The Technomancer

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-14600K paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT sits at rank 830 out of 1656 tested combos in The Technomancer. That places this pairing almost exactly in the middle of the database—not a standout, but far from a straggler. The rank reflects a system that can handle the game comfortably at most settings, but it does not threaten the upper echelons of the performance leaderboard.

The CPU itself is a strong anchor. It lands in the 93rd percentile against all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 49166. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X, scores 49062—a delta of just 0.2%, meaning the i5-14600K is effectively on par with that 16-core flagship in synthetic workloads. The Intel Core i5-14600KF is marginally ahead at 49367 (a 0.4% delta), while the AMD EPYC 4345P leads by 0.9% at 49595. The gap to the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H is 1%, with that chip scoring 48698. These are all within a rounding error of each other, so the CPU is not the bottleneck here.

On the GPU side, the RX 6750 XT holds the 79th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35327. Its closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 5600M at 35264 (0.2% delta), followed by the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile at 35435 (a 0.3% deficit for the 6750 XT). The AMD Radeon 880M trails by 0.9%, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 leads by 1.3% at 35787. The RX 6750 XT is competitive with those parts in raw compute, though the RTX 3080 holds a slight edge.

The combination of a 93rd-percentile CPU with a 79th-percentile GPU produces a mid-pack result in this specific game. The data suggests the GPU is the limiting factor—when the resolution climbs, the CPU has plenty of headroom left on the table.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is built on the Navi 22 chip using RDNA 2.0 architecture on a 7 nm process from TSMC. It packs 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock runs at 2250 MHz, which translates to 18 Gbps effective. The GPU's base clock is 2150 MHz, with a game clock of 2495 MHz and a boost clock of 2600 MHz.

The 12 GB frame buffer is the headline feature here. In The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, that capacity is more than sufficient at 1080p and 1440p, and it remains workable at 4K. The game does not appear to be VRAM-starved in the measured rows—the FPS drops are consistent with raw compute limits rather than memory exhaustion. The shading units number 2560, with 160 TMUs and 64 ROPs, giving a pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 416.0 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 13.31 TFLOPS, which is adequate for a title of this era.

The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) means it handles modern rendering paths without issue, though The Technomancer's age means it likely does not push those features hard. The 40 ray accelerators are present but largely irrelevant for this game, which predates widespread RT adoption. The card's PassMark G3D score of 20700 and GPU compute score of 9550 reflect solid mid-range positioning, and in this game, that translates to playable frame rates at most settings.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data points to Medium as the sweet spot for this combo, particularly if you are targeting a balance between visual quality and frame rate. At 1080p, Medium delivers 137.6 FPS average, which is 23.3 FPS higher than High (114.3) and only 39.3 FPS lower than Low (176.9). The jump from Medium to High costs you 23.3 FPS, while the jump from High to Ultra costs another 20.2 FPS, dropping to 94.1. That is still playable, but you are giving up a lot of headroom for marginal visual gains.

At 1440p, Medium yields 89.3 FPS, which is comfortable for a smooth experience. High drops to 75.8, and Ultra falls to 62.9—the latter is borderline for fast-paced action. Low runs at 116.3, but the visual hit is rarely worth it on a system this capable. At 4K, Medium produces 46.5 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for a game that rewards responsiveness. High manages 42.3, and Ultra dips to 34.9. Low is the only 4K setting that clears 60 FPS, hitting 65.2.

For most users, Medium at 1080p or 1440p is the recommendation. It keeps frame rates well above 60 at both resolutions while preserving enough visual fidelity for an Action RPG. If you have a high-refresh 1080p display, High at 114.3 FPS is a better pick—it stays above 100 and looks noticeably sharper. Ultra is only worth it if you have a 60 Hz monitor and prefer maximum eye candy at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce 176.9 FPS average, which is nearly triple the 4K Ultra result. Medium follows at 137.6, High at 114.3, and Ultra at 94.1. The scaling from Low to Ultra is a 46.8% reduction in frame rate, which is substantial but not surprising given the GPU's mid-range positioning.

Moving to 2560x1440, the numbers drop predictably. Low runs at 116.3 FPS, Medium at 89.3, High at 75.8, and Ultra at 62.9. The gap between Low and Ultra here is 53.4 FPS, a 45.9% decrease. Notably, the 1440p High result (75.8) is still above the 1080p Ultra result (94.1) by a comfortable margin—you can run higher settings at a higher resolution and still get better performance than maxing out at 1080p.

At 3840x2160, the GPU starts to struggle. Low yields 65.2 FPS, which is the only 4K setting that breaks 60. Medium drops to 46.5, High to 42.3, and Ultra to 34.9. The delta between Low and Ultra at 4K is 30.3 FPS, a 46.5% reduction. Every 4K setting except Low falls below the 60 FPS threshold, making 4K a compromise unless you are willing to drop to Low.

The pattern across all resolutions is consistent: Low to Medium is a moderate drop, Medium to High is another moderate drop, and High to Ultra is the steepest penalty. At 1080p, the Ultra setting still clears 90 FPS, but at 4K it barely holds 35.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and reveals where the bottleneck lives. At Low settings, 1080p produces 176.9 FPS, 1440p produces 116.3, and 4K produces 65.2. That is a 63.1% reduction from 1080p to 4K. At Medium, the numbers are 137.6, 89.3, and 46.5—a 66.2% drop. High goes from 114.3 to 75.8 to 42.3, a 63.0% reduction. Ultra drops from 94.1 to 62.9 to 34.9, a 62.9% decline.

The consistency of that 63-66% reduction across all settings is telling. If the CPU were the limiting factor, you would expect the 4K results to suffer less relative to 1080p, since higher resolutions shift the load toward the GPU. Instead, the frame rate scales almost linearly with pixel count, which indicates the RX 6750 XT is the primary constraint. The i5-14600K, with its 14 cores and 20 threads boosting to 5.30 GHz, has ample compute headroom—its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32881 and single-core score of 4642 place it well above what this 2016 title can utilize.

The practical takeaway is that 1080p and 1440p are the native playgrounds for this combo. Pushing to 4K requires dropping to Low settings to stay above 60 FPS, and even then, the 65.2 FPS result is far from the 176.9 FPS you get at 1080p Low. The GPU's 12 GB VRAM and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient, but the raw 13.31 TFLOPS of FP32 performance cannot drive 4K at high quality in this title.

FAQ

Q: Is this combo capable of 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: Yes, at Medium and High settings. Medium delivers 89.3 FPS and High delivers 75.8 FPS at 2560x1440. Ultra drops to 62.9 FPS, which still clears 60 but leaves little margin.

Q: What is the best 4K setting for this pairing?

A: Low is the only 4K setting that breaks 60 FPS, at 65.2 FPS. Medium (46.5), High (42.3), and Ultra (34.9) all fall below playable thresholds for a fast-paced Action RPG.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival?

A: The Intel Core i5-14600K scores 49166 on average, which is 0.2% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X (49062) and 0.4% behind the Intel Core i5-14600KF (49367). The AMD EPYC 4345P leads by 0.9%, and the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H trails by 1%.

Q: Does the 12 GB VRAM cause any issues in this game?

A: The measured results show no VRAM-related bottlenecks. The FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are consistent with compute limits, not memory capacity. The 12 GB frame buffer is ample for a 2016 title.

Q: What FPS can I expect at 1080p Ultra?

A: The combo averages 94.1 FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings. That is 20.2 FPS lower than High (114.3) and 43.5 FPS lower than Medium (137.6).

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The resolution scaling shows a 63-66% FPS reduction from 1080p to 4K across all settings, which is characteristic of GPU-bound performance. The CPU sits in the 93rd percentile overall, far above the GPU's 79th percentile.