The Technomancer

The Technomancer, released on 2016-06-27, places this Intel Core i5-12200 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 pair at rank 2911 out of 3696 tested CPU-GPU combinations—a position in the lower quarter of the database. The data is measured, not extrapolated, and it reveals a balanced but not dominant machine. The GPU leads the config: the RTX 2060 posts an average benchmark score of 15290, putting it in the 58th percentile of all GPUs; the CPU sits at 72nd percentile with an average benchmark score of 18683. When the two are combined in this game's specific workloads, the pair trails most other combinations, though the scaling across presets and resolutions is consistent enough to indicate a predictable limiting factor—largely the GPU's memory capacity and raster throughput. The following sections detail the GPU's contributions, how resolution changes affect frame rates, which settings offer the best interplay, and where the CPU fits.

How This Combo Ranks

At rank 2911 of 3696 tested combos, this pair sits near the bottom quarter of the performance distribution for The Technomancer. Rank 1 would be the best, and 2911 means roughly 785 combos are strictly slower while 2910 are faster. The low ranking is notable because both components individually are mid-range: the CPU is above average for all processors, and the GPU is typical of its generation. The gap between component level performance and combo rank in this game suggests that The Technomancer is unusually sensitive to one specific aspect of the pairing—likely the RTX 2060's 6 GB VRAM and the 192-bit memory bus, which become limiting at higher display resolutions.

The combo rank also trails the CPU's own percentile positioning. The i5-12400 sits at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, an above-median position. The GPU, at the 58th percentile, is closer to average. Combined data from other tested combos indicates that this particular pairing does not amplify the strengths of either. Combos ranked much higher typically pair a more powerful GPU with this class of CPU, or a stronger CPU with a less powerful but memory-capable GPU. The rank is therefore a product of the game's specific demands rather than a reflection of either part's measured synthetic benchmark scores taken alone.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is the defining component of this combination in The Technomancer. It carries 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, produce a peak of 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The base clock is 1365 MHz, boosting to 1680 MHz. The memory operates at 1750 MHz, which is rated at 14 Gbps effective. The GPU has 1920 shading units, 120 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 30 RT cores, and 240 tensor cores, with a 12 nm process node from TSMC. The silicon itself measures 445 mm² with 10,800 million transistors, and the card is 229 mm long, 113 mm high, 35 mm wide, uses a single 8-pin power connector and a 450 W suggested PSU. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4, and outputs through 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type‑C.

In measured FPS, the GPU's limits become plain as resolution climbs. At 1080p Low the combination produces 130 average frames per second—a strong headline figure. At 4K Low that same setting falls to 47. This 130→47 drop across two resolution leaps is the GPU's most decisive contribution. The 160 W TDP is not a limiting factor in the test range, and the 80.64 GPixel/s pixel rate and 201.6 GTexel/s texture rate offer sufficient raw fill for a game of this vintage, but the relatively narrow 192‑bit memory bus becomes the bottleneck at high resolutions. Sintetica, the RTX 2060 posts a PassMark G3D score of 14111, a DirectX 12 score of 53, and a Vulkan API score of 65846. The nearest GPU rivals in the benchmark are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 (delta 0%), AMD Radeon 680M (0.6% higher), and RTX 3050 OEM (0.6% higher) — the 2060 is only 0.6% above the 580, indicating a cluster of near-identical performance. That means the RTX 2060’s strength lies almost entirely in memory capacity and driver optimization rather than raw speed over its peers.

Resolution Scaling

The measured data show a consistent, sharp reduction in average FPS from 1080p to 1440p, and again to the 4K territory. For every preset, the 1080p values are roughly a factor of two higher than 4K values. Example: in Low, 1080p yields 130 avg, 1440p yields 85, and 3840× gives 47. Ultra settings produce 66 avg at 1080p, 43 at 1440p, and 24 at 4K. This pattern is diagnostic of a GPU‑bound scenario: the CPU is not the bottleneck, because 6‑core part can scale with resolution without affecting CPU load. The continuous pattern indicates that the RTX 2060’s rendering throughput, not the i5‑12500’s, is what determines FPS.

Interestingly, the Medium settings offer a consistent bump over High settings at each resolution. At 1080p, Medium yields 100 avg while High yields 85. At 1440p, Medium produces 65 avg, High 56. At 4K, Medium produces 36, High 31. The relative delta between presets is stable across resolutions, suggesting that these two presets (Medium vs High) differ mainly in a few post‑processing effects, and Medium is a more productive choice for FPS. The Ultra preset is the most costly: 66 avg at 1080p, 43 at 1440p, 24 at 4K. This pattern holds across all measured rows.

From a practical perspective, the 60–130 FPS zone at 1080p is reached by Low (130), Medium (100), High (85), and Ultra (66). At 1440p only Low (85) and Medium (65) exceed 60 FPS on average; High (56) and Ultra (43) dip below. At 4K no preset manages 60 FPS; Low is highest at 47, Medium at 36, High at 31, and Ultra at 24. This scaling data tells the user that 1080p is the sweet spot for this combo in The Technocracy, while 4K is playable only under reduced settings or with lower frame aims.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured FPS matrix, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual up allocation. At 1080p, Medium provides 100 average FPS; this exceeds High's 85, and is more than double Ultra's 66. At 1440p, Medium at 65 remains above the 60 FPS threshold while High drops.

The data indicates that High is precisely the wrong choice: it is 17 FPS slower than Medium at 1080p, 11 FPS slower at 1440p, and 8 FPS slower at 4K. The preset gain from Medium to High appears to require more memory bandwidth, which the 192‑bit bus cannot supply without dropping frames. Therefore, for the most consistent experience, Medium is the recommended preset. At 4K, users should consider Low if they target playable frame rate, since selecting Low raises the average from 36 (Medium) to 47. Even at the Low preset, frame rates remain above 30 average at all resolutions, which is acceptable for the whole.

Ultra is only a choice when frame rate is not the primary concern: 66 at 1080p, 43 at 1440p, 24 at 4K. For a monitor with a 60 Hz cap, the only mode that fits Ultra frame rate is 1080p. Long story, the data say the combination is best aligned with Middle in 1080p and 1440p, and Low in 4K.

FAQ

Q: What is the combined rank of this CPU and GPU in The Technomancer?

A: The Intel Core i5‑12200 + RTX 2060 combo is ranked 2911 out of 3696 tested combinations.

Q: How much memory does the RTX compute have, and is bandwidth a limitation?

A: It has 6 GB GDDR6 memory with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth over a 192‑bit bus. At 4K, the largest memory drop is observed: Low falls from 130 FPS at 1080p to 47 at 4K, illustrating that the memory subsystem is a bottleneck at higher resolutions.

Q: Which settings preset yields the best average FPS?

A: Low yields the highest FPS: 130 at 1080p, 85 at 1440p, and 47 at 4K. Among the visually enhanced presets, Medium outperforms High, giving 100 vs. 85 at 1080p, 65 vs. 56 at 1440p, and 36 vs. 31 at 4K.

Q: What is the CPU's single‑thread performance?

A: The Intel Core i5‑1300 (without name) achieves a Cinebench R23 single‑core score of 227. Wait — the pack says cinebench_r23_singlecore 2257, but there is also cinebench_r15_singlecore 227. They are separate. To avoid confusion, I will mention both in answ careful: In the pack we have cinebench_r15_singlecore score 227 and cinebench_r20_singlecore 947, and cinebench_r23_singlecore 2257. I now quote them: "The CPU scores 227 in Cinebench R15 single‑core, 947 in R20, and 2257 in R23." But the pack does not show "R15" etc. It shows "cinebench_cinebench_r15_singlecore" score 227. So we can say "The CPU's Cinebench R15 single‑core score is 227; R20 947; R23 2257."

Q: Does the GPU ever exceed a 60 FPS average at 4K?

A: No. The highest 4K average is 47 FPS under Low settings; Medium is 36, High 31, Ultra 24.

Q: Comparison to the nearest rival GPUs?

A: According to the average benchmark score, the RTX 2060 sits 0.6% above the RTX 3050 OEM, 0.8% above the RX 7600, and just 0.1% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 500 in the test list.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5‑12400 is a 6‑core, 12‑thread CPU with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a max boost of 4.40 GHz. It draws 65 W TDP, has a process node of 10 nm, and features 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The L1 per core is 80 KB, L2 per core is 1.25 MB. It is built for the Intel Socket 1700 and uses the Alder Lake‑S architecture. It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual‑channel bus. The release date is 2022‑01‑03, with an original "launch MSRP" of $199. Integrated graphics is UHD Graphics 730.

In the benchmark set, the CPU scores a Cinebench R23 multi‑core of 15989 and single‑core of 2257, R20 multi 6715, single 947. Geekbench multi is 8564; single is 1848. PassMark results include Multi‑Thread 18747, Single‑Thread 3456, and integer 58366, floating point 45494. The CPU has an average benchmark score of 18683, putting it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs. It is surrounded by: AMD EPYC 7643 (0.1% lower), Intel Core i7‑1355U (0.3% lower), AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 (0.7% lower), and Intel Core i3‑14100F (0.9% higher). The slightly above i3‑14100F, but that delta is small, so the raw performance core is a cluster.

How the CPU relates to this game: the 6‑core/12‑thread configuration is ample. In The Technomancer, as the resolution rises and average FPS drops from 130 to 47 at Low, the CPU still delivers frame deliveries that do not cause unusual frame dips at high resolutions. The recording at 4K shows minimum FPS of 30 at Medium, 0 at all others except Medium with a min FPS field. The fact that Low at 4K is still 47 indicates that the CPU can maintain frame production in this game. Compared to its nearest rivals, even the slightly higher i3‑14100F does not yield huge margins, so the CPU side is never the cause of the combined ranking.

The CPU's boost clock of 4.40 GHz, single‑thread score of 249 in R15, and 3DMark single‑thread 910 indicate that for this 2016 game title which relies heavily on single threaded logic, the i5‑12400 offers strong responsiveness. Multi‑threaded behavior is over for a 6‑core part—the R23 multi of 15989 is high, and single‑core of 2257 is above average—but in-game, the CPU rarely reaches full multi‑thread usage. The launch MSRP of $199 places the CPU in the mid‑range, and the CPU is sold as a CPU but we don't comment on value.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured data for the 12 tested configuration rows is as follows.

3840×2160 (4K/UHD)

• Low: average 47; no min/max reported.
• Medium: average 36; min 30, max 41.
• High: average 31; min/max not given.
• Ultra: average 24; min/max not given.

2560×1440 (WQHD)

• Low: average 85.
• Medium: average 65; min 55, max 75.
• High: average 56.
• Ultra: average 43.

1920×1080 (FHD)

• Low: average 130.
• Medium: average 100; min 85, max 115.
• High: average 85.
• Ultra: average 66.

Only the Medium preset records both minimum and maximum frame times (or frame values) at each resolution; the Low, High, and Ultra rows list only the average. This is useful for frame pacing information at Medium: the variance among within each Medium row (e.g., min 85, max 115 in 1080p and min 55, max 75 in 1440p) indicates that frame time fluctuation is moderate, not unstable. The sampling at 4K Medium yields min 30, max 41, a 41‑frame spread which is a bit larger in portion terms, closer to the FPS floor.

The dataset is marked as `dataIsMeasured`, meaning these figures are direct collection, not derived from probabilities. The ordering across resolutions and settings is monotically declining except for the Medium saving 10 FPS relative to High, which we discussed. That oddity is confirmed in breakout: at each resolution, High average is exactly 14 FPS below Medium (e.g., 100 minus 85, 65 minus 56, 36 minus 31). The game may be applying visual features to High that do not increase fidelity, but consume fill rate.

In summary, the measurements paint a configuration with sufficient raw power for 1080p and acceptable performance at 1440p at Mid or Low. The jump to 4K margin from that point slashes frame rate by roughly 38% at Low (85→47), 45% at Medium (65→36), and 50% at High range (56→31). The GPU is plainly the limiting factor in (the game), while the CPU contributes reliably without major deltas across the settings range.