The Technomancer

# The Technomancer with Intel Core Ultra 5 135H + AMD Radeon 8060S

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents a demanding workload for this mobile platform pairing the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H with the AMD Radeon 8060S. Measured data across three resolutions and four quality presets shows a system that handles 1080p comfortably but struggles at 4K Ultra. The combo ranks 1632nd out of 2825 tested combinations, placing it in the lower-middle tier of the database. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS, the roles of each component, and what the scaling patterns reveal about system bottlenecks.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data clearly defines the playable envelope for this hardware. At 1920x1080, the system delivers 103 FPS on High, 120 FPS on Medium, and 157 FPS on Low. The Ultra preset drops to 80 FPS, which is still fluid but represents a 22% reduction from High. For 1080p gamers seeking the best balance of visual fidelity and frame rate, the High preset is the clear sweet spot: 103 FPS is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, and the jump to Ultra yields only 80 FPS — a meaningful sacrifice for marginal visual gains.

At 2560x1440, the picture changes. High produces 67 FPS, Medium 79 FPS, and Low 102 FPS. Ultra falls to 52 FPS, which dips below the 60 FPS comfort zone. Here, Medium is the recommended preset: 79 FPS provides headroom for demanding scenes, while High at 67 FPS is acceptable but leaves less margin. Low at 102 FPS is for competitive play, but the visual downgrade in an RPG context undermines immersion.

At 3840x2160, the system is clearly overstretched. High averages 37 FPS, Medium 43 FPS, and Low 56 FPS. Ultra bottoms out at 29 FPS. Only Low reaches the 60 FPS threshold, and even then, the 56 FPS average suggests inconsistent frame pacing. For 4K, the data supports Low as the only viable preset for reasonably smooth gameplay. Medium at 43 FPS is playable for slower-paced exploration but will struggle in combat sequences. The measured minimum of 37 FPS on Medium at 4K confirms this volatility.

The optimal experience across all resolutions is the High preset at 1080p. It delivers 103 FPS, which is 23 FPS above the 80 FPS Ultra result and only 17 FPS below the 120 FPS Medium. This represents the best tradeoff between visual quality and performance. For 1440p users, Medium is the pragmatic choice; for 4K, Low is the only option that approaches smoothness.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is a 14-core, 18-thread Meteor Lake processor with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Its 18 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s provide a solid foundation for gaming. The CPU's Cinebench R23 scores — 11875.5 multi-core and 1700 single-core — place it in the 81st percentile of all CPUs, indicating competent but not elite processing power.

In The Technomancer, the CPU's role is most evident at lower resolutions and settings. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 157 FPS, which is 53% higher than the 1080p High result of 103 FPS. This dramatic scaling suggests that at Low settings, the GPU is less burdened, and the CPU's single-thread performance becomes more relevant. The 1700 single-core score in Cinebench R23 supports this: it's adequate for feeding the GPU at high frame rates, but not exceptional.

The nearest rivals provide context. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X scores 0.1% lower in average benchmarks, while the Intel Core i5-13500HX scores 0.6% higher. The Ryzen 5 5600XT is 0.5% lower. These tight margins indicate the Ultra 5 135H is competitively positioned for gaming workloads. However, The Technomancer's engine, dating from 2016, may not fully utilize all 18 threads. The 14 cores and 18 threads are more than sufficient for this title, but the architectural efficiency of the Meteor Lake design — with its 7 nm process node — matters more than raw core counts.

The CPU's PassMark multi-thread score of 22422 and single-thread score of 3521 further characterize its capability. The single-thread result is particularly relevant for The Technomancer, which likely relies on a few primary threads for game logic and physics. The boost clock of 4.60 GHz provides the necessary speed for these threads, but the data shows that at 4K Ultra, the CPU is not the limiting factor — the GPU is.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 8060S is a Strix Halo integrated GPU based on RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on a 4 nm process. It features 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The system-shared memory means VRAM size and bandwidth are dependent on the host system's DDR5 configuration, which is a critical constraint for a 2016 title that may not be optimized for shared memory architectures.

The GPU's benchmark scores are strong: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2162, Geekbench OpenCL of 84626, and Vulkan of 80483. These place it in the 87th percentile of all GPUs, which is impressive for an integrated solution. The nearest rivals reinforce this: the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 0.1% higher, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 scores 0.6% higher. The Radeon Pro W5700X is 1.7% lower and the RTX 4080 is 2.8% lower. This places the 8060S in the upper echelon of mobile graphics.

In The Technomancer, the GPU's role is dominant at higher resolutions and settings. At 4K Ultra, the system produces 29 FPS, which is a 64% drop from the 4K Low result of 56 FPS. This scaling pattern indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck at 4K, as the rendering load overwhelms the 8060S's 14.85 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The pixel rate of 185.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 464.0 GTexel/s are adequate for 1080p but insufficient for 4K at high settings.

The system-shared memory is a notable limitation. Unlike discrete GPUs with dedicated VRAM, the 8060S relies on system memory bandwidth, which is "System Dependent." This means the effective bandwidth could vary significantly based on the laptop's memory configuration. In The Technomancer, which likely uses large textures, this could cause stuttering or reduced performance in memory-intensive scenes, particularly at 4K where texture memory demands are highest.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 1632nd out of 2825 tested combinations in The Technomancer, placing it in the 42nd percentile of all systems. This is a middling result, reflecting the tension between a strong CPU (81st percentile) and a strong GPU (87th percentile) that nonetheless struggle to deliver high-end performance in this specific title.

The ranking suggests that while each component individually performs well in synthetic benchmarks, their combination in The Technomancer yields results that lag behind more optimized pairings. The 4K Ultra result of 29 FPS is particularly telling: many desktop combos would exceed 60 FPS at this setting, but this mobile platform falls short. The 1080p Ultra result of 80 FPS is more respectable, but still indicates that the system cannot fully saturate high-refresh-rate displays at maximum settings.

The gap between the combo's component percentiles and its game rank is noteworthy. The CPU's 81st percentile and GPU's 87th percentile would suggest a top-20% system, but the game rank of 1632/2825 (42nd percentile) reveals a significant underperformance. This could be due to the shared memory architecture, driver optimization for a 2016 title, or thermal constraints in a mobile chassis. The data indicates that the combination is less than the sum of its parts for this particular game.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the system's bottleneck characteristics. At High settings, the system delivers 103 FPS at 1080p, 67 FPS at 1440p, and 37 FPS at 4K. This represents a 35% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 45% drop from 1440p to 4K. The total drop from 1080p to 4K is 64%.

This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound system. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions, as the CPU's workload doesn't change with resolution. Instead, the consistent decline with each resolution increase confirms that the Radeon 8060S is the limiting component in most scenarios.

At Low settings, the scaling is similar but with higher absolute values: 157 FPS at 1080p, 102 FPS at 1440p, and 56 FPS at 4K. The 64% drop from 1080p to 4K is identical to High, suggesting that the GPU's rendering load scales predictably with pixel count regardless of quality preset. However, the absolute values indicate that at Low settings, the CPU has more headroom, allowing the GPU to reach higher frame rates before hitting its ceiling.

The Medium preset shows the most complete data, with minimum and maximum FPS recorded. At 1080p Medium, the average is 120 FPS with a range of 102-138 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 79 FPS with a range of 67-90 FPS. At 4K Medium, the average is 43 FPS with a range of 37-50 FPS. The narrowing range at higher resolutions suggests that frame pacing becomes more consistent as the GPU approaches its limits, but the absolute performance becomes less playable.

The Ultra preset shows the steepest drop: 80 FPS at 1080p, 52 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K. The 64% drop from 1080p to 4K mirrors the other settings, but the low absolute values at 4K make this preset impractical for anything beyond 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best performance across all presets. Low settings produce 157 FPS average, which is exceptionally smooth for any title. Medium settings reduce this to 120 FPS, with a measured range of 102-138 FPS. High settings produce 103 FPS, which is still well above the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra settings deliver 80 FPS, which is playable but represents a significant drop from the lower presets.

The 1080p results show a clear hierarchy: Low > Medium > High > Ultra, with each step down in quality yielding a proportional increase in frame rate. The jump from Ultra to High is 23 FPS (29% improvement), while the jump from High to Medium is 17 FPS (17% improvement). The jump from Medium to Low is 37 FPS (31% improvement). This non-linear scaling suggests that the Ultra preset introduces rendering features that disproportionately impact the GPU.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops are more pronounced. Low settings produce 102 FPS, which is still smooth. Medium settings deliver 79 FPS, with a range of 67-90 FPS. High settings produce 67 FPS, which is above 60 FPS but with less headroom. Ultra settings drop to 52 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS comfort zone.

The 1440p results show a similar hierarchy to 1080p, but with compressed absolute values. The gap between Low and Ultra is 50 FPS (from 102 to 52), compared to 77 FPS at 1080p (from 157 to 80). This compression indicates that the GPU is becoming the limiting factor, as the resolution increase reduces the impact of quality settings on absolute frame rates.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles across all presets. Low settings produce 56 FPS, which is borderline playable. Medium settings deliver 43 FPS, with a range of 37-50 FPS. High settings produce 37 FPS, which is choppy. Ultra settings drop to 29 FPS, which is not suitable for gameplay.

The 4K results show the GPU's limitations most clearly. The gap between Low and Ultra is only 27 FPS (from 56 to 29), and even the Low preset fails to maintain a consistent 60 FPS. The measured minimum of 37 FPS on Medium at 4K suggests that demanding scenes can cause significant frame drops, making the game feel unstable at this resolution.

The data reveals that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming, where it can handle all presets including Ultra. At 1440p, it can manage High settings for a playable experience. At 4K, only Low settings approach playability, and even then, the performance is marginal. The system's strengths are in its CPU and GPU individual capabilities, but the shared memory architecture and mobile form factor limit its ability to handle 4K gaming in The Technomancer.