The Technomancer

This combo pairs Intel’s Core Ultra 5 235 with NVIDIA’s GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER for a run through The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG. The dataset places this pairing at rank 1620 out of 2825 tested combos, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the field. The numbers tell a story of a system that can handle the game at 1080p with high refresh rates, but which begins to struggle as resolution climbs toward 4K. The following sections break down the measured performance, the roles of the GPU and CPU, and the practical settings you should use.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 1620 out of 2825 tested configurations puts it in the 42nd percentile of all tested pairings. That is not a top-tier position, but it is far from the bottom. The data shows a system that is capable of delivering smooth gameplay at 1080p and 1440p with moderate settings, while 4K remains a challenge. The rank is pulled down primarily by the GPU’s age and its 8 GB VRAM, which limits high-resolution performance in a game that was released several years after the card’s 2019 debut.

Looking at the individual components, the CPU is the stronger part of this combo. The Core Ultra 5 235 sits in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 46062. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 scores 46030 (0.1% slower), the Intel Core i9-13900HX scores 46098 (0.1% faster), and the AMD EPYC 4364P and EPYC 7303 both sit at 45970 and 45960 respectively (0.2% faster). This means the CPU is effectively trading blows with some of the fastest mobile and server chips available, making it a non-factor in this game’s performance.

The GPU, by contrast, is in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20282. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (20480, 1% faster), the RTX 3070 Mobile (20534, 1.2% faster), and the Intel Arc B570 (20556, 1.3% faster). The RTX 2070 SUPER is essentially at parity with these cards, meaning it is a mid-pack performer in 2025. The combination of a top-tier CPU with a mid-tier GPU means the system is almost always GPU-limited, which is confirmed by the FPS scaling across resolutions.

GPU Role

The RTX 2070 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture with a TU104 chip, manufactured on a 12 nm process. It has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, along with 40 RT cores and 320 tensor cores. The base clock is 1605 MHz and the boost clock is 1770 MHz, with memory clocked at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The 8 GB of GDDR6 memory runs on a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. These specs place the card as a solid 1440p performer from its generation, but the VRAM capacity is the key constraint in The Technomancer.

At 1080p, the GPU has enough headroom to push high frame rates. The data shows 103 FPS at High settings and 157 FPS at Low, which suggests the card is not fully saturated at this resolution. Moving to 1440p, the frame rates drop to 67 FPS at High and 102 FPS at Low, which are still playable but show the GPU starting to work harder. At 4K, the card struggles: 37 FPS at High, 43 FPS at Medium, and 29 FPS at Ultra. The 8 GB VRAM is likely the limiting factor here, as the game’s textures and geometry at 4K exceed what the card can comfortably hold.

The GPU’s FP32 performance is 9.062 TFLOPS, with a pixel rate of 113.3 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 283.2 GTexel/s. These numbers are adequate for the game’s age, but the measured FPS shows that the card is consistently the bottleneck. Even at 1080p Low, the CPU is not the limiting factor; the GPU is still delivering 157 FPS, which is below what the Core Ultra 5 235 could theoretically push in a CPU-bound scenario. The data suggests that lowering settings provides a direct FPS benefit, which is typical of a GPU-bound workload.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in The Technomancer?*

A: The data shows 1080p is the sweet spot, with 103 FPS at High and 157 FPS at Low. 1440p is playable at 67 FPS on High, but 4K drops to 37 FPS on High, which is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the RTX 2070 SUPER compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score is 20282, placing it 1% below the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (20480), 1.2% below the RTX 3070 Mobile (20534), and 1.3% below the Intel Arc B570 (20556). These are all within a 1.5% margin, making them functionally equivalent.

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

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The CPU sits in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 65th percentile. The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K shows a consistent drop that aligns with GPU load, not CPU load.

Q: What settings should I use for 1440p gameplay?

A: Medium settings at 1440p deliver 79 FPS, which is the best balance of quality and performance. High settings drop to 67 FPS, which is still playable, but Medium provides a smoother experience with a 12 FPS margin.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K at all?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, which delivers 56 FPS. Medium settings drop to 43 FPS, and High settings fall to 37 FPS. Ultra is not viable at 29 FPS. For a consistent 60 FPS experience, 4K is not recommended.

Q: How does the CPU’s performance compare to its rivals?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235 scores 46062 on average, which is 0.1% faster than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030) and 0.1% slower than the Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098). It is also 0.2% faster than the AMD EPYC 4364P and EPYC 7303.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured data provides a complete picture across three resolutions and four settings levels. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers 157 FPS on Low, 120 FPS on Medium (with a min of 102 and max of 139), 103 FPS on High, and 80 FPS on Ultra. The jump from Low to Ultra is a 77 FPS drop, representing a 49% performance loss, which is typical for a GPU-bound scenario where settings directly impact render load.

At 2560x1440, the numbers scale down proportionally. Low settings produce 102 FPS, Medium delivers 79 FPS (min 67, max 91), High produces 67 FPS, and Ultra drops to 53 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra is 49 FPS, or 48% of the Low score. This consistent percentage drop across resolutions confirms that the GPU is the primary constraint, as the relative cost of each settings tier remains stable.

At 3840x2160, the performance falls below playable thresholds for most settings. Low delivers 56 FPS, Medium produces 43 FPS (min 37, max 50), High drops to 37 FPS, and Ultra falls to 29 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 27 FPS, which is a 48% reduction, again matching the pattern seen at lower resolutions. The min FPS values at 4K Medium (37 FPS) indicate that even the average frame rate can dip into stutter territory, making 4K a poor choice for this combo.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all settings. At High settings, the frame rate goes from 103 FPS at 1080p to 67 FPS at 1440p (a 35% drop) and then to 37 FPS at 4K (a 64% drop from 1080p). This scaling is characteristic of a GPU-bound workload, where the number of pixels being rendered quadruples from 1080p to 4K, but the frame rate does not drop by the same factor because the CPU and memory bandwidth still provide some headroom.

At Low settings, the scaling is similar: 157 FPS at 1080p, 102 FPS at 1440p (a 35% drop), and 56 FPS at 4K (a 64% drop from 1080p). The fact that the percentage drops are nearly identical between Low and High settings suggests that the GPU is consistently the bottleneck, regardless of the quality preset. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see a smaller drop from 1080p to 1440p and a larger drop from 1440p to 4K, but the data shows a linear scaling pattern.

The limiting component is clearly the GPU. The RTX 2070 SUPER has 8 GB of VRAM and a 448.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, which are both insufficient for 4K in a 2016 title that was not designed with such high resolutions in mind. The CPU’s 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth and 24 MB of L3 cache are more than adequate for this game, as evidenced by the CPU’s high percentile ranking. The data indicates that upgrading the GPU would provide the most significant FPS improvement, while the CPU would not need to be replaced for this specific title.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The CPU supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, providing 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. These specs are well above what The Technomancer requires, as the game was released in 2016 when 4-core CPUs were the norm.

The CPU’s benchmark scores reinforce its strength. In Cinebench R23, it scores 14769 multi-core and 2085 single-core, placing it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs. The PassMark multi-thread score is 37816, with a single-thread score of 4516. Its nearest competitors are all within 0.2% of its average score, indicating that the CPU is not a differentiating factor in this benchmark. The data shows that the CPU is never the bottleneck in this game, as the FPS numbers are entirely dependent on the GPU’s settings and resolution.

Given the CPU’s 14 cores and 14 threads, it has ample headroom for the game’s single-threaded and lightly-threaded workloads. The boost clock of 5.00 GHz ensures high single-core performance, which is what most games from this era rely on. The CPU’s 89th percentile ranking means it is faster than 89% of all tested CPUs, making it a non-issue for The Technomancer. Even at 1080p Low, where the GPU is least stressed, the CPU does not limit the frame rate, as the 157 FPS result is still below what the CPU could theoretically deliver.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance on the best settings for each resolution. At 1080p, the High preset delivers 103 FPS, which is smooth and visually detailed. Medium produces 120 FPS, which is a 17 FPS improvement over High, but the visual difference is noticeable in a game that relies on atmosphere. Ultra drops to 80 FPS, which is still playable, but the 23 FPS cost over High is not worth the marginal visual upgrade. For a 60 Hz monitor, High is the best choice; for a 144 Hz monitor, Medium is the recommended setting to stay above 120 FPS.

At 1440p, the choice is between High at 67 FPS and Medium at 79 FPS. Both are above 60 FPS, but Medium provides a 12 FPS buffer that helps maintain smooth gameplay during action sequences. The min FPS at Medium is 67, which matches the average of High, meaning High will occasionally dip below 60 FPS in demanding scenes. Ultra at 53 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold and should be avoided. For the best experience at 1440p, Medium is the recommended preset, as it offers the highest frame rate without sacrificing too much visual fidelity.

At 4K, the data is unambiguous: Low is the only playable preset, delivering 56 FPS. Medium drops to 43 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target and will feel stuttery. High and Ultra are not viable at 37 FPS and 29 FPS respectively. If you must play at 4K, Low settings are the only option, but the visual quality will be significantly reduced. The 8 GB VRAM limit is the primary constraint here, and there is no settings combination that can overcome that hardware limitation. For most players, 1440p Medium is the best overall balance of performance and quality for this combo.