The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents a demanding workload for the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti combination. The measured frame rates across resolutions and settings reveal a system where the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher fidelity levels, while the six-core processor provides adequate headroom at lower settings. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS data to explain the performance profile of this specific hardware pairing.

Resolution Scaling

The data shows a clear and expected trend: average frame rates drop substantially as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At High settings, the system delivers 72.1 FPS at 1080p, which falls to 45.3 FPS at 1440p and further to 26.9 FPS at 4K. This progression indicates that the GTX 1660 Ti is the limiting component at higher resolutions, as the pixel count increase directly impacts the GPU's fillrate and shading capabilities.

The scaling pattern becomes more pronounced when examining the Ultra preset. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 59.9 FPS, but at 1440p Ultra it drops to 35.6 FPS, and at 4K Ultra it reaches just 22.4 FPS. The transition from 1440p to 4K at Ultra settings represents a 37% performance loss, which is a steeper decline than the 1080p to 1440p drop of 41%. This suggests that the game's Ultra preset introduces effects that are particularly punishing at 4K resolution, overwhelming the 6 GB VRAM buffer and the GPU's 288.0 GB/s memory bandwidth.

Conversely, the Low preset shows the smallest resolution penalty. From 109.1 FPS at 1080p Low to 69.5 FPS at 1440p Low, the drop is 36%, and further to 41.8 FPS at 4K Low, another 40% reduction. Even at Low settings, the 4K resolution remains difficult for this GPU, as the raw pixel count still exceeds what the TU116 chip can comfortably process. The data indicates that 1080p is the only resolution where this combination consistently exceeds 60 FPS across all presets, with 1440p being viable only on Low and Medium settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a six-core, six-thread processor based on the Coffee Lake architecture, running at a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. Its benchmark scores place it at the 50th percentile among all CPUs, with an average score of 2305. In synthetic tests, it achieves 7969 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 1125 points in single-core, indicating solid but not exceptional processing power for a game released in 2016.

In the context of The Technomancer's measured results, the CPU appears to be sufficient at 1080p with Low settings, where the system reaches 109.1 FPS. This high frame rate suggests that the processor can feed the GPU adequately at lower graphical loads. However, the 6 threads and lack of hyper-threading may become a limitation in CPU-intensive scenes, though the measured data does not show a clear CPU bottleneck at any resolution. The 9 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth provide adequate data throughput for the game's demands.

The CPU's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-10305 and Intel Core i3-1125G4, both with average scores within 0.2% of the i5-9400. The Intel Xeon E-2134 is 0.4% ahead, while the Intel Core i7-8809G is 0.6% behind. This tight grouping shows that the i5-9400's performance is closely matched by newer and older parts, meaning its role in this game is more about consistency than raw capability. The benchmark results indicate that the CPU is not the primary constraint in most measured scenarios, as the frame rate drops from 1080p to 4K are consistent with GPU-bound behavior.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is the dominant factor in these benchmark results. With 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, the GPU provides 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is critical for texture-heavy scenes at high resolutions. The TU116 chip, built on a 12 nm process, contains 1536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs, with a boost clock of 1770 MHz. Its FP32 performance of 5.437 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 84.96 GPixel/s define its raw throughput.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it at the 55th percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 13925. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 570X, which is 0.4% faster, and the NVIDIA Tesla K10, which is 0.7% slower. The RTX A2000 Mobile and GTX 680 are 0.8% slower in comparison. This positioning shows that the GTX 1660 Ti is a mid-range performer, and the measured FPS in The Technomancer reflects that status.

At 1080p, the GPU delivers playable frame rates across all settings, from 59.9 FPS at Ultra to 109.1 FPS at Low. However, the jump to 1440p exposes the GPU's limitations, as only Low and Medium settings exceed 60 FPS, with High at 45.3 FPS and Ultra at 35.6 FPS. At 4K, the GPU is clearly overmatched, with even Low settings producing only 41.8 FPS and Ultra dropping to 22.4 FPS. The 6 GB VRAM capacity is likely a factor at 4K Ultra, where texture streaming demands exceed what the memory can hold, causing the frame rate to collapse.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this hardware in The Technomancer?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all four presets achieve an average above 59 FPS, making it the optimal choice for consistent performance. At 2560x1440, only Low and Medium settings maintain playable frame rates above 59 FPS.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 Ti compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 13925 places it slightly behind the AMD Radeon RX 570X by 0.4% and the NVIDIA Tesla K10 by 0.7%. It is ahead of the RTX A2000 Mobile and GTX 680 by 0.8%.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 4K resolution?

A: The frame rate drops from 1080p to 4K are steep, with High settings falling from 72.1 FPS to 26.9 FPS. This pattern indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck at 4K, as the CPU's performance does not scale with resolution.

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

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves 69.5 FPS, while Ultra drops to 35.6 FPS. This represents a 49% reduction in average frame rate when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset.

Q: Does the CPU's benchmark score indicate it can handle this game?

A: The i5-9400's 50th percentile ranking and Cinebench R23 scores of 7969 multi-core and 1125 single-core suggest adequate processing power. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (109.1 FPS) confirms the CPU does not severely limit performance in this title.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 Ti's memory bandwidth affect 4K performance?

A: With 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth and 6 GB of VRAM, the GPU struggles at 3840x2160, where the highest measured average is 41.8 FPS on Low. The bandwidth is insufficient to maintain high frame rates with the increased pixel throughput required at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are as follows: Low settings deliver 109.1 FPS, Medium settings achieve 88.6 FPS, High settings produce 72.1 FPS, and Ultra settings result in 59.9 FPS. This gives a clear gradient where each preset step costs roughly 15-18 FPS, and the system is fully playable at all quality levels.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops significantly: Low settings average 69.5 FPS, Medium settings achieve 59.2 FPS, High settings produce 45.3 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 35.6 FPS. The transition from Medium to High at this resolution costs 13.9 FPS, which is a substantial hit, indicating that High preset introduces effects that strain the GPU.

At 3840x2160, the system falls below playable thresholds in most cases: Low settings average 41.8 FPS, Medium settings achieve 28.7 FPS, High settings produce 26.9 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 22.4 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium at 4K is 13.1 FPS, while High and Ultra are closely grouped, suggesting the GPU is saturated and further settings increases have diminishing returns.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience with this hardware, the data points to 1920x1080 as the primary resolution, with High settings providing a solid balance of visual quality and performance at 72.1 FPS. For players seeking higher frame rates, Medium settings at 88.6 FPS offer a significant boost without a massive visual sacrifice, while Low at 109.1 FPS is suitable for competitive play or high-refresh-rate displays.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset at 59.2 FPS is the recommended choice, as it stays close to the 60 FPS target while providing better image clarity than 1080p. Low at 69.5 FPS is also viable, but High at 45.3 FPS and Ultra at 35.6 FPS are too inconsistent for smooth gameplay. At 3840x2160, only Low at 41.8 FPS is remotely playable, but the experience is suboptimal; users with 4K displays should consider lowering resolution to 1440p for a better frame rate. The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution above 1080p, as the measured frame rates of 59.9 FPS at 1080p and below 36 FPS at higher resolutions do not provide a consistent experience. Overall, the sweet spot for this combination is 1080p High or 1440p Medium, depending on the user's preference for resolution versus visual effects.