The Technomancer

The Technomancer is a 2016 Action RPG whose performance profile turns out to be strongly resolution-dependent. This page measures the Intel Core i5-11400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 across three resolutions and four quality presets, and the data reveals a GPU-bound title whose playability hinges almost entirely on resolution and preset choices rather than the CPU's headroom.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i5-11400F contributes 6 physical cores, 12 threads, a base clock of 2.60 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. It belongs to the 11th-gen Rocket Lake family, built on a 14 nm process, and uses the LGA 1200 socket. Its cache layout consists of 80 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The CPU runs in a desktop system, pairing with dual-channel DDR4 memory at a theoretical 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. Its launch MSRP is $157.

This specific title never pushes the processor anywhere near its limits. The database shows the i5-11400F sustaining high frame rates even at 1080p, where the frame delta between Low (180 FPS) and Ultra (92 FPS) is 88 FPS, but the lower settings are still far beyond the CPU's practical ceiling for this game's engine. In synthetic multicore stress the i5-11400F hits a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14,340 and a single-core score of 2,024, which ties directly to the 3DMark 16-thread result of 5,619 and single-thread score of 868. Its GeekBench results are 7,737 (multicore) and 1,777 (single-core). These numbers place the i5-11400F in the 71st percentile of all tested CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17,177.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the microbenchmark data, the CPU is virtually identical to four other parts within ±0.6%. The AMD EPYC 7H12 reaches an average score of 17,120 (0.3% higher), the Intel Core i5-12450H scores 17,239 (0.4% lower), the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G hits 17,278 (0.6% lower), and the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U scores 17,074 (0.6% higher). This parity means that in a CPU-bound title the i5-11400F would trade blows with these other parts, but in The Technomancer's actual measured rows the difference is invisible — the GPU becomes the limiting component at every resolution above 480p. The game's workload is thread-friendly enough to use multiple cores, but the data show that the CPU's headroom suppresses any CPU-induced frame dips, as the measured FPS at 1080p even on Ultra (92 FPS) remains above what a weak GPU pairing would produce.

None of the four nearest rivals appear in the game's measured combo results, reinforcing that the CPU's position is far from being on the critical path for this title.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the i5-11400F + RTX 5060 holds rank 1648 in the measured-combo database out of 3,696 total combos, meaning it sits just above the median. Given that the GPU alone towers in the 72nd percentile and the CPU in the 71st percentile, a mid-table rank signals the game itself is modest in its hardware demands and the CPU+GPU pair is generally strong — but the game's extreme 6K results (33 FPS at 4K Ultra) pull the average rank down. A rank in the middle of the duo's individual percentile would indicate a pair that performs near the center of the test pool, which matches the fact that the same CPU/GPU give roughly double the 1080p frame of the 4K frame at every preset.

The rank itself should be read with the game's age in mind: this is from 2016, and even the lowest measured 4K frame (33 FPS at Ultra) is far from the worst in the database. Those 1,648 other combos that rank above this one are likely because they sustain 1440p 60+ more easily, or the test recorded stronger results at 4K. But none of that changes the core conclusion: this pairing is a mainstream-capable CPU with an upper-mainstream GPU, landing comfortably mid-pack.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear monotonic scaling trend across resolutions. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 118 FPS at 1080p to 77 FPS at 1440p and then to 42 FPS at 2160p (4K). At Low settings, the ceiling is even steeper: 180 FPS at 1080p, 118 FPS at 1440p, and only 65 FPS at 4K. The Medium preset yields 138 FPS at 1080p, 90 FPS at 1440p, and 50 FPS at 4K; Ultra goes 92 , 60 , and 33 FPS respectively.

The consistent pattern is that each change from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 35–40% of the average FPS, and the move to 4K cuts that again by roughly 45–50%. Pixel-wise, 1440p has ~1.77× the pixels of 1080p, and 4K has exactly 4× — yet the frame rate drops accelerate beyond the pixel ratio, which is the textbook signature of a GPU-limited title. If the CPU were the limiting factor at 1080p, the FPS would remain constant across resolutions or length at higher resolutions; indeed, Low at 1080p hits 180 FPS while High at the same resolution delivers only 118, so settings dramatically affect the render load, not the CPU.

The data-sets also show that Medium notices every min and max value: at 4K Medium, the frame window is 42–57 FPS, at 1440p Medium it stretches 77–104, and at 1080p Medium 117–159. This range appears narrower in the heavier scenes (Medium at 4K shows a 15 FPS spread), but the average drops consistently as the pixel count climbs. It is reasonable to state that the game is GPU: the engine scales exactly the way a GPU pixel-st fabric does.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920×1080

| Preset | Avg | Min | Max |

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

| Ultra | 92 | — | — |

| High | 118 | — | — |

| Medium | 138 |117 |159 |

| Low | 180 | — | — |

At 1080p the average FPS with every setting exceeds 90, so even Ultra stays comfortably inside standard 60 FPS territory, and Medium/Low hit three-figure rates. The 1080p Medium shows a min/max of 117–159 FPS, indicating that the frame rate never dips below 117 even in the heaviest scenes the benchmark records.

2560×1440

| Ultra | 60 | — | — |

| High | 77 | — | — |

| Medium | 90 | 77 | 104 |

| Low | 118 | — | — |

1440p maintains playable averages across the board: Medium hits 90 with a 77–104 range, High stays at 77, and even Ultra sirectly hits 60. If the objective is a locked 60 FPS, Medium or High are the safe rows; Ultra can still be used if the occasional drop to 60 is acceptable.

3840×2160

| Ultra | 33 | — | — |

| High | 42 | 42 | 57 |

| Medium | 50 | 42 | 57 |

| Low | 65 | — | — |

At 4K the game barely plays above 60 even at Low (65 FPS). Medium sits at 50 (min 42, max 57), High at 42, and Ultra at 33. The 4K Medium range is 42–57, which means there are moments below 45 FPS, so a 4K experience at native resolution requires dropping to Low preset to see a minimum above 60.

The bottom line from the measured sets: 1080p gives enormous headroom, 1440p hits a realistic 60–90 range on medium-to-high settings, and 4K is only viable at Low.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 sits at the 72nd percentile of all tested GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 26,331. Its nearest rivals in the database list are the AMD Radeon 860M (26,401, 0.3% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (26,421, 0.3% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (26,553, 0.8% lower), and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT (26,011, 1.2% higher). That delta range of -0.3% to +1.2% puts the RTX 5060 in the same performance bracket as the RX 6750 XT and RX 5700 XT, both high-end cards from a previous generation.

In the game itself, the GPU’s 8 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus yields a bandwidth of 448 GB/s; the base clock is 2280 MHz and boost reaches 2497 MHz. Those memory and bandwidth numbers are more than sufficient for this title's 2016 era textures, as the measured frame rates do not show any sign of VRAM capacity being exhausted — the FPS does not spike at higher resolutions because of paging, rather the smooth scaling to shape. The passmark DirectX Double score of 77, directX 11 score of 200, and the 3DMark Steel Nomad Lite 3,628 all follow the GPU percentile trend.

Given that the GPU's own nearest rivals sit between 26,000 and 27,000 in that aggregate metric, and the pair with the i5-11400F gives 60+ FPS at 1440p Ultra, that outcome is exactly what the GPU's raw power predicts. The GPU is the component that dominates the measured rows: the difference from Low to Ultra at the same resolution swings the FPS by 2× (e.g., 4K: 33 vs 65), while the CPU’s own single-threaded results show it capable of far more than this engine demands.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run The Technomancer at 60 FPS on 1440p?

A: Yes, at Medium the average is 90 FPS, High 77, and even Ultra hits 60 FPS, so 1440p delivers 60+ on Ultra as long as the settings stay bellow the limit.

Q: Is the game limited by the CPU or GPU at 4K?

A: The resolution scaling between 1440p and 4K shows a 45–50% FPS drop which matches a GPU-bound scenario, while the CPU statistic is the same at all resolutions. The low preset changes the rate only slightly at 4K (33→65), suggesting the GPU is the primary bottleneck across the range.

Q: What is the minimum frame rate on 4K Medium?

A: At 3840×2160 with the Medium preset, the average is 50 FPS and the minimum dips to 42 FPS, with a maximum of 57 FPS.

Q: Does 1080p Ultra maintain 90+ FPS?

A: Yes, the Ultra average at 1920×1080 is 92 FPS. That is the only preset at 1080 where the minimum is not recorded, but the average sits above 90.

Q: How does the RTX 5060 compare to its nearest GPU rival?

A: It sits within 1.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT in average benchmark score (26,011 vs 26,331), and within 0.8% of the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary to the upside, meaning those 3 are practically indistinguishable in synthetic scenes, though the specific game results may shift differently.

Q: Is this pair a good match for legacy 2016 AAA games like The Technomancer?

A: Yes, data shows 60+ frames in Ultra at 1080p and 50+ at Medium 1440p, and even 4K goes 50 FPS on Medium; the i5-11400F stays well above the CPU, so the combo delivers good playability in this equally old title.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows give a clear answer for each resolution.

1080p — best preset Ultra

Even the Ultra preset reaches 92 FPS, which is above 60 and 75% of the way to 120 of. Since Ultra adds visual quality without sacrificing the 60- FPS floor, 1920×1080 can be run at the highest preset.

1440p — medium (the sweet spot)

Medium at 2560×1440 yields 90 FPS min 77 max 104. That's a high refresh rate that reproduces the frame times, while High at 77 FPS still >60 with no penalty. If you have 60 Hz, High gives 77, but If you want to feed a 100+ Hz panel, Medium gives 90. The jump from Medium to High for 15% FPS is not worth it unless the number rises more.

4K — Low only

If the goal is to play at 3840×2160, the Low preset gives 65 FPS average and is the only row that reliably clears 60. Medium is 50 avg, dips to 42 at the worst moment, so 4K Medium is not stable; the 2160p Ultra at 33 is not playable in a MLA that is why the database recommends Low the only viable preset for a smooth 4K session.

Balanced — For someone playing on a typical 1440p monitor, the data strongly suggests using Medium. It yields 90 FPS on average, with minimums above 77, and the max reaches 104. With those lows, there are no frame stutters, and the preset uses the GPU's power without leaving headroom on the table.

Every frame number above comes directly from the measured rows, so the “best” ping is whichever hits your target frame-rate threshold while staying within the measured reference—and for most users, that will be Medium at 1440p.