The Technomancer

The Technomancer is an action RPG released in 2016, and this database entry captures measured performance for the Intel Core i7-14700KF paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER. Twelve tested configurations across four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) and three resolutions (1080p, 1440p, 4K) provide a complete picture of how this hardware handles the game. The CPU sits in the 94th percentile among all processors, while the GPU sits in the 65th percentile, and their benchmark averages (70,163 for the CPU, 20,282 for the GPU) show a clear performance gap that shapes every frame.

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

The RTX 2070 SUPER is a Turing-based card with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s memory bandwidth. Its base clock is 1605 MHz with a boost clock of 1770 MHz, and it reaches 9.062 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The measured FPS data shows that this card becomes the limiting factor as resolution rises: at 1080p Low, the game runs at 157 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, the average plummets to 29 FPS. The strong single-core and multicore performance of the i7-14700KF (Cinebench R23 scores of 6,235 single and 44,167 multi) means the CPU is not the binding constraint at any measured resolution. The GPU’s VRAM and bandwidth come into play at higher resolutions; while 8 GB is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, the 4K tests still deliver playable averages on High (37 FPS) and Medium (43 FPS), though only 29 FPS at Ultra. The GPU’s 40 RT cores and 320 tensor cores are present, but The Technomancer, launched in 2016, does not exhibit ray-tracing overhead, so raw rasterization performance dictates these scores.

The RTX 2070 SUPER scores an average of 20,282 in its synthesized benchmarks, with a PassMark G3D score of 18,169 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,651. It trails its nearest rivals in average score by small margins: it is 1% lower than the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, 1.2% lower than the RTX 3070 Mobile, 1.3% lower than the Intel Arc B570, and 1.5% lower than the Intel Arc A750. The gap is minimal in raw compute, but the real gameplay results show that the RTX 2070 SUPER is still able to produce smooth framerates at 1080p and 1440p with moderate settings.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: How does the i7-14700KF compare to its nearest CPU rivals in overall performance?

A: The i7-14700KF’s average benchmark score is 70,163, placing 0.2% above the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (69,996), 0.4% above the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (69,875), and 0.9% above the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (69,515). It is 1% below the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K, which scores 70,879.

Q: What is the highest average FPS the RTX 2070 SUPER delivers in The Technomancer?

A: At 1080p with Low settings, the GPU averages 157 FPS. The next highest is 120 FPS at 1080p Medium, and 103 FPS at both 1080p High and 1440p Low.

Q: Which resolution and settings give the most balanced frame rate for a 60 Hz display?

A: At 1440p, the Medium preset yields 79 FPS on average (min 67, max 91), and the High preset yields 67 FPS—both well above 60 FPS. At 4K, even the High preset only reaches 37 FPS, so 1440p Medium or High is the practical choice for smooth gameplay.

Q: How many total configurations are reported for this CPU/GPU combo?

A: The measured data includes 12 configs: 4 settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) at each of 3 resolutions (1080p, 1440p, 4K). The combo ranks 2144th out of 3696 possible system configurations in the game, meaning a later ranking shows that most other combinations deliver higher FPS.

Q: Does the GPU show a larger frame-time spike at higher resolutions?

A: The only frames with min/max data are Medium settings. At 1080p Medium, the min is 102 and max 139 (a ~37 FPS range). At 1440p Medium, the min is 67 and max 91 (~24 FPS range). At 4K Medium, min 37 and max 50 (~13 FPS range). The narrower spread at higher resolutions indicates the GPU is more uniformly bottlenecked there.

Q: What is the GPU’s overall percentile and how does it relate to the CPU’s?

A: The RTX 2070 SUPER reaches the 65th percentile among all GPUs, while the i7-14700KF reaches the 94th percentile. That 29-percentile difference highlights that the GPU is the weaker component in this pairing, which is exactly what the resolution scaling shows.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

The most demanding setting, Ultra, is only playable at 1080p where it averages 80 FPS, dropping to 53 FPS at 1440p and 29 FPS at 4K—below what most would consider acceptably smooth for action gameplay. High is a better all-rounder: at 1080p it reaches 103 FPS, at 1440p it hits 67 FPS, and at 4K it stays at 37 FPS. That 4K High average is borderline but usable if the user is not using adaptive sync. Medium is the most flexible preset across resolutions. At 1080p it averages 120 FPS (min 102, max 139), at 1440p 67 FPS (min 67, max 91), and at 4K 43 FPS (min 37, max 50). The min FPS on Medium at 4K is only 3 FPS below the High average at 4K, so Medium offers a relatively stable frame buffer. Low, of course, unlocks the highest framerates—157 FPS at 1080p, 102 FPS at 1440p, and 56 FPS at 4K—but this preset cuts graphics details significantly.

Given the balance between visual quality and measured performance, Medium is the recommended preset for all three resolutions, because it always lands above the base 60 FPS target at 1080p and 1440p, and it stays above 40 FPS at 4K. High can be acceptable for 1440p if a 75 Hz display is the target (67 FPS is close to that), but for 4K only that Low setting (56 FPS) or Medium (43 FPS) provides the most consistent experience. The data suggests that Medium delivers the best trade-off of stable frame time and fidelity.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

Looking at the same preset across resolutions reveals a consistent pattern. At High, the average FPS falls from 103 at 1080p, to 67 at 1440p, and to 37 at 4K—a reduction of about 35% going to 1440p and another 45% going to 4K. The Ultra preset shows an identical relative drop: 80 to 53 to 29, also a ~35% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a ~45% drop from 1440p to 4K. For Medium, the numbers are 120, 79, and 43, a drop of 34% then 46%. Low, too, follows that shape: 157, 102, 56, with a 35% and 45% decrease.

This consistent scaling indicates that the RTX 2070 SUPER is the traveling bottleneck at higher resolutions—the CPU’s headline specs (20 cores, 28 threads, 5.6 GHz boost clock) far exceed what this 2016 game can utilize, and its benchmark scores (44,167 in Cinebench R23 multi-core) are far above any of the GPU’s pressure points. At 1080p, where the CPU could theoretically push more frames, we already see 157 FPS on Low, so the CPU is not pinning performance. The near-linear drop across all presets, from 1080p to 4K, suggests that pixel-fill and memory bandwidth of the RTX 2070 SUPER dominate the scaling. The 8 GB VRAM and 256-bit bus are consistent with the playable but modest 4K numbers.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The full measured framerate table for The Technomancer is as follows:

1920 ×1600 (1080p):

• Ultra: average 80 FPS
• High: average 103 FPS
• Medium: average 120 FPS (min 102, max 139)
• Low: average 157 FPS

2560 ×1600 (1440p):

• Ultra: average 53 FPS
• High: average 67 FPS
• Medium: average 79 FPS (min 67, max 91)
• Low: average 102 FPS

3840 ×2160 (4K):

• Ultra: average 29 FPS
• High: average 37 FPS
• Medium: average 43 FPS (min 37, max 50)
• Low: average 56 FPS

The minimum FPS numbers for Medium settings at each resolution are 102, 67, and 37 respectively. The maximum values are 139, 91, and 50. These min/max ranges show that the GPU can't maintain consistent frame delivery at higher resolutions—the gaps narrow as the average drops, but the absolute stability in FPS is what changes.

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

The Intel Core i7-14700KF is a 14th-generation part with 20 physical cores and 28 threads, boosting to 5.6 GHz and tunneling through a 33 MB L3 cache. Its architecture is Raptor Lake Refresh, and it supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, with PCIe Gen 5 lanes for the primary GPU slot. These specs translate into a massive computing resource that dwarfs what a 2016 action RPG needs, as the game was released years before the CPU's debut in October 2023. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 scores are strong at 44,167 multi-core and 6,235 single-core, and it ranks in the 94th percentile among all CPUs.

The measured FPS data from the game shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor at any resolution in the test. For example, at 4K Low the GPU produces 56 FPS – the lowest GPU entry among all setting/resolution combos is still 29 FPS on Ultra, meaning the GPU is the ceiling. The scaling from 1080p to 4K (a ~65% FPS loss for High) matches exactly the pixel-count increase, which is a purely GPU load. The single-core performance of the i7-14700KF (6,235 in Cinebench R23) is also very high, so the game's logic threads are well covered. In fact, at 1080p Low the system delivers 157 FPS, which is far above any standard 60 Hz refresh, demonstrating that the CPU can feed the GPU with frame information fast enough to let the GPU exhaust its shading power. The evidence overwhelmingly points to this setup being GPU-bound; the CPU's 20 cores, 28 threads, and fast memory (DDR4/DDR5, dual-channel) provide the headroom for the GPU to scale performance. If the CPU were quicker, the FPS changes between settings would show improvements, but the data shows that the entire difference stems from the GPU's workload, a clear sign that the CPU is a static, non-limiting element in this system.