better than the Intel Core 7 160UL. This means that the i5 places solidly in the mid-upper echelon.

In the Technomancer, the CPU is sufficient. The measured FPS follows the pixel-throughput scaling of the GPU rather than any CPU limit: 1080p Low to 4K Low drops from 55 to 20, and Ultra drops from 28 to 10. If the CPU were the bottleneck, these numbers would be much closer together, since the CPU workload per frame doesn't change as radically with resolution. Instead, the FPS scales directly with the GPU's fill and texture shift, confirming that the i5-10400F provides more headroom than the GTX 1050 Ti can use. The Intel Core has 12 threads and a