The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents an interesting stress profile for modern hardware. This analysis examines the performance of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D across three resolutions and four quality presets. The data shows a system capable of very high frame rates, but the performance scaling reveals distinct bottlenecks depending on the resolution and settings.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D is the dominant component in this pairing. With a massive 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, the card provides a theoretical bandwidth of 1.79 TB/s. This is far beyond the requirements of a 2016 title like The Technomancer, meaning memory capacity and bandwidth are effectively non-factors in the observed results. The GPU's raw compute power, driven by its 21,760 shading units and boost clock of 2407 MHz, allows it to process the game's geometry and effects with immense headroom.

The card's architecture, Blackwell 2.0, is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. While the specific clock behavior in this game is not measured, the base clock of 2017 MHz and boost clock of 2407 MHz provide a substantial operating range. In the benchmark results, the RTX 5090 D's performance is consistently high, but its utilization is not always the limiting factor. At lower resolutions and less demanding settings, the GPU is often waiting on the CPU to deliver frames, preventing it from reaching its full potential.

The GPU's benchmark scores confirm its high-end status. It achieves a Passmark G3D score of 44,065 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 376,915. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, it scores 14,326 points. These figures place it in the 92nd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB, with the RTX 5090 D trailing those two by 1.6% and 2.4% respectively in average benchmark score. Interestingly, it is only 1.1% ahead of the lower-tier AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT, showing that synthetic benchmarks can vary significantly from real-world gaming performance.

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

The measured frame rates for this combination are exceptionally high across all configurations. At 1920x1080, the performance is extreme. With Low settings, the system averages 330 FPS. This drops to 276 FPS on Medium and 236 FPS on High. Even at the Ultra preset, which is the most demanding, the average stays at a very high 184 FPS. The Medium preset at this resolution shows a minimum of 235 FPS and a maximum of 317 FPS, indicating a stable frame delivery even with slight variation.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain very high. The Low preset delivers 235 FPS, while Medium drops to 180 FPS and High to 154 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 120 FPS. The Medium preset here shows a min of 153 FPS and a max of 207 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p shows a significant but expected drop, as the GPU is now required to render more pixels, yet the system still maintains refresh-rate-topping performance.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the GPU is finally pushed harder. The Low preset still averages a very playable 129 FPS. Medium settings bring the average down to 99 FPS, with a minimum of 84 FPS and a maximum of 114 FPS. High settings average 85 FPS. The Ultra preset is the only configuration that dips below the 70 FPS threshold, averaging 66 FPS. This is the first point where the GPU's workload becomes substantial enough to bring frame rates to a level where a high-refresh-rate monitor might not be fully saturated.

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. It has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. This combination of core count and high clock speed is critical for gaming. While The Technomancer is an older title that may not utilize all 14 cores effectively, the strong single-thread performance, highlighted by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4,648, ensures that the primary game thread is processed efficiently.

The CPU's benchmark results show it is a solid performer, placing in the 90th percentile among all CPUs. Its average benchmark score is 48,995, which puts it in close competition with the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 and the Intel Core i5-14600K. The data shows it is 0.5% behind the Ryzen 9 7900 and 0.8% ahead of the Core i5-14600K. This level of performance is more than sufficient to feed the RTX 5090 D at most settings.

The data suggests that the CPU is the primary bottleneck at 1080p and with lower settings at higher resolutions. At 1080p Low, the GPU is rendering frames so quickly that the CPU cannot supply them fast enough, capping the average at 330 FPS. This is a common scenario in high-end system analysis. The CPU's 24 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth are adequate to keep the pipeline full, but the game's engine and instruction overhead limit the maximum frame rate achievable.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the maximum average frame rate achievable with this combination?

A: The highest measured average frame rate is 330 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset.

Q: How does the RTX 5090 D compare to its nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score is 77,712. It is 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT but 1.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT and 2.4% behind the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB.

Q: At which settings and resolution does the system first drop below 70 FPS?

A: The only measured configuration with an average below 70 FPS is at 3840x2160 resolution with the Ultra settings preset, which averages 66 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1920x1080 with Low settings?

A: The data indicates the CPU is the primary limiter. The GPU is capable of far higher frame rates, but the average is capped at 330 FPS, which is likely due to the CPU's ability to process the game's simulation and render commands.

Q: What is the performance difference between the 1080p and 4K Ultra presets?

A: At 1920x1080 Ultra, the average frame rate is 184 FPS. At 3840x2160 Ultra, the average frame rate is 66 FPS. This is a significant drop of 118 FPS when moving to 4K.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 5 245's multi-core performance compare to its rivals?

A: In the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, the CPU scores 32,924 points. Its average benchmark score of 48,995 is 0.5% lower than the AMD Ryzen 9 7900's score of 49,228 and 0.8% higher than the Intel Core i5-14600K's score of 48,618.

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

The frame rate scaling across resolutions tells a clear story about where the system bottleneck lies. At 1080p, the system is heavily CPU-bound. The difference between the Low preset (330 FPS) and the Ultra preset (184 FPS) is 146 FPS, which is a significant range. This large drop shows that as the GPU workload increases, the CPU has more time to catch up, and the frame rate becomes more dependent on the GPU's rendering speed.

When scaling from 1080p to 1440p, the frame rates drop in a predictable manner. For example, the High preset falls from 236 FPS at 1080p to 154 FPS at 1440p, a reduction of 82 FPS. This indicates that the system is transitioning from a CPU-bound state to a more balanced state, where both the CPU and GPU are contributing to the frame time. The GPU is now being tasked with rendering more pixels, which begins to show its effect.

The jump from 1440p to 4K is where the GPU's role becomes dominant. The High preset at 1440p averages 154 FPS, but at 4K it drops to 85 FPS. This is a reduction of 69 FPS. The Ultra preset shows an even more dramatic scaling, dropping from 120 FPS at 1440p to 66 FPS at 4K, a 54 FPS decrease. This steep drop-off at 4K confirms that the RTX 5090 D is now the definitive bottleneck. The CPU has sufficient headroom to keep up, but the GPU's raw pixel-pushing power is being exhausted at the higher resolution.

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

The choice of settings depends heavily on the target resolution and refresh rate. For users with a 1920x1080 monitor, almost any setting is viable. The Low preset at 330 FPS offers the highest possible frame rate, which is ideal for competitive play, but the High preset at 236 FPS still provides an excellent experience with better visual fidelity. The Ultra preset at 184 FPS is also more than sufficient for any high-refresh-rate 1080p display, making it the best choice for maximum visual quality without sacrificing fluidity.

At 2560x1440, the High preset at 154 FPS is the recommended balance. It provides a substantial visual upgrade over Medium and remains well above the 120 FPS needed for a smooth experience on most high-refresh-rate monitors. The Ultra preset at 120 FPS is also a strong option for users who prioritize image quality over raw frame rate, as it still hits the 120 FPS mark. The Low preset at 235 FPS is unnecessary here, as the visual compromises are too great for the additional frame rate, which exceeds the refresh rate of most 1440p monitors.

For 3840x2160, the High preset at 85 FPS is the optimal choice for a balanced experience. It delivers a smooth frame rate suitable for G-Sync or FreeSync displays and offers good visual quality. The Medium preset at 99 FPS is also a solid alternative, providing a 14 FPS boost over High. The Ultra preset at 66 FPS is only recommended for users who prioritize absolute visual fidelity and have a display that supports lower refresh rates, as it is the only preset that falls below the 70 FPS threshold. The Low preset at 129 FPS offers high frame rates but significantly reduces visual quality, making it a less appealing choice at this resolution.