The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents a demanding workload that stresses both processor and graphics hardware. This analysis pairs the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 with the AMD Radeon RX 6600, using measured frame rate data to characterize the experience across resolutions and settings. The data shows a system that is firmly capable of 1080p gaming but which requires careful settings management to maintain playability at higher resolutions. The combination ranks in the 22nd percentile of tested configurations for this title, indicating that while it is not a top-tier performer, it sits within a large cluster of systems that deliver a playable experience under the right conditions.

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates reveal a clear and predictable progression as resolution increases, highlighting where the system's bottleneck lies. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo produces an average of 85 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same High preset, the average drops to 56 FPS, a reduction of roughly 34%. This is a substantial hit, but the system remains fluid. The jump to 3840x2160 is far more punishing, with the average plummeting to 31 FPS, a 45% drop from the 1440p figure. This steep decline at 4K strongly indicates that the AMD Radeon RX 6600's rendering capabilities become the primary limiting factor, as the pixel count overwhelms the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth.

The scaling pattern from Low to Ultra settings reinforces this diagnosis. At 1080p, the spread between Low (130 FPS) and Ultra (67 FPS) is nearly double, showing that the CPU has ample headroom to feed the GPU at lower graphical loads. The GPU is the constraint even at 1080p Ultra, but it is not saturated. However, at 4K, the gap narrows significantly in relative terms. The Low preset yields 47 FPS, while Ultra yields only 24 FPS. The fact that 4K Low (47 FPS) is still far below 1080p Ultra (67 FPS) confirms that resolution scaling has a more profound impact on performance than settings scaling. The GPU is completely bound by the sheer number of pixels at 3840x2160, regardless of how much graphical detail is reduced.

This data suggests that the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is not the limiting component in this pairing. The CPU's strong single-thread performance, evidenced by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2085, is more than sufficient to keep up with the GPU's output, even at lower resolutions where frame rates are high. The performance cliff at 4K is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck. For users targeting 1440p or 4K, the RX 6600 will be the component dictating the playable settings, while at 1080p, the system is better balanced, with the GPU still the primary determinant of maximum frame rates but the CPU capable of pushing high FPS in less demanding scenes.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU and GPU combo in The Technomancer?

A: The data indicates that 1920x1080 is the most suitable resolution. The system achieves an average of 85 FPS on High settings and 67 FPS on Ultra at this resolution, providing a smooth experience. At 2560x1440, the High preset still delivers a playable 56 FPS, but 3840x2160 is not viable, with all presets falling below 47 FPS.

Q: How does the Ultra preset at 1080p compare to the High preset at 1440p?

A: The 1080p Ultra preset produces an average of 67 FPS, while the 1440p High preset averages 56 FPS. The 1080p Ultra setting provides a higher frame rate and better graphical fidelity in terms of detail settings, making it the superior choice for a smoother visual experience over the higher resolution.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for the frame rate drops at 4K?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor at 4K. The frame rates drop dramatically across all settings, from 47 FPS on Low to 24 FPS on Ultra. Since even the lowest settings cannot achieve a high frame rate, the GPU's pixel processing throughput is the bottleneck, not the CPU's ability to prepare frames.

Q: What is the expected performance frame range for the Medium preset at 1080p?

A: The measured data for 1080p Medium shows an average of 100 FPS, with a minimum of 85 FPS and a maximum of 115 FPS. This provides a stable and highly playable experience, with the minimum frame rate remaining well above common 60 FPS thresholds.

Q: How does this combo's overall performance rank compared to other tested systems?

A: In terms of overall in-game performance, this combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and AMD Radeon RX 6600 ranks 2193 out of 2825 tested combos. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the performance distribution for The Technomancer.

Q: Does the GPU's performance in this game align with its general benchmark standing?

A: The GPU's general benchmark percentile is 63, meaning it performs better than 63% of all GPUs in the database. However, its in-game rank with this CPU is lower, suggesting that The Technomancer is a particularly demanding title that does not scale as favorably with this GPU as other games might.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and AMD Radeon RX 6600 combination is positioned at rank 2193 out of 2825 total tested combos for The Technomancer. This places it in the 22nd percentile of tested systems, indicating that a significant majority of other hardware configurations deliver higher average frame rates. This ranking is informative when considering the individual components. The CPU itself holds an 89th percentile ranking against all CPUs, showing it is a high-performing processor. The GPU, however, holds a 63rd percentile rank, indicating it is a mid-range performer. The combination's lower in-game rank compared to the GPU's own percentile suggests that The Technomancer is a title that heavily favors systems with stronger graphics cards.

The delta between the combo's rank and the GPU's percentile suggests that the game's engine may be more sensitive to raw GPU compute and memory bandwidth than to CPU throughput. The RX 6600's 8 GB of VRAM and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth are likely adequate for 1080p but become stressed at higher resolutions, which aligns with the measured FPS drops. The CPU's position, having a nearest rival in the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 with a negligible 0.1% score difference, confirms that the 235 is a highly competitive processor. However, its power is not the deciding factor in this game's performance ceiling, which is set by the GPU.

For context within the database, the system is not an outlier in either direction; it is a representative example of a balanced mid-range build. The 22nd percentile ranking means it will struggle with the most demanding settings at high resolutions but should handle the game at 1080p with most presets. The performance gap to higher-ranked combos is likely dominated by GPUs with more shading units, higher memory bandwidth, and larger VRAM pools. This ranking serves as a clear indicator that for this specific game, investment in a more powerful GPU would yield more significant performance gains than upgrading the processor.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rate data provides a comprehensive look at performance across the three primary resolutions and four quality presets.

At 1920x1080, the system shows strong performance. The Low preset achieves an average of 130 FPS, indicating a high level of headroom. The Medium preset averages 100 FPS, with a minimum of 85 FPS and a maximum of 115 FPS, providing a very stable experience. The High preset averages 85 FPS, which is still well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The Ultra preset delivers an average of 67 FPS, which is playable but begins to approach the lower bound of what many consider ideal for fast-paced action. All 1080p presets are viable, with Low and Medium being optimal for high refresh rate displays.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance cost is clear. The Low preset averages 85 FPS, which is good, but represents a 35% drop from the 1080p Low figure. The Medium preset averages 65 FPS, with a minimum of 56 FPS and a maximum of 75 FPS. This is still within the playable range, though the minimum frame rate suggests occasional dips. The High preset averages 56 FPS, which is just on the edge of smooth playability. The Ultra preset drops to an average of 44 FPS, which will feel stuttery and is not recommended for a consistently smooth experience. For 1440p, the Low and Medium presets are the most sensible choices.

At 3840x2160, the system is out of its depth. The Low preset averages 47 FPS, which is technically playable but not smooth. The Medium preset averages 36 FPS, with a minimum of 31 FPS and a maximum of 41 FPS, indicating a largely sub-60 FPS experience. The High preset averages 31 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 24 FPS. None of these 4K presets provide a good experience. The data suggests that the RX 6600 simply does not have the required pixel throughput or memory bandwidth to handle The Technomancer at 4K, regardless of the graphical settings used.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 is the central figure in this performance analysis, as its characteristics directly determine the system's capabilities. The GPU's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory is a critical resource. While this capacity is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p textures, the performance collapse at 4K suggests that the memory bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s becomes a severe constraint when the resolution increases. The GPU's memory clock of 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) and 128-bit bus width are mid-range specifications that cannot feed the data demands of a 4K frame buffer.

The core clocks are another factor. The GPU has a base clock of 1626 MHz, a game clock of 2044 MHz, and a boost clock of 2491 MHz. These are respectable figures for the RX 6000 series, and the boost clock is key for maintaining performance in less demanding scenes. However, the overall compute throughput, rated at 8.928 TFLOPS FP32, is the hard limit for pixel and shader processing. The data shows that even at 1080p Ultra, the system only achieves 67 FPS on average, which indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck, as a more powerful GPU would push this higher. The GPU's 1792 shading units and 64 ROPs are simply not enough to maintain high frame rates when the pixel count is high.

The GPU's general performance percentile of 63 aligns with its mid-range market position. Its nearest rivals in the database, such as the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 with a 0% delta, show that it is a well-understood and consistently performing chip. For The Technomancer, the GPU's role is to be the limiting factor at resolutions above 1080p. The measured FPS scaling is a direct result of the GPU's fill rate and bandwidth limitations. Users should not expect this GPU to deliver high refresh rates at 1440p or maintain 60 FPS at 4K in this title, as the data unequivocally shows it cannot.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 plays a supporting role in this pairing, and its performance data confirms it is not the cause of the frame rate limitations observed in The Technomancer. The CPU's 14 cores and 14 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, provide ample processing power for the game's logic and physics. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14769 and single-core score of 2085 demonstrate a strong processor that can handle both multi-threaded and single-threaded tasks efficiently. This is important because many games, including those from 2016, rely heavily on single-core performance.

The data strongly suggests that the CPU has significant headroom. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 130 FPS, which is a high frame rate that demands a capable CPU to feed the GPU. The fact that the frame rate drops to 67 FPS at 1080p Ultra, while the CPU load does not increase proportionally, indicates that the CPU is waiting on the GPU to complete rendering tasks. The CPU's high performance is also reflected in its 89th percentile ranking against all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375, has a 0.1% higher average score, showing the 235 is at the top of its class.

The CPU's role in this game is to ensure that frame times are consistent and that the GPU is never starved of data. The measured FPS minimums, such as the 85 FPS minimum at 1080p Medium, show that the CPU is capable of maintaining a stable frame pacing. The processor is not a bottleneck at any resolution tested. Even at 4K, where the GPU is clearly struggling, the CPU is likely idle for significant periods. This means that for users considering an upgrade, replacing the CPU would yield no measurable improvement in this game. Any performance gains would only come from upgrading the graphics card.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this system depend heavily on the user's target resolution and refresh rate.

For 1920x1080, the system is capable of delivering an excellent experience. The High preset is the recommended starting point, providing an average of 85 FPS, which is ideal for a 60Hz or 75Hz monitor. For users with a 144Hz display, the Medium preset, with an average of 100 FPS and a minimum of 85 FPS, offers the best balance of visual quality and high refresh rate performance. The Ultra preset, at 67 FPS, is playable but is the least stable of the viable options and offers diminishing visual returns over High. The Low preset at 130 FPS is only necessary for competitive play at very high refresh rates where every frame matters.

For 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the best choice for a smooth experience. It averages 65 FPS with a minimum of 56 FPS, which puts it right at the edge of the 60 FPS threshold. The High preset at 56 FPS is acceptable for slower-paced exploration but will suffer during combat. The Ultra preset at 44 FPS is not recommended due to noticeable stuttering. The Low preset at 85 FPS is the only way to achieve a high refresh rate experience at this resolution, but the visual downgrade is significant.

For 3840x2160, the data suggests that this game is not realistically playable with this GPU. Even the Low preset at 47 FPS will feel inconsistent. The Medium preset at 36 FPS and High at 31 FPS are too low for an action RPG. The Ultra preset at 24 FPS is effectively a slideshow. Users with a 4K display should strongly consider lowering the resolution to 1440p or 1080p, as the visual quality difference from a higher resolution with low settings is often less important than a stable frame rate. In summary, the best experience is achieved at 1080p with High or Medium settings, or at 1440p with Medium settings.