The Technomancer

The Technomancer's performance with the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is decisively low-end, with the pairing ranking 3568 out of 3696 tested combos. At 1080p High the average frame rate is 45 FPS, but that falls to 29 FPS at 1440p and to 16 FPS at 4K, making the GPU the primary bottleneck. The i5-9400's six cores and 4.10 GHz boost clock provide moderate CPU power, while the GTX 1650's 4 GB GDDR5 memory and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are clearly insufficient for high-resolution play. These results place the configuration in the bottom 4% of all tested combinations, confirming a very dated gaming experience for The Technomancer.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor based on the Coffee Lake architecture with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. Its 9 MB shared L3 cache and 65 W TDP make it a mid-range part from 2018. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU scores 6629 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 935 in single-core, along with a Geekbench 5 multi-core score of 5141 and single-core of 1389. Its average benchmark score is 2254, placing it in the 47th percentile of all CPUs. The nearest database rivals are the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (average 2259, delta –0.2%), Intel Core i7-10710U (2248, +0.3%), AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (2246, +0.4%), and Intel Core i3-10305 (2264, –0.4%). These small deltas indicate the i5-9400 sits squarely in the middle of mainstream desktop chips.

For a game like The Technomancer, an action RPG with a steady stream of enemies and environmental AI, a 6-core/6-thread processor is typically sufficient. The measured frame rates show that at 1080p Low, the game runs at 68 FPS, while at High it only drops to 45 FPS—a difference of 23 FPS attributed to CPU and game logic rather than GPU, since the GPU is the same in all cases. At 1080p Medium the average is 52 FPS and at Ultra 35 FPS. The CPU does not appear to be the limiting factor here; even with the lowest graphical preset, the 68 FPS figure represents the CPU’s peak capability for the given resolution, and increasing resolution further does not change the CPU load. The i5-9400’s six threads handle the game’s physics and characters without a visible frame-dip from CPU limits.

In summary, the CPU is an adequate match for this game, delivering a smooth experience at 1080p when the GPU is not constrained. However, the 47th percentile ranking shows it is not exceptional; it aligns with mainstream i5 parts and yields performance within 0.4% of the listed rivals. For a title that relies on frequent hit-box calculations and a moderate number of NPCs, the i5-9400 provides enough headroom to avoid bottleneck at 1080p and 1440p, but the GPU becomes the barrier above 1080p.

GPU GPU — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The GeForce GTX 1650 is a Turing-architecture part on a 12 nm process with 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. It features 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit interface, offering a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s. Its base clock is 1485 MHz and boost clock 1625 MHz, which is a modest boost for a GTX card. The GPU’s raw compute performance is 2.984 TFLOPS in FP32 and its texture fill rate is 93.24 GTexel/s, with a pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s. In DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility are supported, but the card’s 40th percentile ranking among all GPUs (average benchmark score 7472) places it in the lower-mid segment. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R7 350 (average 7447, delta –0.3%), Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441, +0.4%), AMD Radeon R7 350 (7425, +0.6%), and Intel Arc A310 (7550, –1%). All these GPUs score extremely close, underlining that the GTX 1650 is essentially equivalent to integrated graphics in raw compute terms, but with a dedicated memory interface.

The GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM is a critical limit. In The Technomancer, at 1080p Low the game runs at 68 FPS, likely because low settings keep scenery textures small. Increasing to Medium (52 FPS) and High (45 F FPS) shows the GPU struggling as more texture memory and shader complexity are demanded. At Ultra, the average drops to 35 FPS, but it still remains playable. The real bottleneck comes at higher resolutions: 1440p High yields 29 FPS, and 4K High yields a mere 16 FPS. This severe reduction is a classic symptom of VRAM and bandwidth shortage. The 128.1 GB/s bandwidth—already modest—is shared across an increasing pixel count, and 4 GB becomes insufficient to hold the geometric and texture data for 4× the pixels of 1080p. The GPU’s fill rate (53.28 GPixel/s) is also saturated, as the 54.8 million pixels per frame at 4K (16.2 million at 1080p) produce a 4.6× increase in pixel load, whereas the GPU cannot scale its output accordingly.

The measured FPS at 1080p shows that the GTX 1650 is capable of approaching 60+ only on Low settings (68), but for a smooth High experience it would require lowering the resolution. So, while the GPU has enough raw power for low-to-medium scene complexity at 1080p, the headroom is minimal, and every degree of setting or resolution increase quickly throttles the experience.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs

Q: What average FPS does the i5-9400 + GTX 1650 achieve at 1080p with Ultra settings in The Technomancer?

A: The game averages 35 FPS at 1080p Ultra, with a minimum of 44 and maximum of 60 recorded (though that 60 may have been in a non-heavy scene). There is no min/max recorded for Ultra.

Q: Is this combination suitable for 4K gaming?

A: No. At 4K High settings the average is 16 FPS, and at 1080p High it is 45 FPS. Even at 4K Low the average reaches only 24 FPS, which is below playable smoothness.

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

A: The i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254, with the nearest rival Intel Core i5-10305 achieving 2264 (delta –0.4%), and the i7-10606NG7 at 2259 (delta –0.2%). The differences are within one percent, so the i5-9400 is statistically equivalent to those parts.

Q: What is the best graphical setting for the game at 1080p to exceed 60 FPS?

A: At 1080p Low, the game runs at 68 FPS. At Medium, it drops to 52 FPS, which is below 60. So Low is the only preset that yields a 60+ FPS average.

Q: Does the GPU have enough VRAM for The Technomancer?

A: The GPU has 4 GB GDDR5 memory. At 1080p High the game runs at 45 FPS, and at 4K High it runs at 16 FPS, the latter indicating that VRAM capacity is insufficient for higher resolutions.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to the best?

A: The combo ranks 3568 out of 3696 tested, meaning only 128 configurations perform worse. This puts it in the bottom 3.5% of all tested combos.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the i5-9400 and GT X 1650 lands at rank 3568 out of 3696 in The Technomancer’s measured results. This is a very low rank, leaving only 128 better combinations. Given that rank 1 is the fastest, this string is clearly insufficient for a demanding 2016 action RPG. The nearest CPU rival, the i7-10606NG7, has almost identical CPU benchmark (2259 vs 2254, delta –0.2%), but its GPU pairing would likely also be varied. In terms of GPU, the GTX 1650 is equivalent to the RX 340 or UHD Graphics 750 in compute (difference within 0.6%), which are integrated or older parts, so the GPU performance is the key limiter. The fact that the CPU is not bottlenecking is supported by the vast FPS disparities between resolution: the CPU’s 6 threads deliver the same logic load regardless of resolution, so the 4K drop is purely GPU. Therefore, the ranking reflects a well-balanced low-end CPU but an insufficient GPU for this game.

Resolution Scaling

Resolution scaling reveals the GPU-limit nature of the setup. At 1080p High, the deck averages 45 FPS; at 1440p High, that falls to 29 FPS (a drop of 16 FPS); at 4K High, it further drops to 16 FPS (a further drop of 13 FPS). The pattern holds for each setting. For Low, the numbers are 68 → 44 → 24; for Medium, 55 → 34 → 19; for Ultra, 35 → 23 → 13. The qualitative interpretation is that the scaling factor is nearly proportional to the pixel area difference: 1440p has 78% more pixels than 1080p, and 4K has 4× times the pixels. The observed drop from 45 to 16 FPS at High represents a 64% reduction, suggesting the GPU is fully gated by the increased fill rate and memory bandwidth demands. Since the CPU load per frame remains the same, the disproportionate frame loss is symptomatic of a GPU that is close to its rendering ceiling even at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following are all measured results for this combo in The Technomancer, covering each resolution and preset.

| Resolution | Setting | Average FPS | Minimum FPS | Maximum FPS |

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

| 3840x2160 | High | 16 | – | – |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 24 | – | – |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 19 | 16 | 22 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 13 | – | – |

| 2560x1440 | High | 29 | – | – |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 44 | – | – |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 34 | 29 | 39 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 23 | – | – |

| 1920x1080 | High | 45 | – | – |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 68 | – | – |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 52 | 44 | 60 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 35 | – | – |

The data show a clear gradient: only Low at 1080p achieves 60+ FPS, while all 4K settings fall hover between 13–24 FPS. Medium settings at 1080p provide a balanced 52 FPS with a minimum of 44, so they may be acceptable for single-player. Ultra at 1080p at 35 FPS is playable but not smooth. The 1440p and 4K numbers are mostly sub-30, meaning these presets are not suitable for gaming, highlighting the limitation of the 4 GB VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bus. These numbers confirm the configuration is intended for 1080p gaming at low-to-medium details, and any higher resolution is non-functional.