The Technomancer

# The Technomancer — Intel Core Ultra 5 245 + AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT

The Technomancer, a 2016 action RPG, presents an interesting case study for modern hardware. The combination of Intel's Core Ultra 5 245 and AMD's Radeon RX 9070 XT produces a wide spread of frame rates across resolutions and settings, with the data suggesting a system that is heavily GPU-limited at higher resolutions but reveals a more balanced picture at 1080p. The measured results show this combo ranks 627th out of 2825 tested combinations, placing it in the top ~22% of all tested pairings for this title.

Resolution Scaling

The most striking observation from the measured data is how frame rates collapse as resolution increases. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 233 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 152 FPS, a reduction of 81 FPS or roughly 35%. The jump to 4K Low yields 83 FPS, which is another 45% drop from the 1440p figure. This pattern indicates that the Radeon RX 9070 XT is the primary bottleneck as pixel count rises, with the CPU having plenty of headroom to feed frames at lower resolutions.

The scaling curve steepens further when looking at High settings. At 1080p High, the system produces 153 FPS. At 1440p High, that falls to 100 FPS (-35%), and at 4K High it drops to 55 FPS (-45% from 1440p). The consistency of these percentage drops across settings strongly suggests a pure GPU-bound scenario at 4K, where the RX 9070 XT's 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth are being taxed heavily.

Ultra settings tell an even more dramatic story. The 4K Ultra average of 43 FPS is less than one-fifth of the 1080p Low result. This massive spread—from 233 FPS down to 43 FPS—indicates that The Technomancer's Ultra preset imposes a severe load on the GPU, likely through heavy use of effects that scale poorly with resolution. The fact that 4K Ultra still manages 43 FPS average, while 4K Medium achieves 64 FPS, suggests the Ultra preset adds significant computational work beyond just resolution scaling.

What's particularly revealing is the Medium preset's min/max data. At 1080p Medium, the range is 152-205 FPS, a 53 FPS spread. At 1440p Medium, the range narrows to 99-134 FPS, a 35 FPS spread. At 4K Medium, the range tightens further to 55-74 FPS, a 19 FPS spread. This progressive tightening of frame time variance as resolution increases is classic GPU-bound behavior—when the GPU is saturated, frame delivery becomes more consistent because the bottleneck is steady, whereas at lower resolutions, CPU and memory latency variations create larger swings.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with a Navi 48 chip on a 4 nm process. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth, which appears sufficient for The Technomancer's needs at all tested settings, given that even 4K Ultra never dips below the 43 FPS average. The GPU's boost clock of 2970 MHz and game clock of 2400 MHz are notably high, and these clocks help explain why the card can push 233 FPS at 1080p Low.

The GPU's benchmark scores provide context for its performance tier. Its Passmark G3D score of 26795 places it in the 55th percentile of all GPUs, while its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 7260 indicates solid DirectX 12 performance. However, the nearest rivals in the database are surprising: the AMD Radeon HD 7770M (0.1% delta), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 (0.2% delta), NVIDIA P106-090 (0.5% delta), and AMD Radeon Pro 555 (1% delta) all have nearly identical average benchmark scores of around 13,500. This clustering suggests that the average benchmark score of 13543 is not representative of the card's gaming performance, or that the benchmark suite weights certain workloads oddly.

In The Technomancer specifically, the RX 9070 XT shows it can handle 4K at playable frame rates on Medium (64 FPS) and High (55 FPS), but Ultra at 4K (43 FPS) falls below the 60 FPS threshold that many consider ideal. The 16 GB VRAM is likely not a limiting factor here, as even the most demanding preset doesn't appear to cause memory-related stuttering based on the available min/max data. The pixel rate of 380.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 760.3 GTexel/s are substantial, yet the game's engine still struggles at 4K Ultra, pointing to compute-bound effects rather than raw fillrate limitations.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo achieve 60 FPS at 4K?

A: Yes, but only on Medium settings, where the average is 64 FPS. High settings produce 55 FPS average, and Ultra drops to 43 FPS average. For a locked 60 FPS experience at 4K, Medium is the highest preset that averages above the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the combo rank overall for The Technomancer?

A: This pairing ranks 627th out of 2825 tested combinations, placing it in the top 22% of all tested setups for this game. The data indicates it performs well above the median tested configuration.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between settings?

A: The largest gap is between Low and Ultra at 1080p, where the average drops from 233 FPS to 119 FPS—a 114 FPS difference. This represents a 49% reduction in frame rate for the Ultra preset.

Q: Is the 16 GB VRAM sufficient for 4K in this game?

A: The data shows no evidence of VRAM limitations. The 4K Medium preset maintains a 55 FPS minimum and 74 FPS maximum, indicating stable memory performance. Even at 4K Ultra, the 43 FPS average suggests the bottleneck is compute-bound rather than memory-bound.

Q: How consistent are frame rates across resolutions?

A: Frame rate consistency improves as resolution increases. At 1080p Medium, the min-max spread is 53 FPS (152-205). At 1440p Medium, it narrows to 35 FPS (99-134). At 4K Medium, it tightens to 19 FPS (55-74). Higher resolutions produce more stable frame pacing due to GPU saturation.

Q: What CPU benchmark scores support this pairing's performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 scores 32924 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 4648 in single-core. Its Passmark multithread score is 38706 with a single-thread score of 4394. These figures place the CPU in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, indicating it is unlikely to bottleneck the GPU in this title.

How This Combo Ranks

With a rank of 627 out of 2825 tested combinations, this pairing sits comfortably in the top quarter of all configurations tested for The Technomancer. The percentile positioning suggests that roughly 78% of tested combos perform worse than this setup, making it a strong performer for this game. The rank reflects the combined effect of the CPU's 90th percentile standing and the GPU's 55th percentile standing, with the final result landing well above what the GPU's percentile alone might suggest.

The CPU's nearest rivals in the database—the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (-0.4%), AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (-0.5%), Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (+0.6%), and Intel Core i5-14600K (+0.8%)—all have average benchmark scores within 1% of the Core Ultra 5 245's 48995 average. This tight clustering indicates that the CPU's performance is well within the expected range for its class. The Core Ultra 5 245's 14 cores and 14 threads, with a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, provide strong single-threaded performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4648) that is particularly relevant for older games like The Technomancer, which may not utilize many threads.

The GPU's nearest rivals, however, present an odd picture. The HD 7770M, GTX 570, P106-090, and Radeon Pro 555 all have average benchmark scores within 1% of the RX 9070 XT's 13543 average, yet these are vastly less capable cards in real-world gaming. This discrepancy suggests that the benchmark average calculation may be skewed by the GPU's lower DirectX scores (Passmark DX9: 353, DX10: 154, DX11: 292, DX12: 78), which appear anomalously low compared to its G3D score of 26795. In The Technomancer's actual measured results, the RX 9070 XT performs at a level consistent with a modern high-end card.

Settings Recommendations

For 1080p displays, the data shows that Ultra settings at 119 FPS average provide an excellent experience, while Medium at 179 FPS offers a smoother experience with a 60 FPS headroom above the 60 FPS threshold. Low at 233 FPS is unnecessary for most users. The sweet spot for 1080p is likely High at 153 FPS, which balances visual quality with a frame rate that far exceeds display refresh capabilities.

At 1440p, the choice becomes more nuanced. Ultra at 78 FPS average is still above 60 FPS and offers the best visual fidelity, but High at 100 FPS provides a substantially smoother experience with only a modest visual compromise. Medium at 117 FPS is also viable, but the step from Medium to High costs only 17 FPS (117 to 100) while likely providing meaningful visual improvements. For 1440p, High appears to be the recommended preset, as it maintains a triple-digit frame rate while offering better visuals than Medium.

At 4K, the options are more constrained. Ultra at 43 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold and may feel sluggish for action-oriented gameplay. High at 55 FPS is close but still under 60. Medium at 64 FPS is the only preset that averages above 60 FPS, making it the recommended choice for 4K play. The min FPS of 55 at 4K Medium suggests that demanding scenes may occasionally dip below 60 FPS, but the overall experience should be acceptable. Low at 83 FPS provides a smoother alternative if visual quality is less important than frame rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160 (4K), the measured averages are: Low 83 FPS, Medium 64 FPS (min 55, max 74), High 55 FPS, and Ultra 43 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a consistent degradation of approximately 20 FPS per preset step, with the gap between High and Ultra (12 FPS) being slightly smaller than the gap between Medium and High (9 FPS).

At 2560x1440 (1440p), the averages are: Low 152 FPS, Medium 117 FPS (min 99, max 134), High 100 FPS, and Ultra 78 FPS. The percentage drops from 1080p are 35% for Low, 35% for Medium, 35% for High, and 34% for Ultra—a remarkably consistent scaling pattern that reinforces the GPU-bound nature of the workload at this resolution.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the averages are: Low 233 FPS, Medium 179 FPS (min 152, max 205), High 153 FPS, and Ultra 119 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 54 FPS, between Medium and High is 26 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 34 FPS. The smaller gap between Medium and High suggests diminishing returns from the High preset at this resolution, while the Ultra preset imposes a more significant cost.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 features 14 cores and 14 threads, which is an unusual configuration (no hyperthreading) but provides strong multi-threaded performance. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32924 and single-core score of 4648 indicate a well-balanced processor. The boost clock of 5.10 GHz is particularly relevant for The Technomancer, a 2016 title that likely relies more on single-threaded performance than modern multi-threaded optimization.

The CPU's Passmark physics score of 2569 is modest, but its integer math score of 91187 and floating point math score of 120548 suggest strong computational throughput. The data compression score of 400942 and encryption score of 30236 further demonstrate the CPU's capability. However, the find prime numbers score of 365 is notably low, which is an interesting outlier given the other strong results.

The Core Ultra 5 245's 3 nm process (TSMC) and 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die contribute to its 65 W TDP, making it a power-efficient choice. Its dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth provides ample memory throughput for gaming workloads. The L3 cache of 24 MB shared is reasonable, though not exceptional for modern standards.

In The Technomancer, the CPU's role appears to be secondary to the GPU at higher resolutions, as evidenced by the consistent scaling patterns. However, at 1080p with Low settings (233 FPS), the CPU is clearly capable of feeding frames at very high rates. The 90th percentile standing among all CPUs suggests that this processor will not be a limiting factor for this game, even at high refresh rates. The nearest rival comparisons show the Core Ultra 5 245 performing within 1% of processors like the Ryzen 9 7900 and Core i5-14600K, confirming its competitive positioning in the desktop CPU market.