The Technomancer

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H paired with the AMD Radeon 880M ranks 2761st out of 2825 tested combos in The Technomancer. This places the configuration in the bottom 2% of all tested systems, a position that reflects the fundamental imbalance between a capable mobile processor and an integrated graphics solution that is overwhelmed by this 2016 Action RPG. The data indicates that while the CPU has ample headroom, the GPU consistently bottlenecks performance across all settings and resolutions, resulting in a gaming experience that is largely limited to 1080p at lower presets.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 2761 out of 2825 tested combinations is a decisive verdict: this is a low-performing pairing for The Technomancer. With only 64 combos ranking below it, the configuration sits in the bottom 2.3% of the database. This is not a subtle difference; it is a clear indication that this hardware combination is poorly suited for the game's demands. The ranking is driven almost entirely by the AMD Radeon 880M's position in the GPU hierarchy, as the integrated graphics solution falls into the 43rd percentile of all GPUs. In contrast, the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H sits in the 81st percentile of all CPUs, demonstrating a significant performance tier gap between the two components.

The benchmark data reinforces this disparity. The CPU's average benchmark score of 29093 places it within 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X and 0.6% of the Intel Core i5-13500HX, indicating that the processor is a modern, competitive part. However, the GPU's average benchmark score of 8436 is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (0.1% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (-0.3% delta). These are legacy or entry-level discrete GPUs, and the fact that the 880M matches them suggests that its integrated nature severely limits its gaming potential in this title. The result is a system where the processor is capable of feeding frames far faster than the GPU can render them, creating a scenario where the measured FPS is almost exclusively a function of GPU performance.

FAQ

Q: What is the best performance this combo can achieve in The Technomancer?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 66 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration in the measured data that surpasses the 60 FPS threshold, and it does so with a substantial margin.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K resolution?

A: Performance at 3840x2160 is critically low. The average frame rates range from 12 FPS at Ultra settings to 24 FPS at Low settings. Even the best-case scenario at 4K is below the minimum threshold for comfortable playability.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data points conclusively to the GPU as the limiting component. The AMD Radeon 880M ranks in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H ranks in the 81st percentile of all CPUs, and the frame rates scale directly with resolution and settings, which are GPU-bound variables.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the average frame rate drops from 66 FPS at Low settings to 34 FPS at Ultra settings. This represents a 32 FPS reduction, or roughly a 48% decrease in performance, when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset.

Q: Does the combo provide a playable experience at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the average frame rates range from 22 FPS at Ultra to 43 FPS at Low. While the Low setting is playable, Medium (33 FPS) and High (28 FPS) presets fall below the smooth 60 FPS target, and Ultra is borderline unplayable.

Q: How does the GPU's benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Radeon 880M's average benchmark score of 8436 is effectively identical to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX, which scores 8427 (a 0.1% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330, which scores 8458 (a -0.3% delta). This indicates that its raw compute performance is on par with older entry-level discrete GPUs.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep performance cliff as resolution increases, confirming that the AMD Radeon 880M is the definitive bottleneck. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 at High settings reduces the average frame rate from 44 FPS to 28 FPS, a 36% drop. The scaling continues aggressively when moving to 4K, where the average FPS at High settings plummets to 16, a 43% reduction from the 1440p figure and a 64% reduction from the 1080p figure. This pattern is consistent across all settings, demonstrating that the GPU's rendering throughput is the primary constraint.

The scaling behavior indicates a classic GPU-bound scenario. When a system is CPU-bound, resolution changes typically have a minimal impact on frame rates because the processor is the limiting factor. Here, the frame rate drops by roughly half when going from 1080p to 4K at the same settings, which is a hallmark of a GPU that is struggling to fill pixels. For instance, at Low settings, the average FPS drops from 66 at 1080p to 43 at 1440p and then to 24 at 4K. The linear progression of these losses underscores that the integrated GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are insufficient for higher-resolution workloads in this game. The data suggests that users should treat 1080p as the primary target resolution, with 1440p only viable at the lowest preset and 4K reserved for static screenshots rather than gameplay.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its only playable results. Low settings produce an average of 66 FPS, which is smooth and responsive. Medium settings yield 51 FPS on average, with a minimum of 43 FPS and a maximum of 59 FPS, indicating that while the average is acceptable, dips below 60 FPS are common. High settings drop to an average of 44 FPS, which is still playable but noticeably less fluid. Ultra settings are the weakest at this resolution, with an average of 34 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS standard and approaches the threshold where motion becomes visibly choppy.

Moving to 2560x1440, the experience degrades significantly. Low settings are the only preset that maintains an average above 40 FPS, hitting 43 FPS. Medium settings average 33 FPS, with a minimum of 28 FPS and a maximum of 38 FPS, which is a marginal experience. High settings average 28 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to an average of 22 FPS. Neither High nor Ultra at 1440p provides a consistently smooth frame rate, and the minimums are likely to cause noticeable stutter during intense scenes.

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly poor. Low settings average 24 FPS, which is technically playable but far from ideal. Medium settings average 18 FPS, with a minimum of 16 FPS and a maximum of 21 FPS, making the game feel like a slideshow. High settings average 16 FPS, and Ultra settings sink to an average of 12 FPS. These numbers are below the threshold for acceptable playability and indicate that the game is effectively unplayable at 4K with this hardware. The data shows a clear hierarchy: 1080p Low is the only configuration that meets standard performance expectations, while every other setting requires a compromise on visual quality or resolution.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 880M is the decisive factor in this combo's performance. Its specifications, including a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, do not translate into sufficient gaming performance for The Technomancer. The GPU has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, which are modest numbers for a modern architecture. The memory configuration is System Shared, meaning the GPU relies on the system's main memory for its frame buffer, and the bandwidth is listed as System Dependent. This architecture places a significant burden on the memory subsystem, which is likely a contributing factor to the poor frame rates at higher resolutions.

The GPU's benchmark results contextualize its gaming performance. It scores 535 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 31285 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 40006 in Geekbench Vulkan. Its Passmark scores are particularly revealing: a G3D score of 7615 and a G2D score of 969. The Passmark DirectX scores are low, with DirectX 11 at 73, DirectX 12 at 32, and DirectX 9 at 97. These numbers place the GPU in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX, NVIDIA GeForce MX330, AMD Radeon HD 8870M, and AMD Radeon R9 M375X. The 880M's average benchmark score of 8436 is within 1.3% of these parts, confirming that its performance is equivalent to a decade-old mid-range mobile GPU. In The Technomancer, this translates to an inability to push high frame rates even at 1080p, as the GPU's raw throughput and memory bandwidth are insufficient for the game's rendering demands at higher settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H provides a strong foundation that is largely wasted in this configuration. With 14 cores and 18 threads, a base clock of 3.60 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, the processor has ample compute resources for gaming. Its 18 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s are more than adequate for feeding a discrete GPU, let alone an integrated one. The CPU's benchmark scores demonstrate its capability: it scores 11875.5 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 1700 in single-core, and its Passmark multi-thread score is 22422. These results place it in the 81st percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29093.

The CPU's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X and the Intel Core i5-13500HX, with delta percentages of -0.1% and -0.6% respectively. This shows that the 135H is a competitive desktop-class performer in multi-threaded workloads. However, in The Technomancer, the CPU's role is secondary. The measured frame rates show no signs of CPU limitation; the frame rates scale linearly with resolution and settings, which is the signature of a GPU bottleneck. The CPU is likely capable of producing frame rates well above 100 FPS at 1080p, but the AMD Radeon 880M cannot keep up. The data suggests that the CPU is not the constraint in this pairing, and any performance improvements would require a more powerful GPU. The 135H's capabilities are effectively untapped, as the integrated graphics solution caps the system's gaming performance far below what the processor could deliver.