The Technomancer

The GeForce GTX 1650 paired with the Core i7-13700K produces a clearly GPU-bound result in The Technomancer: at the lowest tested settings, the combo reaches 68 FPS at 1080p, 44 FPS at 1440p, and 24 FPS at 4K, which shows the 4 GB VRAM buffer and 128.1 GB/s bus as the decisive constraint. On the CPU side, the 16-core / 24-thread part never appears as a limitation in any of the 12 measured rows, and the scaling pattern across resolutions and presets consistently follows the pixel output, not the instruction throughput.

Resolution Scaling

The measured average frame rates follow a consistent and near-linear degradation as pixels increase. At Low settings, the card runs 68 FPS at 1920×1080, 44 FPS at 2560×1440, and 24 FPS at 3840×2160. That is a 24-FPS drop for the first step and a 20-FPS drop for the diaphanous jump to 4K. The High preset behaves identically in shape: 45 at 1080p, 29 at 1440p, 16 at 4K. Medium is 54–64? Wait — Medium is 52 at 1080p, 34 at 1440p, and 19 at 4K. Ultra runs 35 at 1080p, 41? No — Ultra is 35, 23, and 13, respectively. Each preset samples nearly halves as you go up, which is the signature of a memory-bandwidth-constrained raster pipeline.

The pattern becomes diagnostic when comparing the spread between Low and Ultra across resolutions. At 1080p that spread is 33 FPS (68 vs. 35); at 1440p it narrows to 21 FPS (44 vs. 23); and at 4K it narrows to 11 FPS (24 vs. 13). As pixel one rises, the cost ratio between quality preset tiers compresses. With the pixel count quadrupled, the difference between “Low” and “Ultra” can no longer express itself; there simply isn’t enough bandwidth to spend on higher-quality shaders when the pixel fill and texturing demand already saturates the interface. That is a strong indication the limits component is the GTX 1650, not the cannot‑scale CPU.

One more observation: at 1440p, the Low preset (44 FPS) still delivers more framer than the 4K Low (24 FPS) by 20 FPS, and 4K Medium (19) is even worse. Since none of the 4K entries reach 25 FPS — the highest 4K row, Low, is 24 — resolution downscaling to 1440p is effectively required for any interactive rate. At 1080p Light we logarithm 68, but the jump to 1440p already drops below half in most presets (High 29, Ultra 23, Medium 34). aGPU use the buffer and bandwidth doubled: the data suggests 1440p in the “fixture” too much; only the Low preset 44 FPS is live.

GPU Role

The GPU side of the combo is the 12 nm TUGeForce GTX 1650 with 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 raster units. Base clock is 1485 MHz, boost reaches 1665 MHz, and the memory is 4 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus at 2001 MHz, producing a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s when the effective transfer rate is 8 Gbps. The FP32 compute is stated as 2.984 TFLOPS with an FP16 throughput of 5.967 TFLOPS (2:1). These specs the pixel fill capacity (53.28 GPixel/s, 93.24 GTexel/s) that align with the measured behavior.

The 128-bit bus is the primary limit in the high-pots. With 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth and 32 ROPs, the GPU loses per-pixel cost to resolution. The 1.5 billion transistors (from the pack) — the chip is TU, 12 nm, TSMC — a dense enough die, but the memory bus is 4 GB of VRAM worth of data. In result, adding more lines of text with a settings crossing is more than the multi-row pipeline.

Measured benchmarks support this interpretation. In the PassMark G3D suite, NVIDIA G3D score is 7880; the full average benchmark score is 7472, which places the GPU at the 40th percentile among all GPUs. Comparing with the nearest GPU rivals demonstrates a tight band: the AMD Radeon R7 350, a 0.6 deltaPct away, scores 7425, and Intel Arc in-something scores 7550 with a –1 delta. That is, the 1650 at 7472 average is essentially indistinguishable from peers around it (7450–7500 region), reinforcing the sense that this is a commodity tier of fill rate. The numeric delta (±0.3, ±0.4, ±0.6, −1) is within one percentage point of direct neighbors, confirming the GPU is not exceptionally configured for a high‑demand title.

Boot speed data: boost 1665 MHz with the default boost methodology. Higher boost is not relevant enough; at 1080p Medium, the effect of an extra 180 MHz has already been included in the data. It's the memory, not the clock, that gates.

Therefore, the card is a 2020-era entry-level rasterizer. In a modern 15-inch title like The Technomancer (2016 release), the 4 GB buffer is not extra; the data shows that 2K3 pressures push the 4K above (average above the 24) despite the same core. Because the 128-bit bus doesn't recircuit the bandwidth needed for a 8.3 M pixel frame, the per-frame cost rises.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data strongly recommends 1920×1080 Low as the only config that ensures a comfortable blue in the row. 1080p Low averages 68 FPS, far beyond the 60 mark. But the next step, Medium, already cuts to 52 FPS with a minimum of 44 — still usable, and 4 FPS below the classic 60. If the goal tail-feeling 60 on a 60 Hz panel, the safest choice is Low, while Medium is an acceptable transition.

For 1440p, no row reaches 48 FPS; a solid recommendation is Low (44 average). Medium at 34 and High at 29 still 29 worst case, with Ultra at 23 — outside any competitive need. 1440p Low is thus the best image/performance compromise for 1440 pains; the amortized fact is that the minimum on the Medium 1440 row is 29, which is over 10 fps below the average of the 1080 Medium — comparable to the cost of 2K rows.

At 4K, the data is unequivocal: none of the four settings provide a playable average. Low 24, Medium 19, High 16, and Ultra 13 are all below a 24 threshold—only the Low matches the 24 FPS baseline. Even with a Low preset, the min values (the rows with min only) are not shown for most 4K rows; the only min given is in Medium 14–22 in the 4K row. That min (16 average, 19) means drops into the mid-teen. Therefore the measured set has no 4K recommendation.

The relative jumps are informative: at 1080p, going from Low to Medium costs 16 FPS (68→52), Medium to High 7 (52→45), High to Ultra 10 (45→35). Ultra’s extra visual sharpness over High costs more than the Medium over Low; but the absolute number is still 35. Between Medium and Ultra, 17 FPS is sacrificed. Between Medium and High, 7. That means medium is a sweet spot: the 1080p Medium row gives 52 avg / 44 min — the only row with a given min and max (44 min–60 max) besides 1440 Medium (29–39) and 4K Medium (16–22). The data rewards these Medium entries for the scatter of min.

In short: 1080p Low is statistically the only 60+; 1080p Medium is the “smoothest balanced” row given min headroom; 1440p Low is the sill; 4K is to be avoided.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS that this combination can reach in The Technomancer?

A: 68 FPS, achieved at 1920×1080 with the Low preset. No 1440p or 4K row exceeds 44 or 24, respectively.

Q: Does the Core i7-13700K bottleneck the GTX 1650 in this game?

A: No. The CPU has 24 threads, a 5.40 GHz boost, and a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 30745 with 2116 single-core, compared the R20 single 2299, R15 4507.5 — none of the FPS curves drop with the CPU but with the pixel resolution and settings, indicating that the GPU’s 4 GB / 128‑bit memory subsystem is the corset.

Q: Which preset gives the best experience at 1080p?

A: Low gives 68 FPS, but Medium yields 52 FPS avg with a 44 FPS min, a far more stable tap. The data suggests 1080p Medium as the most acceptable compromise if 60 FPS is not strictly demanded; for strict 60, Low.

Q: Is 1440p playable?

A: Only Low to a degree: 44 average. Medium 34, High 29, Ultra 23. None reach 48 average; if you can tolerate 44, then 1440p Low is the candidate.

Q: Why is there no consistent minimum FPS recorded for most rows?

A: The measurement set includes min/max only for the Medium rows — 1080 Medium min 44 max 60, 1440 Medium min 29 max 39, 4K Medium min 16 max 22. For other presets (Low, High, Ultra) only the average is reported.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its closest GPU peers?

A: The nearest rivals yield an average benchmark deviation within ±1.0 — AMD RX 8850M (0.3), Intel (0.4), R7 350 (0.6) and Arc A310 (–1). This «flat» cluster means the 1650 in this scene is the same as its tier.

CPU Role

The i7-13750K is a 16‑core / 24‑thread Raptor Lake (10 nm) chip from Intel with a base clock 3.40 GHz and boost 5.40 GHz. In single-Thread load, Cinebench R23 single 2119, staged; in multi‑thread, R23 307259, and its PassMark multi 45887 vs PassMark single 4333 (single-thread) — strong ratios. Yet in The Technomancer, the CPU is never the critical path. The FPS delta at such jumps: 1080 → 1440 always exceeds the CPU’s ability, because the GPU cripples first. The 3DMark 2‑thread score 2264; means even the threads alone are far from a bottteck. The class single-threaded game from 2016 would need far less than the R23 single 2116.

With 16 threads/24 cores, the CPU can certainly to build: but the measured 1080p Ultra at 35 FPS does not exceed the 68 FPS ceiling; no benchmark data contradicts this. The graphics processing unit rests fully on the VRAM bus, and the CPU side data (single-thread score 2116, Boost 5.40) is idle in traffic. The ability to hit 68 is capped by the GPU, not cores.

The 89th percentile among all GPUs — the CPU’s relative position, — underscores that the i7-13735 is far above the requirements. The nearest rivals — the 1630 KX has an average score 46881 vs 46971 for the AMD Ryzen 9 5900, a 0.2 delta; AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX374 0.0 delta; Ryzen 9 7845HX 0.5 delta; Xeon w2-2435 0.5 delta. In other words, parallel CPU trends even in e‑sports to compute remains above that needed by this title. The data points to World without.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete FPS table from the measurement set:

1920×1080 (1080p)

• Low: average 68, min/max not recorded
• Medium: average 52, minimum 44, maximum 60
• High: average 45, min/max not recorded
• Ultra: average 35, min/max not recorded

2560×1440 (1440p)

• Low: average 44
• Medium: average 34, minimum 29, maximum 39
• High: average 29
• Ultra: average 23

3840×2160 (4K)

• Low: average 24
• Medium: average 19, minimum 16, maximum 22
• High: average 16
• Ultra: average 13

Only the Medium rows of each resolution include min/max values, which fluctuate up (the 1080 Medium ranges from 44 to 60, the 1440 Medium from 29 to 39, and the 4K Medium from 16 to 22) — all inside a tight band around avg. That indicates even in the “mid” duty, the frame consistency is moderate.

FPS deltas across the settings are (derived from the numbers): 1080p Low->Medium falls by 16 FPS, Medium->High 7, High to Ultra 10. At 1440p, that is 10, 5, 6 per step; namely 44→34→29→23; at 4K, it’