The Technomancer

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for The Technomancer with the Intel Core i5-12400 and AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling as resolution increases. At 1080p with Ultra settings, the combo delivers 137.8 FPS. Moving to 1440p Ultra drops this to 90.7 FPS, a reduction of 47.1 FPS. At 4K Ultra, the average falls further to 46.5 FPS, which represents a 91.3 FPS gap from the 1080p result. This steep decline across resolutions indicates that the Radeon RX 7900 XTX is the primary limiting component at higher pixel counts, with the GPU's rendering workload scaling nearly linearly with pixel count.

The scaling pattern is consistent across all settings presets. At Low settings, the frame rate goes from 252 FPS at 1080p to 173.9 FPS at 1440p and 93.4 FPS at 4K. The 1080p-to-4K drop at Low is 158.6 FPS, while at Ultra it is 91.3 FPS. Notably, the percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is larger at Low settings (37.1% of the 1080p value remains at 4K) compared to Ultra (33.7% remains). This suggests that at lower settings, the CPU has more headroom to feed frames, but the GPU still becomes the bottleneck when pixel count quadruples.

At 4K, the gap between Low (93.4 FPS) and Ultra (46.5 FPS) is 46.9 FPS, which shows that even at the highest resolution, the settings preset significantly impacts performance. The data indicates that the RX 7900 XTX's 24 GB GDDR6 memory with 960.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for 4K textures, but the rendering pipeline — with 6144 shading units and 192 ROPs — still struggles to maintain high frame rates at Ultra. The 4K Ultra result of 46.5 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold commonly considered smooth, while 4K High at 63.2 FPS clears it narrowly.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400 brings 6 cores and 12 threads to this pairing, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its 18 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support (DDR4 or DDR5) position it as a mid-range desktop part. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU scores 15,935 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,249 in single-core, with a PassMark multi-thread score of 18,747. The 3DMark results show scaling from 910 in single-thread to 5,890 in max-threads, indicating healthy multi-threading capability for a 6-core part.

In The Technomancer, the CPU's role becomes evident when examining the 1080p results. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 252 FPS, which is close to the practical ceiling for many displays. The 1080p Ultra result of 137.8 FPS is still high, but the gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p (114.2 FPS) is smaller than the gap at 4K (46.9 FPS). This compression at lower resolutions suggests that the CPU can keep up with the GPU's frame production even at high settings, but the GPU's workload dominates at higher resolutions.

The Core i5-12400's percentile rank of 77 against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19,850, places it in the upper-middle tier. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-9700, scores 19,831 (0.1% higher), while the Core i7-8700 scores 19,894 (-0.2% difference). These near-identical scores indicate that the 12400's performance is well-matched to previous-generation 8-core parts, despite having fewer cores, due to its Alder Lake architecture and higher boost clock. For The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, the CPU's 12 threads provide ample headroom; the game's age means it likely does not utilize more than a few cores efficiently, and the 12400's strong single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core of 2,249) handles legacy game logic without becoming a bottleneck.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this combo in The Technomancer?

A: The highest measured average is 252 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This drops to 173.9 FPS at 2560x1440 Low and 93.4 FPS at 3840x2160 Low.

Q: Can this combo maintain 60 FPS at 4K?

A: At 4K High, the average FPS is 63.2, which exceeds 60. At 4K Medium, it rises to 77 FPS. However, at 4K Ultra, the average falls to 46.5 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Core i5-12400 has an average benchmark score of 19,850. The Intel Core i7-9700 scores 19,831 (0.1% higher), the Intel Core i7-8700 scores 19,894 (-0.2% lower), and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX scores 19,928 (-0.4% lower). The differences are within 0.4% for all rivals.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings produce 173.9 FPS, while Ultra produces 90.7 FPS. The difference is 83.2 FPS, meaning Ultra delivers roughly 52.2% of the Low setting's frame rate.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: At 1080p, the data shows a smaller relative drop between settings than at 4K. The 1080p Low-to-Ultra gap of 114.2 FPS, compared to the 4K gap of 46.9 FPS, indicates that the GPU is still the primary limiter, but the CPU has enough headroom to push very high frame rates at lower resolutions.

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested combinations?

A: The combo ranks 250th out of 1,656 tested combinations for The Technomancer, placing it in the top 15.1% of all combos tested.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-12400 + AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX combination ranks 250th out of 1,656 tested combos in The Technomancer. This places the pairing in the top 15.1% of all tested configurations. The rank reflects the GPU's strong absolute performance — the RX 7900 XTX has a percentile rank of 85 against all GPUs and an average benchmark score of 44,019 — combined with a CPU that, while not top-tier, is sufficient to avoid being a major constraint in this title.

The RX 7900 XTX's nearest GPU rivals in synthetic benchmarks are the AMD Radeon Pro 580 (44,195, -0.4% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile (43,667, 0.8% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti (44,900, -2% delta). These small deltas suggest that the RX 7900 XTX performs on par with these cards in general compute, though the game-specific results in The Technomancer will vary based on driver optimization and architecture differences. The CPU's nearest rivals, as noted, are all within 0.4% of its average score, indicating that swapping the 12400 for a Core i7-9700 or Core i7-8700 would yield almost identical results in this game.

The rank of 250th is respectable given that the combo pairs a mid-range CPU with a high-end GPU. The data shows that the GPU dominates the frame rate outcomes, so the rank is more heavily influenced by the RX 7900 XTX's capabilities than the CPU's. In a game like The Technomancer, which was released in 2016, the CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads are more than adequate, and the rank would likely improve if the game were more CPU-intensive.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the target resolution and frame rate preference. At 4K, High settings (63.2 FPS) provide the best balance, as Ultra (46.5 FPS) drops below the 60 FPS threshold, while Medium (77 FPS) offers a meaningful improvement but sacrifices visual fidelity. For users with 1440p displays, High settings (113.4 FPS) are recommended for a smooth experience, while Medium (137.6 FPS) is also viable for higher refresh rate monitors. Ultra at 1440p (90.7 FPS) remains playable but offers diminishing returns over High.

At 1080p, all settings presets exceed 100 FPS except Ultra, which still delivers 137.8 FPS. For 1080p users, Ultra is the recommended preset, as it provides the highest visual quality without compromising frame rates. The Low preset at 1080p (252 FPS) is only useful for competitive play or extremely high refresh rate displays beyond 240 Hz, as the visual fidelity loss is substantial.

The data shows that the scaling from Medium to High at 4K is relatively modest (77 to 63.2 FPS, a 13.8 FPS drop), while the jump from High to Ultra is more severe (63.2 to 46.5 FPS, a 16.7 FPS drop). This suggests that High settings occupy the sweet spot for visual quality per frame rate cost. At 1440p, the Medium-to-High drop is 24.2 FPS, and the High-to-Ultra drop is 22.7 FPS, indicating more consistent scaling at this resolution. Users should prioritize High settings unless they have specific needs for higher frame rates, in which case Medium provides a solid fallback.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table summarizes all measured average FPS values for the combo:

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS |

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

| 3840x2160 | High | 63.2 |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 93.4 |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 77.0 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 46.5 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 113.4 |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 173.9 |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 137.6 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 90.7 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 179.6 |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 252.0 |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 205.8 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 137.8 |

At 1080p, the spread from Low to Ultra is 114.2 FPS, with Medium (205.8 FPS) landing nearly midway between Low and High (179.6 FPS). At 1440p, the spread narrows to 83.2 FPS, and at 4K it narrows further to 46.9 FPS. This compression at higher resolutions reinforces the GPU-bound nature of the workload.

The performance deltas between consecutive settings at each resolution are as follows: at 1080p, Low-to-Medium is 46.2 FPS, Medium-to-High is 26.2 FPS, and High-to-Ultra is 41.8 FPS. At 1440p, the deltas are 36.3, 24.2, and 22.7 FPS respectively. At 4K, the deltas are 16.4, 13.8, and 16.7 FPS. The 4K data shows a more uniform cost per settings tier, while 1080p shows a larger penalty for the Ultra preset relative to High. The lowest measured result is 46.5 FPS at 4K Ultra, while the highest is 252 FPS at 1080p Low. All measured data points are from actual testing (dataIsMeasured is true), providing confidence in the consistency of the results across resolution and settings combinations.