The Technomancer

The Technomancer is a 2016 action RPG that still presents a meaningful challenge to modern hardware. This analysis examines the pairing of an Intel Core i5-12400 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT, a system that occupies a mid-tier position in our benchmark database. The measured results show a dramatic spread of frame rates across resolutions and presets, from a low of 33 fps at 4K Ultra to a high of 179 fps at 1080p Low. The overall combo rank is 1698 out of 3696 tested combos, placing this build just below the middle of the database. The data points to a system that can comfortably handle the game at high refresh rates on full HD, but one that struggles to maintain smooth gameplay at ultra-high resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

The brightest spot for this combo is definitely 1920x1080. At this resolution, every settings level delivers a playable experience, with even Ultra averaging 92 fps. For a player seeking maximal image quality, Ultra is clearly viable; the 92 fps average still leaves headroom above common 60 Hz and 144 Hz monitors. However, the jump from High to Ultra costs roughly 25 fps (117 down to 92) while delivering the most pronounced visual fidelity. For those who prefer a balance between pixel count and frame smoothness, Medium is a safe choice at 138 fps, but the visual return between Medium and High is worth the drop for most builds.

At 2560x1440, the story shifts. High settings average 77 fps, which is comfortable for 60 Hz and moderate for 144 Hz, but Ultra falls to exactly 60 fps average. For those willing to sacrifice a few visual details, High is the sweet spot it keeps the frame rate above the monitor refresh threshold while still preserving most of the game’s lighting effects. Medium at 90 fps is the second-best alternative if you notice dips during action sequences; note that the medium preset at this resolution shows a minimum of 76 fps, which is still perfectly playable.

At 3840x2160, the GPU reaches its limits. All settings remain under 60 fps: High is 42, Medium is 49, Ultra is only 33, and Low 64. Low fame is viable for 60 fps with 64 fps, but the visual penalty is heavy. Medium is the best compromise between image quality and playability at 49 fps average, though even this may not meet the demands of hardcore gamers. High and Ultra turn this game into a cinematic experience at 30-40 fps, which may be acceptable after some tone down. If a 60 fps target is non-negotiable, then setting the game to Low, or alternatively reducing the above the resolution to 1440p, is the only effective path.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 6750 XT is the main force for pushing pixels. Its 12GB of GDDR16 memory, running at 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, is typical for this class of GPU and appears to provide ample storage for The Technomancer’s textures. The base and boost clocks of 2150 MHz and 2600 MHz respectively, with a game clock of 2495 MHz, are all within specifications, yet the measured frame changes in a clear pattern. At 1080p, the card is rarely challenged: Low (179 fps) and even Ultra (92 fps) suggest that the pixel workload is well below the card’s compute capacity. The high-rate makes sense because the GPU is not being put under excessive pressure.

Discrepancies between resolution margins also reflect the GPU's memory bandwidth. At 4K, the pixel count quadruples relative to 1080p, but in this dataset the reduction in frame rate is far from linear. For instance, High drops from 117 fps at 1080p to 42 fps at 4K—a 64% decline. That steep drop is the hallmark of a GPU that is clearly strained at this resolution, as the shading units must process four times as many pixels. The 2560 shading units and 160 TMUs are the firepower, but memory bandwidth and pixel throughput still cap the output.

The card's benchmark percentile (the 71st percentile among all GPUs) and its average benchmark score of 26011 are in line with what we expect from a mid-to-upper-mid-range part. Looking at its nearest rivals—the AMD Radeon R9 M395X (avg 25891, 0.5% behind) and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (avg 25740, 1.1% behind)—the RX 6750 XT is definitely a competitive piece. But the game itself is not a benchmark suite; its measured results indicate that at 4k Ultra, the card is overwhelmed, losing half of its 1080p Ultra frame rate.

FAQ

Q: What settings deliver a consistent 60+ fps at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, High settings average 77 fps and Medium averages 90 fps. That means both the settings exceed 60 fps, with Ultra exactly 60 fps, though it is at the exact limit. If you want headroom, use Medium or High, not Ultra.

Q: Can the RTX 6750 XT handle 4K in this game?

A: The data says no for most presets. Medium is the best with 49 fps, High and Low at just 42 and 33 respectively, and Low reaches 64 fps. Only at the Low preset does the average clear 60 fps, and that requires substantial quality loss. For a consistent 60 fps, 1440p is the practical resolution.

Q: Which setting level shows the most fluctuation in frame times?

A: Only the Medium preset has measured min and max values. At 1080p Medium, the range is 117 to 158 fps (avg 138); at 1440p Medium, 76 to 103 fps (avg 90); and at 4K Medium, 42 to 57 fps (avg 49). This suggests that Medium has broader internal fluctuations, likely due to dynamic scenes, but the minimum remains acceptable at 1080p and 1440p.

Q: How does the CPU influence frame performance at high frame rates?

A: At 1080p Low, the combination reaches 179 fps, which is far beyond typical monitor refresh rates, indicating the i5-12400 is capable of driving very high frame rates. As the graphical load increases (e.g., to 1080p Ultra at 92 fps), the frame drops but still remains high, meaning the GPU and CPU work in reasonable balance for this game. The CPU is at 72nd percentile of all CPUs, with a 6-core / 12-thread arrangement, and it does not appear to be the weak component at lower settings.

Q: When compared to other CPUs in the database, how high is the i5's performance in this game?

A: The i5-13400 has a benchmark average score of 18683 (close to 72nd percentile. Its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 7643, has an avg of 18697, essentially a tie; the i5 actually sits at a delta of -0.1% relative to that rival, meaning it is even with or a hair below that monster of server CPU. This relative parity with a high-core server part speaks to the i5’s strong single-thread and moderate multi-thread capability.

Q: Does the game favor many cores or few cores?

A: The i5-12400 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor. At low CPU usage scene like 1080p Low, frame rates are high, but moving to higher settings the bottleneck shifts to the GPU. The fact that raising settings causes a major drop in frame rate even with a powerful GPU indicates that the game is requiring fewer the performance, not flood of multi-core scaling. The game’s 210 Million base point is from 2016, so it likely single-core.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel i5-12400 and RX 6750 XT finds itself at a rank of 1698 out of 3696 combos in our database for The Technomancer. That places it in the lower-middle of all tested systems. To give that context, the top 10% of all combos would rank roughly around 369, so this is optimistic about 46th percentile. The rank reflects a balanced mid-range system: it is not in the front-row of high-end performers, but it is far from the bottom of the list.

The challenge comes when interpreting what this rank signifies. The database includes many combinations with much more powerful GPUs (like the ones that run that (Radeon RX 6900 XT) and a high-end CPU). At 1080p and 1440p, this combo is playable, but the 4K numbers pull it down. The rank likely factors in the overall performance across all settings. Since resolution is a large part of the dataset, the weak 4K data depresses the score. If the only recorded were at 1080p, the rank would definitely be higher.

The GPU's 71st percentile ranking among all GPUs combined with the CPU's 72nd percentile suggests a very well matched duo—both are above-average parts, but neither one is exceptional. The game's own performance results confirm that pairing: 1080p Ultra at 92 fps is splendid, while 1440p High at 77 fps remains more than adequate.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on Alder Lake architecture. Running at a base clock of 2.50 GHz and all-core boost of 4.40 GHz, it has 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU operates as an efficient all-rounder. In the data, we see that this CPU can sustain frames far above typical refresh rates: at 1080p Low it achieves 179 fps, likely limited by the graphics card's ability at that setting—never by the CPU.

The i5-12400’s benchmark performance is healthy: its average benchmark score is 18683 (per the centile vs all CPUs 72). Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7643 (18697 avg, a -0.1% delta) and the Intel Core i7-1355U (18730, -0.3%). This means that the i5 is essentially at parity with the EPYC in these synthetic blends, even though the EPYC is a server part with many more cores. That's a strong indication of how good the Alder Lake single-thread performance is, which is particularly relevant for a game like The Technometer, given that the game's core optical has single core handling.

For GPU-bound scenarios, the CPU does not appear to hold back the graphics card. At 1440p High and 4K High, the CPU is not under pressure; the GPU still suffers from the heavier fill rates. The data also shows a clear monotonic FPS drop with each increase in resolution, which is typical of a balanced system where the GPU is the ana. In short, the i5 offers enough single-core grunt to feed the graphics card, and its multi-core power is not a limiting factor in this 2016 title.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following rows are the exact measured framerates for the given resolution and settings:

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS |

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

| 1920x1080 | Low | 179 |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 138 (min 117, max 158) |

| 1920x1080 | High | 117 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 92 |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 117 |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 90 (min 76, max 103) |

| 2560x1440 | High | 77 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 60 |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 64 |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 49 (min 42, max 57) |

| 3840x2160 | High | 42 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 33 |

The progression shows a heavily scalable game. At 1080p, the Ultra preset nearly maintains 60-90+ frame rates; at 1440p, Ultra sits at exactly 60 and the averages are still high; at 4K, even the lower presets fall below 100. The medium settings always provide 20-30% more than High, and High is only a reasonable step from Ultra.

Resolution Scaling

The scaling from 1080p to 4K is not linear; it's steeper. For High settings, 1080p, 1440p, and 4K deliver 117, 77, and 42 fps respectively. Real difference between 1080 and 1440 p is a 34% drop (in the order 117 to 77), and a further 45% drop from 1440 to 4K (77 to 42). In absolute numbers, the 1080p number is 2.8 times larger than the 4K number.

Looking at Low settings, the pattern is similar: 179→117→62 that is, ≈34% over the first step and ≈45% over the second. This consistency across settings tells us that the primary controlling variable is the resolution change (pixel count) and not the quality preset. The reason the frame rate drops so strongly at 4K is that the GPU's shading units and memory bandwidth are not used to efficiency at that pixel count. The RX 6750 XT's 432 GB/s bandwidth is the obvious restriction: a 192-bit bus and 12 GB of VRAM might mean that data is transferred but at the resolution it just doesn't enough bandwidth to fill the 4K buffer.

The scaling also has an effect on which component is the limiting factor. At 1080p, the GPU is not the bottleneck, as even High yields 117 FPS—so CPU draws the limit. As the resolution increases, the GPU becomes the bottleneck, which is why the difference between 1080p Ultra (92 fps) and 4K low (64 fps) is not 4x but only 1.4x dominate. This suggests that the game's visual quality does not scale linearly with resolution; at 4K, the GPU just can’t keep up with the sheer user-defined scenes, and CPU headroom becomes irrelevant.

Since the i5-12400 and RX 6750 XT both fall near the their respective 72nd and 71st percentiles, the data shows a particularly balanced pair: for gamers the 1440p High tier is the sweet spot, where 77 fps still provides smooth gameplay and quality. The 4K market is only for those who insist on medium-low detail or accept a sub-60 experience.