The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents an interesting case study for the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX pairing. The measured data reveals a configuration that is heavily skewed toward GPU-bound performance at higher resolutions, while the 14-core processor demonstrates its capability to keep pace at lower settings where frame rates escalate dramatically. This analysis walks through the CPU and GPU roles, scaling behavior, ranking, and settings recommendations based strictly on the provided benchmark results.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The chip includes 24 MB of shared L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel interface, yielding a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. These specifications place the CPU in the 90th percentile of all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 48995.

In The Technomancer, the CPU's influence is most visible when the rendering load is light. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 271 FPS average. This high frame rate suggests the processor is capable of feeding the GPU with sufficient draw calls and game logic updates to avoid becoming a bottleneck at this level. The CPU's single-thread performance, indicated by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4648, is a relevant factor here, as older game engines like those from 2016 often rely heavily on a few primary threads.

Comparing to nearest rivals, the Core Ultra 5 245 sits very close in aggregate performance to several other chips. It is 0.4% behind the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G and 0.5% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 in average benchmark score. Conversely, it is 0.6% ahead of the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H and 0.8% ahead of the Intel Core i5-14600K. These deltas are marginal, implying that in CPU-limited scenarios within The Technomancer, any of these processors would likely produce similar results. The data indicates that moving from 1080p Low to 1080p High reduces the average FPS from 271 to 178, a drop of 93 FPS. This sizable reduction points to the increased pixel shading workload engaging the GPU more, but the CPU still manages to keep the frame rate well above 144 Hz, indicating no severe CPU-related stutter is present in the measured results.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX is a high-end graphics card based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, featuring the Navi 31 chip. It is equipped with 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, providing a substantial 960.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The GPU has a base clock of 1929 MHz and a boost clock of 2498 MHz, with a game clock rated at 2365 MHz. It includes 6144 shading units and 192 ROPs, contributing to a pixel rate of 479.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 959.2 GTexel/s. The card's FP32 performance is listed at 61.39 TFLOPS.

Despite these impressive specifications, the GPU's percentile rank among all tested GPUs is only 64th, with an average benchmark score of 19410. The nearest rivals in the benchmark database are unexpected: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB (0.4% higher score), the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (1% lower), the AMD FirePro D300 (1.2% lower), and the NVIDIA TITAN Xp (1.2% higher). This suggests that the specific benchmark suite used for ranking may not favor the RX 7900 XTX's architecture, or that the average score is dragged down by legacy tests. However, for The Technomancer, the measured FPS data tells a different story.

At 4K Ultra, the combo produces 50 FPS average, while at 4K High it jumps to 64 FPS. The 14 FPS difference between these two presets indicates the GPU is the primary limiter, as the increase in visual fidelity from High to Ultra imposes a significant rendering cost. The 24 GB VRAM buffer is more than sufficient for this title, as no memory-related performance cliffs are evident in the data; the frame rates scale consistently with the settings changes. The GPU's high memory bandwidth and raw compute power are the key drivers of the high frame rates seen at lower resolutions, such as 178 FPS at 1080p High and 271 FPS at 1080p Low.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, which is typical for a GPU-bound scenario. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 271 at 1080p to 177 at 1440p, and then to 97 at 4K. This represents a 35% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 45% reduction from 1440p to 4K. The absolute drop of 174 FPS from 1080p Low to 4K Low demonstrates the massive increase in pixel shading workload on the GPU.

For Medium settings, the pattern is similar: 209 FPS at 1080p, 136 FPS at 1440p, and 75 FPS at 4K. The 4K Medium result includes a minimum FPS of 64 and a maximum of 86, showing some variance but still maintaining a playable average. At High settings, the frame rates are 178 FPS (1080p), 116 FPS (1440p), and 64 FPS (4K). The drop from 1440p to 4K at High settings is 52 FPS, which is a 45% reduction, consistent with the scaling seen at Low settings.

Ultra settings show the steepest curve: 139 FPS at 1080p, 91 FPS at 1440p, and 50 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is the only measured configuration that falls below the commonly accepted 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The data indicates that the GPU is the limiting component across all resolutions. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see frame rates plateau at lower resolutions, but instead they continue to rise significantly from 1440p to 1080p. For instance, at Low settings, the 1440p to 1080p jump yields 94 FPS of additional performance, confirming that the CPU has ample headroom and is not constraining the system.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

Within the database of tested hardware combinations for The Technomancer, this specific pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX holds a rank of 326 out of 2825 total combos. This places the configuration in the top 11.5% of all tested systems for this game. The rank is a composite measure that likely factors in performance across various settings and resolutions, weighted by the game's demands.

Given the GPU's relatively low percentile rank in the general benchmark suite (64th) and the CPU's high rank (90th), the combo's overall game rank of 326 suggests that The Technomancer is particularly responsive to the GPU's strengths. The RX 7900 XTX's high memory bandwidth and compute throughput are well-suited for the game's rendering engine. The combination outperforms the vast majority of tested systems, with only 325 other configurations achieving a higher score. This indicates that while the RX 7900 XTX may not rank highly in synthetic compute benchmarks compared to its peers, its real-world gaming performance in this specific title is robust. The large gap between the GPU's synthetic rank and the combo's game rank highlights the importance of game-specific testing over general-purpose benchmarks. The data suggests that users with this combo will experience performance that is significantly better than the median system in the database.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 4K gaming, the Medium preset provides an average of 75 FPS, with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 86 FPS. This is the only 4K preset that consistently stays above the 60 FPS threshold, making it the recommended choice for a smooth experience at that resolution. The High preset at 4K averages 64 FPS, which is technically playable but leaves less headroom for demanding scenes. The Ultra preset at 4K drops to 50 FPS, which may be acceptable for slower-paced games but is generally not ideal for an Action RPG.

At 1440p, the High preset offers an excellent balance, delivering 116 FPS average. This is well above the 100 FPS mark, providing a fluid experience on high refresh rate monitors. The Medium preset at 1440p yields 136 FPS, which is also strong, but High provides better visual quality for a relatively small performance cost (20 FPS difference). The Ultra preset at 1440p averages 91 FPS, which is still very playable and would be the choice for users prioritizing image quality over raw frame rate.

For 1080p, the High preset is the standout recommendation, achieving 178 FPS average. This is sufficiently high to take advantage of 144 Hz or 165 Hz displays, and the visual uplift from Medium to High is significant. The Ultra preset at 1080p averages 139 FPS, which is also excellent and provides the best visual fidelity. Given the high frame rates at this resolution, users can comfortably select Ultra if they prefer, as the 39 FPS difference between High and Ultra is unlikely to be noticeable on most monitors. The Low preset at any resolution is not recommended for general play, as the performance gains (e.g., 271 FPS at 1080p) come at a substantial cost to visual clarity.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The following is a detailed breakdown of the measured average FPS, with minimum and maximum values where provided, for each resolution and settings combination.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 271 FPS average, no min/max provided.
• Medium: 209 FPS average, with a minimum of 177 and a maximum of 240.
• High: 178 FPS average, no min/max provided.
• Ultra: 139 FPS average, no min/max provided.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 177 FPS average, no min/max provided.
• Medium: 136 FPS average, with a minimum of 116 and a maximum of 157.
• High: 116 FPS average, no min/max provided.
• Ultra: 91 FPS average, no min/max provided.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 97 FPS average, no min/max provided.
• Medium: 75 FPS average, with a minimum of 64 and a maximum of 86.
• High: 64 FPS average, no min/max provided.
• Ultra: 50 FPS average, no min/max provided.

The data shows a consistent progression, with each step up in settings yielding a measurable FPS cost. For example, at 4K, moving from Low to Medium costs 22 FPS, from Medium to High costs 11 FPS, and from High to Ultra costs 14 FPS. At 1080p, the corresponding costs are 62 FPS (Low to Medium), 31 FPS (Medium to High), and 39 FPS (High to Ultra). The larger absolute drops at lower resolutions indicate that the GPU is working harder to produce the higher base frame rates, but the relative scaling is similar across resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What average frame rate does this combo achieve at 4K with High settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with High settings is 64 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in The Technomancer for this configuration?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary limiter. As resolution increases, frame rates drop significantly (e.g., 271 FPS at 1080p Low to 97 FPS at 4K Low), while the CPU's high single-thread score (4648 in Cinebench R23) suggests it has enough headroom to avoid bottlenecking.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested systems in The Technomancer?

A: It ranks 326th out of 2825 tested combinations, placing it in the top 11.5% of all tested systems for this game.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 4K gaming with this hardware?

A: The Medium preset at 4K provides an average of 75 FPS with a minimum of 64 FPS, making it the recommended choice for maintaining a stable experience above 60 FPS. The High preset averages 64 FPS, and Ultra drops to 50 FPS.

Q: What is the single-core performance of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245?

A: The CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4648, which contributes to its ability to handle the game's logic at high frame rates.

Q: How much faster is 1080p compared to 4K at Low settings?

A: At Low settings, the average FPS at 1080p is 271, while at 4K it is 97. This represents a 174 FPS difference, or a performance increase of approximately 179% at the lower resolution.