The Technomancer

The Technomancer runs on a 2016 engine that pushes the GPU hard at high resolutions, and the measured results for the Intel Core i7-14700K plus AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT combination tell a straightforward story: the processor has plenty of headroom at every resolution, while the graphics card dictates the frame rate ceiling once you move past 1080p. The data records average FPS for Low, Medium, High, and Ultra presets at three resolutions—1280×1440, 2560×1440, and 3840×2160—and the pattern from those numbers is consistent: as resolution increases, the GPU becomes the limiting component, whereas at 1080p even the most demanding preset stays above 75 frames per second.

At 1080p, the lowest preset produces a 149 frames per second average, the Medium preset 115 frames with a minimum of 98 and a maximum of 132, the High preset 98, and the Ultra preset 77. Those are all very high rates for a 2016 action RPG, indicating that the i7-14700K’s 20 cores and 28 threads do not restrict performance at standard HD. The CPU’s benchmark percentile—94 among all CPUs—and an average benchmark score of 69,355 further support that this processor is far more powerful than what the game needs. But resolution scaling reveals the turning point.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS values show a steep, monotonically increasing drop as the resolution moves from 1080p to 1440p to 4K. At the High preset, the 1080p average is 98 frames, the 1440p average is 64, and the 4K average is 35. That is a 34-frame difference between 1080p and 1440p, and a 29-frame difference from 1440p to 4K. The Medium preset follows the same pattern: 115 at 1080p, 75 at 1440p, 41 at 4K. The Low preset goes from 149 at 1080p, to 98 at 1440p, to 54 at 4K. Even the Ultra preset, which achieves 77 at 1080p, falls to 50 at 1440p and then 27 at 4K. In every case, the largest absolute drop occurs between 1440p and 4K, confirming that the GPU quickly runs out of pixel-pushing capability.

This scaling behavior points directly to the GPU as the limiting component beyond 1080p. The 1080p numbers are high enough that one could argue the CPU could handle even more, but the 1440p figures—while still playable—are roughly two-thirds of the 1080p numbers, and the 4K results dip below 60 frames per second for all but the Low preset. The pattern is typical of a mid-range GPU: the memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s and the 128-bit memory interface on the RX 7600 XT are insufficient to feed the huge pixel counts demanded by 4K. The card’s compute throughput, measured at 22.57 TFLOPS FP32, is not enough to maintain 60+ frames per second at that resolution, regardless of settings.

The CPU’s role is best seen at 1080p Low, where the 149 FPS average suggests the graphics card is not an obstacle; otherwise, the processor would exhibit the same bottleneck. The i7-14700K has a boost clock of 5.60 GHz and an L3 cache of 33 MB, and it ranks in the top 94% of all CPUs based on its average benchmark score. The nearest rivals in the CPU database—the AMD EPYC 9115 (0.1% higher average score), the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (-0.2%), the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (-0.7%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (-0.9%)—are all within 1% of the i7-14700K’s performance, so no single CPU is likely to impede the game’s results at 1440p or 4K. The bottleneck is definitively the GPU.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured FPS rows, the sweet spot for this combination is the Medium preset at 1080p and, with some caveats, at 1440p. At 1080p, Medium delivers a 115 FPS average with a 98 FPS minimum and a 132 FPS maximum, providing a fluid experience with substantial visual fidelity improvement over Low. The Low preset offers 149 FPS and would be the choice for competitive or high-refresh-rate play, but the quality loss is unnecessary because Medium remains well above 60 FPS at all times. The High preset at 1080p, at 98 FPS, is also perfectly playable, yet Medium is more consistent because its worst-case (98) matches the High average, and Medium’s average is 17 FPS higher. Ultra at 1080p drops to 77 FPS, which is still smooth, but it does not offer a large enough jump in visuals to justify the 38 FPS deficit compared to Medium.

At 1440p, the Medium preset is the best choice of what the data shows. It yields a 75 FPS average with a 63 FPS minimum and an 86 FPS maximum, which is the only preset that keeps the minimum close to the 60 FPS line. The High preset at 1440p, at 64 FPS, is a reasonable compromise if quality matters, but its average is only 11 FPS higher than the 75 FPS, while having a minimum that is left unspecified (no min/max provided). The Low preset at 1440p bounces to 98 FPS, but Medium already delivers almost three times the visual detail at a rate that is still high. At this resolution, Ultra falls to 50 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS mark and should be reserved for static scenes, not interactive play.

At 4K, the data are sober. Only Low produces a frame rate near 54, which is below 60. Medium sits at 41, High at 35, and Ultra at 27. Given these numbers, the only viable 4K preset for a stable (albeit slow) experience is Low, but the simulation indicates that this combination is not suited for 4K gaming. Higher presets at 4K would cause to frustrate a player’s framerate expectations.

The general recommendation is to use Medium at 1440p, and at 1080p either Medium or High depending on the tolerance for visual quality. The data do not include min/max for High, so it cannot be stated whether High exhibits frame time spikes, but the average numbers are acceptable.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is the decisive hardware component in this combination for frame rate limiting, especially above 1080p. Its specification polygon: 16 GB of GDDR6 VRAM, a 128-bit memory bus, 64 ROPs, and 128 texture mapping units. The memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s, while not trivial, is insufficient to drive the massive geometry and texture workloads that come with 4K rendering. The shade units number 2048 and the RDNA 3 architecture is a modern design, but the measured FPS scaling shows that the GPU is not a match for 4K. At 1440p the performance is still good, but 4K degrades to playing at low preset.

The card’s benchmark scores reflect its mid-range standing. The 7,600 XT has an average benchmark score of 17,083, placing it at the 60th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690, logged an average score of 17,037 (0.3% lower), while the AMD Radeon HD 7970M (0.4% higher) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 (which has a 0.7% higher score) are also in the same ballpark. These discrete cards are far older or far more power-hungry, yet they all cluster around the RX 7600 XT’s performance—which underscores that the GPU is the primary reason the FPS drops so steeply at 4K.

The RX 7600 XT’s 16 GB of VRAM may seem generous, but the data does not indicate that memory capacity is a limiting factor; the FPS decline is consistent across all resolutions and settings, so it is not a remedy for large memory clusters.

How This Combo Ranks

The combined performance of the Intel Core Ultra 14700K and the RX 7600 XT ranks 2335 out of 3696 combinations tested in this game. That places this pairing in the lower third of all tested combinations. Many of the combinations ranked above it will have either a more powerful GPU (e.g., RTX 3080 or better) or a more CPU-tuned setup, because the CPU is not a bottleneck at typical 1080p situations. The measured FPS at 1080p are very high—98 on High, 149 on Low—which implies the CPU is doing its part; the rank is clearly dragged by the GPU’s performance at higher resolutions.

The i7-14700K itself ranks 94th percentile among all CPUs, and the nearest processors in its own benchmark score range are within 1% of its performance. The GPU, however, sits at the 60th percentile among all GPUs, which means the graphics card is below average overall. In a title like The Technomancer, which does not appear to be CPU-bound (based on the 1080p data), the overall combo rank is largely a reflection of the GPU’s capabilities. At rank 2335 out of 3696, the system is functional but not a high-end performer for this game.

FAQ

Q: How does the single-unit setup perform at 1080p Ultra?

A: The average FPS is 77 frames per second, with no minimum reported. This is playable, though it is well below the 98 FPS average of the High preset.

Q: What is the best preset for 1440p?

The Medium preset shows a 75 FPS average with a minimum of 63 and a maximum of 86, which is the only preset to hold above 60 FPS at that resolution. High is 64 FPS, but its min/max are not given.

Q: Is 4K playable with this setup?

A: At 4K, Low gives 54 FPS, Medium 41, High 35, and Ultra 27. So, no preset reaches an average of 60 FPS, though Low could be barely considered during a slide show.

Q: How do the CPU and GPU rank compared to their nearest competitors?

A: The CPU has an average benchmark score of 69,355, placing it ahead of the AMD EPYC 9115 0.1% behind, and behind the Ryzen 9 7950X by □0.2%. The GPU’s average score is 17,083, slight behind the RTX 3070 (0.7% higher), ahead of the GTX 690, and the Radeon HD 7970M.

Q: At 1080p, is the CPU limiting the frame rate?

A: No. At 1080p Low, the average FPS 149, and the CPU’s high benchmark and 5.60 GHz boost indicate it has headroom. The GPU is the limiting factor even at 1080p because FPS declines drastically with resolution, while the CPU could likely push more frames if the GPU allowed.

Q: What is the average fps difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: Low is 149 FPS, Ultra is 27 FPS—a 122 FPS difference. At 1440p, the difference is 98 - 50 = 48 FPS. At 4K, it is 54-27=27 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

All data is from measured runs of The Technomancer with the Intel Core i7-14700K and AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT.

1920×1080

• Low: average 149 FPS, no min/max reported
• Medium: average 115 FPS, min 98 FPS, max 132 FPS
• High: average 98 FPS, min/max not specified
• Ultra: 77 FPS average

2560×1440

• Low: average 98 FPS, no min/max
• Medium: average 75 FPS, min 64 FPS, max 86 FPS
• High: average 64 FPS, no min/max
• Ultra: average 50 FPS

3840×2160

• Low: average 54 FPS, no min/max
• Medium: average 41 FPS, min 35 FPS, max 47 FPS
• High: average 35 FPS, no min/max
• Ultra: average 27 FPS

The numbers within a resolution show a clear order: Low > Medium > High > Ultra. The gaps between Medium and High are smaller than between Medium and Low, especially at 1080p, where Medium is 115 FPS against High 98 and Low 149, a 17 FPS difference between Medium and High but a 34 FPS difference between Medium and Low. The drop from High to Ultra is equally notable: 98 to 77 at 1080p, 64 to 50 at 1440p, and 35 to 27 at 4K. These differences place coming the GPU.

For 1080p a player likely wants at least medium (115 avg) or high (98 avg) to balance visual quality and smoothness. At 1440p, the Medium frame pacing (63 min) is the only one that guarantees 60-something, while the High at 64 is merely a borderline choice if the min frame would dip below 60. 4K is not a viable target, regardless of preset.

The CPU details include 20 cores, 28 threads from an i7-14700K, a boost of 5.60 GHz, and 3.40 GHz base , with 32 MB L3 cache. The GPU’s base clock is 1980 MHz (boost 2755 MHz), memory at 2250MHz effective 18 Gbps, and 16 GB VRAM. These do not appear as double in the FPS, but they contribute to the exact figures above. Launch MSRP: the CPU’s launch MSRP is $409, the GPU’s launch MSRP is 329 USD. These are facts, not estimators of performance.

In final summary, the data shows this pairing to be a 1080p or 1440p system that lacks the GPU muscle for 4K when Ultra settings. The CPU is not the bottleneck, and the GPU’s performance combines a mid-tier handicap with a high-cores extreme, expecting a playable first-person adventure at 1440p using Medium settings, or at 1080p with almost any preset. For 4K, the only pretender is Low, and even so, the average of 54 will be below 60. The benchmark rank of 2335 out of 3696 confirms that this combination is not a performance king, but it can handle the game’s needs at moderate resolutions with good expectations.