The Technomancer

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-13400F compare to its closest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The i5-13400F posts an average benchmark score of 25236. This places it 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-13620H (25201) and 0.5% ahead of both the AMD EPYC 9474F (25103) and AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 (25099). It trails the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (25365) by 0.5%.

Q: What is the GPU's standing relative to comparable graphics cards?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 has an average benchmark score of 37283, ranking in the 81st percentile among all GPUs. It is 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37507), 1.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A (38008), and 2.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (38135), while leading the AMD Radeon RX 5300M (36371) by 2.5%.

Q: What are the core and thread counts of the CPU, and what is its boost capability?

A: The Intel Core i5-13400F features 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. It belongs to the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node.

Q: What memory configuration does the GPU use, and what is its bandwidth?

A: The RTX 4070 comes with 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. Its memory clock is 1313 MHz, with 21 Gbps effective speed.

Q: How does the combo rank within The Technomancer's tested configurations?

A: This specific pairing of the i5-13400F and RTX 4070 ranks 426th out of 1656 total combinations tested in The Technomancer, placing it in the top quarter of all tested hardware pairings.

Q: What is the measured FPS at 1080p High settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo achieves an average of 155.7 FPS. This is notably higher than the 4K High result of 53.2 FPS, highlighting the resolution scaling challenge.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F serves as the processing foundation for this benchmark configuration. With 10 cores and 16 threads, it provides substantial parallelism for The Technomancer's Action RPG workloads. The core arrangement combines performance and efficiency elements, though the data does not specify the exact split. The 2.50 GHz base clock ensures consistent operation under sustained loads, while the 4.60 GHz boost clock allows for rapid single-threaded execution when the game requires it.

The CPU's benchmark results illustrate its balanced capabilities. In 3DMark tests, the processor scores 1880 with 2 threads, 3459 with 4 threads, and 5591 with 8 threads, scaling to 7314 with 16 threads and 7307 at max threads. This scaling pattern shows diminishing returns beyond 8 threads, which is typical for games like The Technomancer that may not fully utilize all available threads. The single-thread score of 960 in 3DMark and 3004 in Cinebench R23 single-core indicates strong per-core performance, which matters for game logic and physics calculations.

The CPU's L3 cache of 20 MB shared across all cores helps reduce memory latency during gameplay. The 10 nm process node and 65 W TDP suggest efficient power delivery, though the data does not include thermal performance in-game. The processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, with dual-channel configuration, though the benchmark data does not specify which memory type was used during testing.

In the context of The Technomancer, the CPU's role becomes more apparent at lower resolutions where the GPU is less constrained. At 1080p Low settings, the system achieves 235.2 FPS, which likely approaches the CPU's ceiling for this game. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 7314 versus the max-thread score of 7307 indicates that the processor's full thread count is available and consistent under load. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 21279 further confirms that the CPU can sustain high multi-threaded output when needed.

The CPU's percentile rank of 82 among all CPUs places it well above average, and its nearest rivals show tightly clustered performance. The deltaPct values of 0.1% to 0.5% against the i7-13620H, EPYC 9474F, and Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 indicate that these processors are essentially interchangeable in aggregate benchmarks. However, the game-specific performance may vary based on how The Technomancer utilizes cores.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 is the primary graphics driver in this configuration. Built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm process at TSMC, the GPU contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. Its base clock of 1920 MHz and boost clock of 2475 MHz provide the raw frequency headroom for sustained rendering performance.

The memory subsystem is critical for high-resolution gaming. The 12 GB GDDR6X capacity with a 192-bit bus and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth allows the GPU to handle large texture sets and complex scenes without stuttering. The memory clock of 1313 MHz with 21 Gbps effective speed ensures that data can flow quickly between the GPU cores and VRAM. This becomes particularly relevant at 4K resolution where texture data demands increase substantially.

The GPU's compute capabilities are substantial. With 5888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, the card can process geometry and pixels efficiently. The 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores provide hardware acceleration for ray tracing and AI-enhanced features, though The Technomancer's 2016 release date means it likely does not utilize these modern features. The FP32 performance of 29.15 TFLOPS and texture rate of 455.4 GTexel/s indicate the raw throughput available for traditional rasterization.

In DirectX benchmarks, the GPU scores 244 in DirectX 11, 103 in DirectX 12, and 320 in DirectX 9, with a DirectX 10 score of 139. The Passmark G3D score of 26927 and GPU compute score of 14720 provide additional context for its overall graphics capability. The GPU ranks in the 81st percentile among all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 37283.

The GPU's role in The Technomancer becomes evident when comparing FPS across settings. At 4K Ultra, the system drops to 40.2 FPS, while at 4K Low it reaches 86.2 FPS. This wide spread indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor at high resolutions and settings. The 12 GB VRAM is likely sufficient for the game's requirements, though the data does not specify VRAM usage during testing.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data reveals distinct performance tiers across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the system achieves 235.2 FPS on Low settings, 180.4 FPS on Medium, 155.7 FPS on High, and 117.9 FPS on Ultra. The spread from Low to Ultra is 117.3 FPS, showing that settings have a significant impact at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the FPS drops to 149.9 on Low, 115.3 on Medium, 97.8 on High, and 77.8 on Ultra. The performance gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 72.1 FPS, indicating that the GPU is becoming more constrained as pixel count increases. The High to Ultra transition costs 20.0 FPS, while the Low to Medium transition costs 34.6 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the system delivers 86.2 FPS on Low, 64.5 FPS on Medium, 53.2 FPS on High, and 40.2 FPS on Ultra. The Low to Ultra spread is 46.0 FPS, further compressing as the GPU approaches its limits. The Medium to High transition costs 11.3 FPS, while the High to Ultra transition costs 13.0 FPS.

The 1080p Low result of 235.2 FPS is the highest measured value, while the 4K Ultra result of 40.2 FPS is the lowest. The data shows no minimum or maximum FPS values, so the average FPS represents the overall performance without indicating frame time consistency.

Across all resolutions, the pattern is consistent: Low settings provide the highest FPS, followed by Medium, High, and Ultra in descending order. The relative cost of each settings tier varies by resolution. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Medium is 54.8 FPS, while at 4K this difference shrinks to 21.7 FPS. This suggests that GPU-bound scenarios at higher resolutions reduce the absolute impact of settings changes.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the bottleneck dynamics of this configuration. At High settings, the system delivers 155.7 FPS at 1080p, 97.8 FPS at 1440p, and 53.2 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 57.9 FPS (37.2%), while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 44.6 FPS (45.6%). The larger percentage drop at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU becomes progressively more constrained as pixel count increases.

For Low settings, the scaling shows 235.2 FPS at 1080p, 149.9 FPS at 1440p, and 86.2 FPS at 4K. The 1080p to 1440p drop is 85.3 FPS (36.3%), and the 1440p to 4K drop is 63.7 FPS (42.5%). This pattern persists across all settings tiers, with the 4K penalty being proportionally larger than the 1440p penalty.

The data indicates that at 1080p, the CPU may be the limiting factor, particularly at Low settings where the GPU has less work to do. The 235.2 FPS result at 1080p Low is likely near the CPU's maximum frame delivery capability. As resolution increases, the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck. At 4K Ultra with 40.2 FPS, the GPU is clearly saturated.

The resolution scaling also shows how settings interact with resolution. At 1080p, the Ultra setting (117.9 FPS) is still well above the 4K Low result (86.2 FPS). This means that lowering resolution has a larger impact on performance than lowering settings in many cases. For example, dropping from 1080p Ultra to 4K Low costs 31.7 FPS despite the significant settings reduction.

The 1440p results provide a balanced middle ground. At 1440p High with 97.8 FPS, the system maintains smooth gameplay while offering better visual fidelity than 1080p. The 1440p Ultra result of 77.8 FPS remains playable, while the 4K Ultra result of 40.2 FPS may struggle with frame pacing.

The bottleneck analysis suggests that for The Technomancer, the RTX 4070 is the primary constraint at 1440p and above. The CPU has sufficient headroom to support the GPU at lower resolutions, as evidenced by the 1080p Low result exceeding 200 FPS. This configuration is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K requiring settings reductions to maintain playable frame rates.