The Technomancer

The Intel Core i7-12700KF and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER pairing delivers a playable 1080p Ultra experience (80 FPS average) and a smooth 1440p High run (67 FPS) in The Technomancer, but at 4K the combo falls to 29 FPS on Ultra and only reaches 56 FPS on Low. In the benchmark database this combination ranks 2144 of 3696 tested combos, positioning it in the lower-to-middle tier for this title. The data shows consistent resolution scaling consistent with a GPU-bound workload; the CPU, despite its strong multicore throughput, does not appear to gate the frame rate at any measured setting. The measured rows indicate the RTX 2070 SUPER becomes the limiting factor as resolution scales upward.

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

The Core i7-12700KF is a 12-core, 20-thread processor built on Intel's Alder Lake architecture, with a 3.60 GHz base clock and a 5.00 GHz boost clock. Its 25 MB of shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core are substantial for a desktop part released in 2021. For The Technomancer, a 2016 action RPG, the CPU's most relevant capabilities are a single-thread performance and the ability to feed a discrete GPU at high frame rates. The processor's 125 W TDP and Gen 4 PCIe 20 lanes architecture reflect a high-end desktop part, but the game itself likely uses only a fraction of its threads.

Benchmarks from the database underline the CPU's raw computational strength: Cinebench R23 scores 28,382 in multicore and 4,071 in single-core, while Geekbench indicates 2,255 single-core and 14,367 multi-core. These figures confirm that the chip does not represent any kind of bottleneck for a 2019-era game; single-thread performance is dominant in older game engines. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches an average of 157 FPS, which suggests that the CPU can push quite high frame ceilings when the GPU load is modest. The nearest rivals to the i7-12700KF in aggregate benchmark scores include the Intel Core i7-13700T (average score 35,403, delta –0.1%), the Core i5-13600T (35,305, +0.2%), the Core 5 213PE (35,428, –0.2%), and the i7-12700KF's own sibling, the i7-12700K (35,287, +0.2%). With a percentile of 85 among all CPUs, the i7-12700KF is a high-tier chip, but the game's frame rates scale more strongly with resolution changes than with CPU configuration, as the resolution-scaling analysis confirms.

The 12-core design and 20 threads may be over-provisioned for The Technomancer, but this does not hurt the experience; the CPU has the headroom to handle any background tasks and the high FPS demands at 1080p. At 1080p Low, the sheer FPS count (157) indicates that the CPU can drive the game well beyond a 60 FPS target. At 4K Ultra, the same combination runs at only 29 FPS, which is a 128 FPS collapse – a drop that cannot be explained by the CPU alone. This pattern points to the RTX 2070 SUPER's limits becoming the central factor at high pixel counts.

How This Combo Ranks

In The Technomancer's measured combination rankings, the Core i7-12700KF with RTX 2070 SUPER runs in the 2,144th position out of 3,696 combinations. This rank compares worse than 1,552 other combos (the better ones), making the combo better than roughly 42% of the tested setups. The rank indicates that the pair is neither a top-tier performer nor a laggard, but it sits in the bottom half of the tested combinations. The CPU's position among all CPUs (85th percentile) and the GPU's position among all GPUs (65th percentile) might suggest a nearly mid-tier pairing, yet the game's specific result still places it at 42% of better-than-wise.

This rank should be interpreted in the context of the game's engine and the resolution settings. For a direct comparison, the RTX 2070 SUPER is within 1.5% of its nearest rivals: the Quadro M4000M (average score 20,480, diff –1%), the RTX 3070 Mobile (20,534, –1.2%), the Intel Arc B570 (20,556, –1.3%), and the Arc A750 (20,582, –1.5%). In CPU scores, the i7-12700KF is either 0.2% ahead or 0.2% behind its nearest neighbors. These margins are small; the game's settle hunk of the combo rank is more tied to the GPU’s resolution handling than to the CPU's raw throughput.

At the tested settings, the combo's performance parcel rises as settings are lowered, so the combination with an average score of 20,282 (GPU average) and a CPU average of 35,365 is an expected mid-tier result. Users with a higher-end GPU than this will rank far better, but this pairing is not a weak man for the game's aggressive demands at 4K Ultra.

Recommendation of Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling of the measured FPS yields strong signs of a GPU limitation. From 1080p Low to 1440p Low, the average drops from 157 FPS to 102 FPS, a 35% decrease; from 1440p to 4K Low, into 56 FPS, a 45% drop. At High setting, 1080p gives 103 FPS, 1440p gives 67 FPS (35% drop), and 4K gives 37 FPS (a 45% drop). This pattern holds across settings: a very similar relative drop from 1080p to 1440p to 4K. For a CPU-bound scenario, we would expect a more moderate scaling with resolution, since the same draw calls are being watched, but here the frame rate drops sharply with every increase in pixels.

The scaling factor: 4K has 4× the pixels of 1080p, but FPS drops only by a factor of 2.8 at Low (157→56) and 2.8 at High (103→37). This 2.8× drop does not match the 4× expectation, which suggests that at 1080p the CPU may be partially delaying the FPS or that the game engine doesn't scale pure pixel count due to other bottlenecks. When running at 1080p Low, the 157 FPS is likely close to a CPU limit, as it is a very high frame rate. At higher resolutions and settings, the GPU load rises and the FPS lowers, demonstrating a GPU-bound point once the CPU is given margins. For example, at 4K Ultra, the combo only manages 29 FPS, which is in the extreme GPU-bound range. The presence of memory bandwidth and 448 GB/s transfer rate on the RTX 2070 SUPER may also constrain at high pixel resolutions, but the available data is insufficient to differentiate between CUDA core limits and memory bandwidth limits.

The 1440p run exhibits a similar pattern: at Low the combo: 102 FPS, which is close to 1080p's 157 FPS percentage-wise. High at 1440p stays watchable at 67 FPS, while Ultra drops to 53. Therefore, the resolution at which the combo really starts to struggle is 4K; at 1440p the switch is still practical.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The exact average frame rates per resolution and setting are listed below. Note that only the Medium setting rows include minimum and maximum FPS values in the measurement set.

4K (3840×2160)

• Low: average 56 FPS
• Medium: average 43 FPS, minimum 37, maximum 50
• High: average 37 FPS
• Ultra: average 29 FPS

4K (2560×1440) – wait, 2560×1440 is 1440p, not 4K. Correct that.

1440p (2560×1440)

• Low: average 102 FPS
• Medium: average 79 FPS, minimum 67, maximum 91
• High: average 67 FPS
• Ultra: average 53 FPS

1080p (1920×1080)

• Low: average 157 FPS
• Medium: average 120 FPS, minimum 102, maximum 139
• High: average 103 FPS
• Ultra: average 80 FPS

At each resolution, the step from High to Ultra costs a noticeable fraction of performance. For instance, at 1440p, High leaves 67 FPS, but Ultra reduces to 80% of that (53 FPS). At 1080p, Ultra still retains 80 FPS, which is above 60 and is a comfortable frame rate area for this title. The 4K Ultra result of 29 FPS is clearly not playable for a fluid action RPG. The Low and Medium settings at 4K are marginal: 56 and 43 FPS, respectively, which may be tolerable for non-competitive play on a slower display, but will not reach a typical 60 FPS threshold.

The frame time variability (min/max) appears only for Medium rows. In 4K Medium, the min dips to 37 FPS, which matches the High average, indicating possible frame hitches. At 1080p Medium, the min of 102 FPS and max 139 give a wider spread, but 102 FPS remain well above playable.

GPU Role — VRAM, clock, and memory

The RTX 2070 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture with a 12 nm process from TSMC. Its TU104 chip hosts 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, 40 RT cores, and 320 Tensor cores. The base clock runs at 1605 MHz, boosting to 1770 MHz, and the 8 GB of GDDR6 memory is on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The memory clock is 1,750 MHz (14 Gbps effective, per the data "14 Gbps effective"). For a 2019 GPU, this specification paired with a 2016 game is well-matched.

The Passmark G3D score for the GFX card is 18,169, placing it in the 65th percentile of all GPUs. The average benchmark score is 20,282, and its nearest rivals are within 1.5%: the Quadro M4000M (20,480, -1%), the RTX 3070 Mobile (20,534, -1.2%), the Intel Arc B570 (20,556, -1.3%), and the Arc A750 (20,582, -1.5%). The GPU's raw computational power (9.062 TFLOPS FP32) and its 160 texture mapping units contribute to solid render engine performance at 1080p native, but its 8 GB VRAM appears sufficient for this game's settings up to Ultra at 1080p, as no card-related limit (such as capping) appears in the data.

At 1080p, the frame rates are strong: the GPU pushes 103 FPS on High and 80 FPS on Ultra. At 1440p the performance degrades to 67 and 53, respectively, while at 4K it falls below a stable 60 FPS mark in all settings. The data shows that the GPU is the dominant component limiting the highest pixel-count in Ultra settings, with only 29 FPS at 4K Ultra. The bandwidth (448 GB/s) and pixel rate (113.3 GPixel/s) numbers are not directly a bottleneck spec, but they corroborate that the card's fill rate becomes too limited when the display is filled with 8.3 million× pixels.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the most sensible trade-off is to prioritize FPS at the launch of a playable frame rate: 60 FPS average should be the minimum target.

For 1080p — the strongest resolution for this combo. Even the Ultra preset averages 80 FPS, well above 60, and High at 103 FPS is even smoother. Given the action RPG will benefit from extra smoothization, either Ultra or High is a great choice. The data shows 80 FPS on Ultra, which is vibration-free for most players. Higher frame dips are not given for non-Medium settings, but the has no min frame in Ultra. If extra fps headroom is desired for eye candy, High at 103 FPS reduces drops but lacks the highest quality, whereas Low’s 157 FPS is over‑kill (unless playing on a 165 Hz+ monitor). The default recommendation: High at 1080p gives a nice balance of 103 FPS and higher fidelity; Ultra at 1080p is also fully playable at 80 FPS and is the best visual quality possible without dropping resolution.

For 1440p, the frame rate drops more significantly. High at 1440p delivers 67 FPS, which just hits the 60–70 FPS range and is playable. However, Ultra down to 53 FPS is less fluid. Medium produces 79 FPS, which offers a comfortable 60+. The data does not directly specify the visual impact of number of quality levels, but from the numbers, a 1440p user should select High for 67 FPS or Medium for 79 FPS if they prioritize a high refresh rate. For 1440p, High is a safe default, with an FPS at least 15% above the 60 threshold.

For 4K, the absolute ceiling is 56 FPS on Low and 43 FPS on Medium. The average FPS on Low is 56, which is 6% short of the 60 target. On High, only 37 FPS; Ultra, 29 FPS. A user who owns a 4K monitor must accept a low‑quality experience or reduce the display scale. The best experience per the measured data is Low at 56 FPS; while Medium at 43 FPS is also playable in slower scenes, its min drops to 37 FPS. Gaming at 4K below 60 FPS is acceptable for a slow paced Action RPG, but many players may prefer to downscale. Ultimately, the 4K path is not recommended: to keep fluid motion, use 1080p High or 1440p High using the four‑core scaling.

The overall best experience for this combination, given the measured results, is 1080p Ultra at 80 FPS average—it captures the High quality setting without any sacrifice.

---

The performance profile of the i7-12700KF + RTX 2070 SUPER in The Technomancer is that of a capable mid-tier system: it excels at 1080p, handles 1440p with minor tuning, and reaches forensic limits at 4K. The CPU maintains 85th percentile strength while the GPU solution, placed in the 65th percentile, ultimately dictates the frame‑rate fate for higher resolutions. The data shows that 1080p and 1440p are where this combination finds the smoothest, most consistent output, and that 4Kp becomes the domain of the very High‑Core, non-Ultra press button.