The Technomancer

# The Technomancer with Intel Core Ultra 5 245 + AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents an interesting benchmark case for the combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT. Measured frame rate data across three resolutions and four quality presets reveals a system that scales predictably with graphical load, showing clear GPU-bound behavior at higher resolutions while exhibiting substantial headroom at 1080p.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 follows a classic performance curve, with the most dramatic drop occurring when moving from 1440p to 4K. At High settings, the average FPS falls from 142 at 1080p to 93 at 1440p—a reduction of 49 FPS—and then further down to 51 at 4K, another 42 FPS decline. This pattern indicates that the RX 6800 XT is the primary limiting component as resolution increases, with the GPU's pixel throughput becoming the bottleneck.

The scaling becomes even more apparent when examining the Low preset. At 1080p, the system delivers an average of 216 FPS, which drops to 141 at 1440p and then to 78 at 4K. The percentage decline from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 35%, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is approximately 45%. This steeper second decline suggests that the GPU's 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 288.0 GPixel/s pixel rate are being saturated as the pixel count quadruples from 1440p to 4K.

At Ultra settings, the same pattern holds: 111 FPS at 1080p, 72 FPS at 1440p, and 40 FPS at 4K. The gap between Low and Ultra widens with resolution, going from a 105 FPS difference at 1080p to a 38 FPS difference at 4K. This narrowing gap at higher resolutions is a hallmark of GPU-bound scenarios, where the additional shading work from Ultra settings becomes relatively less impactful compared to the sheer pixel fill rate required.

The Medium preset provides the only complete frame time data, with minimum and maximum values recorded. At 1080p, the min FPS is 141 and max is 191, while at 1440p the range is 92 to 125, and at 4K it narrows to 51 to 69. The shrinking variance at higher resolutions—from a 50 FPS spread at 1080p down to an 18 FPS spread at 4K—indicates that the GPU is consistently saturated at 4K, leaving little room for frame time fluctuation.

The data suggests that at 1080p, the CPU's 14 cores and 14 threads, boosting to 5.10 GHz, are sufficient to feed the GPU, as evidenced by the 216 FPS ceiling at Low settings. The transition to 1440p introduces a more balanced load, but 4K is firmly GPU-limited. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245's Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4648 and multi-core score of 32924 indicate strong processing capability that does not bottleneck this title until very high frame rates are reached.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achievable with this combo?

A: The highest measured average is 216 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This represents the system's peak output when graphical demands are minimized.

Q: How does the system perform at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 40, which is below the 51 FPS minimum recorded for the Medium preset at the same resolution. This indicates that Ultra at 4K is demanding but technically playable.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The data indicates the GPU is still the limiting factor even at 1080p, but with less severity. The 216 FPS at Low settings versus 111 FPS at Ultra shows a 105 FPS swing, suggesting the GPU's shading units and texture rate are engaged heavily by higher presets rather than the CPU being maxed out.

Q: What frame rate can users expect at 1440p High?

A: The measured average is 93 FPS at 2560x1440 with High settings. This sits comfortably between the 109 FPS Medium and 72 FPS Ultra results, offering a smooth experience for most display refresh rates.

Q: Does the RX 6800 XT's 16 GB VRAM play a role in these results?

A: The 16 GB GDDR6 memory with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth is ample for The Technomancer, as no VRAM-related performance cliffs are observed in the data. The consistent scaling across presets suggests memory capacity is not a limiting factor.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations?

A: This combination ranks 845 out of 2825 tested combos, placing it in the 70th percentile of all configurations. This indicates solid mid-to-upper tier performance for this title.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data supports a clear recommendation for Medium settings as the optimal balance point. At 1920x1080, Medium delivers 166 average FPS with a minimum of 141, providing both high smoothness and a substantial frame rate cushion for demanding scenes. The gap to High is only 24 FPS (166 vs 142), while the jump from Low to Medium costs 50 FPS (216 vs 166), suggesting Medium captures most of the visual improvement with minimal performance sacrifice.

At 2560x1440, Medium yields 109 average FPS with a minimum of 92, which remains above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay on standard refresh displays. High settings at 1440p produce 93 FPS, still playable but with less headroom. For users prioritizing frame rate stability, Medium is the safer choice at this resolution.

The 4K recommendation requires more nuance. Medium at 3840x2160 delivers 60 average FPS with a minimum of 51, which is marginal for a locked 60 FPS experience. High at 4K drops to 51 average, while Low reaches 78. Given that the minimum FPS at Medium 4K is 51, users with adaptive sync displays may find this acceptable, but those seeking a guaranteed 60 FPS should consider Low settings (78 average).

Ultra settings are not recommended at any resolution based on the data. At 1080p, Ultra runs at 111 FPS, which is playable but delivers only 65% of Medium's frame rate. At 1440p, Ultra falls to 72 FPS, and at 4K it drops to 40. The performance cost from High to Ultra is consistent—roughly 30% at each resolution—without a correspondingly larger visual benefit implied by the data.

The strongest recommendation is Medium at 1440p, where the 109 FPS average with a 92 FPS minimum provides both smoothness and detail. This configuration leverages the GPU's capabilities without pushing into diminishing returns territory.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full settings sweep reveals a wide performance envelope. Low settings produce 216 average FPS, representing the system's maximum throughput. Medium settings reduce this to 166 FPS, with recorded minimum and maximum values of 141 and 191. High settings deliver 142 FPS, while Ultra drops to 111. The spread from Low to Ultra is 105 FPS, indicating significant GPU load variation across presets.

The 2560x1440 results show a compressed range. Low settings average 141 FPS, Medium 109 FPS (with min/max of 92/125), High 93 FPS, and Ultra 72 FPS. The total spread narrows to 69 FPS. Each preset step from Low to Medium costs 32 FPS, while Medium to High costs 16 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 21 FPS. This non-linear scaling suggests Medium occupies an efficient operating point.

At 3840x2160, the performance envelope tightens further. Low averages 78 FPS, Medium 60 FPS (min/max 51/69), High 51 FPS, and Ultra 40 FPS. The total spread is just 38 FPS, the smallest across all resolutions. The Medium preset's minimum of 51 FPS is notable—it matches the High preset's average exactly, indicating that frame pacing at Medium 4K remains consistent with the higher preset's typical output.

Comparing across resolutions, the 1080p Low result of 216 FPS versus the 4K Low result of 78 FPS shows a 2.77x reduction, roughly aligning with the pixel count increase from 2.07 million to 8.29 million pixels (4x). The fact that the frame rate does not drop by the full 4x suggests other bottlenecks, such as CPU draw call processing or memory latency, partially mitigate the pixel load.

The Medium preset's complete frame time data provides the most detailed picture. At 1080p, the 141-191 FPS range shows a 50 FPS variance, indicating the CPU can push frames quickly but the GPU occasionally stutters. At 1440p, the 92-125 range narrows to 33 FPS variance. At 4K, the 51-69 range shows just 18 FPS variance, suggesting stable GPU-bound operation with minimal frame pacing issues.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 21 chip, demonstrates its capabilities through these measured results. The GPU's 4608 shading units and 288 texture mapping units, paired with 128 ROPs, provide substantial raw throughput. The 20.74 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 648.0 GTexel/s texture rate are consistent with the frame rates observed at 1440p and 4K.

The 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus delivers 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. For The Technomancer, released in 2016, this bandwidth is more than sufficient, as evidenced by the lack of any memory-related performance cliffs in the data. The GPU's pixel rate of 288.0 GPixel/s becomes the key constraint at 4K, where the 40 FPS Ultra result suggests the ROPs are working near their limit.

The GPU's clocks show a base of 1825 MHz, a game clock of 2015 MHz, and a boost of 2250 MHz. The effective memory speed of 16 Gbps supports the high bandwidth figure. These specifications position the RX 6800 XT in the 85th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 48477. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile (1.5% higher score), Intel Arc A550M (2.5% lower), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti (3% lower), and AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 (3% lower).

The GPU's 300 W TDP and dual-slot design indicate a high-power part, though thermal behavior is not directly measured in this data. The 267 mm length and 120 mm height suggest it is a standard dual-fan design. The display outputs include 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C, supporting modern display connectivity.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3689, Geekbench OpenCL score of 171304, and Passmark G3D score of 24980 all indicate strong synthetic performance. The Passmark DirectX 12 score of 100 versus DirectX 11's 264 is notable, suggesting this older title may be better optimized for the legacy API, which could explain the relatively strong 1080p performance despite the GPU's modern architecture.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245, part of the Core Ultra Series 2 based on Arrow Lake architecture, provides the processing foundation for this combo. With 14 cores and 14 threads (no hyperthreading), running at a base clock of 3.50 GHz and boosting to 5.10 GHz, this CPU offers substantial single-thread performance. The 24 MB shared L3 cache and 102.4 GB/s dual-channel DDR5 memory bandwidth support the GPU's data demands.

The CPU's benchmark results place it in the 90th percentile of all processors, with an average score of 48995. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (0.4% lower), AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (0.5% lower), Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (0.6% higher), and Intel Core i5-14600K (0.8% higher). The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32924 and single-core score of 4648 demonstrate strong performance for both threaded and lightly-threaded workloads.

In The Technomancer, the CPU's role appears secondary to the GPU across most measured configurations. At 1080p Low, the 216 FPS result indicates the CPU can sustain very high frame rates when the GPU is not heavily loaded. The Passmark single-thread score of 4394 and Cinebench R15 single-core score of 468 suggest sufficient single-core throughput for the game's main thread. The Passmark physics score of 2569 and multithread score of 38706 indicate robust multi-core performance for any background tasks or physics calculations.

The CPU's 65 W TDP and 3 nm process node (TSMC fabrication, 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die) represent modern efficiency. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU provides a fallback display output, though it is not relevant to the discrete GPU performance measured here. The PCIe Gen 5 interface with 20 lanes ensures ample bandwidth for the GPU's PCIe 4.0 x16 connection.

At 1440p and 4K, the frame rate differences between presets are primarily attributable to GPU load, with the CPU showing no signs of bottlenecking. The 4K Low result of 78 FPS versus 1080p Low at 216 FPS confirms that the CPU is not the limiting factor even at lower graphical settings—the GPU's pixel throughput governs the upper bound.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination of Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT ranks 845 out of 2825 tested combos for The Technomancer, placing it in the 70th percentile of all configurations. This mid-to-upper tier ranking reflects the GPU's solid but not top-tier position (85th percentile among all GPUs) combined with the CPU's strong showing (90th percentile among all CPUs).

The ranking suggests that while this combo is not among the elite performers for this title, it delivers a consistently playable experience across most settings and resolutions. The 1080p results (111-216 FPS range) place it well above the threshold for high refresh rate displays, while the 1440p results (72-141 FPS) are competitive for mainstream gaming. The 4K results (40-78 FPS) are more modest, requiring settings compromises for smooth gameplay.

Compared to the GPU's nearest rivals, the RX 6800 XT's average benchmark score of 48477 sits within 3% of several competing parts, suggesting similar performance levels. The CPU's nearest rivals show even tighter clustering, with all four within 0.8% of the Core Ultra 5 245's average score. This indicates the combo's ranking is driven more by the GPU's capabilities than the CPU, particularly at higher resolutions where the GPU becomes the primary constraint.

The rank of 845 out of 2825 implies that roughly 70% of tested configurations outperform this combo in The Technomancer. This is expected given the RX 6800 XT's position in the GPU hierarchy—it is a capable card but not a flagship. The 16 GB VRAM and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth are competitive for the game's era, but newer GPUs with higher pixel rates will naturally achieve better 4K performance.

For users considering this combo, the data indicates it is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it delivers frame rates well above playability thresholds. At 4K, it requires Medium or Low settings for a consistent 60 FPS experience, which is a reasonable trade-off given the GPU's market position. The combo's 70th percentile ranking reflects a balanced system that excels at mainstream resolutions without reaching the highest echelons of performance.