The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 action RPG, presents a demanding workload for the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H and AMD Radeon 8060S combination. Measured frame rates across three resolutions and four quality presets reveal a system that scales predictably with both resolution and graphical fidelity, with the data indicating a clear performance hierarchy. The benchmark results place this specific combo at rank 1632 out of 2825 tested configurations for this title, positioning it in the upper half of the database while highlighting the balance between the mobile processor and integrated graphics.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a consistent and steep drop as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, a pattern that points directly to the AMD Radeon 8060S as the primary limiter at higher pixel counts. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 103 FPS at 1080p to 67 FPS at 1440p, a reduction of 36 FPS, and then further to 37 FPS at 4K, representing a total decline of 66 FPS from the lowest to highest resolution tested. This scaling is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where the rendering workload grows quadratically with pixel count, and the integrated graphics unit struggles to maintain throughput.

The Low preset tells a similar story, with average FPS starting at 157 at 1080p, dropping to 102 at 1440p, and finally reaching 56 at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is approximately 64%, which is substantial but slightly less severe than the 64% drop observed at High settings, suggesting that even at the lowest fidelity, the GPU remains the bottleneck. The Medium preset, which is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum frame time data, shows averages of 120 FPS at 1080p, 79 FPS at 1440p, and 43 FPS at 4K, with the minimum FPS at each resolution mirroring roughly the average of the next higher preset, indicating a smooth but steep degradation curve.

Ultra settings push the system hardest, with average FPS plummeting from 80 at 1080p to 52 at 1440p and finally to 29 at 4K. The 4K Ultra result of 29 FPS is below the threshold for smooth gameplay, and the data clearly shows that this resolution is only playable at lower presets. The scaling pattern across all four presets reveals that the gap between 1080p and 1440p is consistently around 35-40 FPS, while the gap between 1440p and 4K is smaller in absolute terms but larger in percentage, reinforcing the idea that the GPU’s compute and memory bandwidth are being saturated as resolution increases.

The fact that the 1080p to 1440p drop is not proportionally identical to the 1440p to 4K drop suggests that the integrated GPU’s pixel fill rate and memory subsystem are the limiting factors, rather than the CPU. If the processor were the constraint, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions, but the data shows a monotonic decline that tracks with pixel count. For a game from 2016, this level of scaling is expected, but the magnitude of the drop indicates that the Radeon 8060S, despite being a modern integrated solution, is not sufficient for high-refresh 4K gaming in this title.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H is a 16-core, 22-thread processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. Its benchmark scores are respectable, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15028 and a single-core score of 1743, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. In the context of The Technomancer, a game released in 2016, the CPU’s role is primarily to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics calculations, and the measured FPS suggests that it is not the bottleneck at any resolution or preset.

At 1080p Low settings, where the GPU load is minimal, the system achieves 157 FPS average, which is a strong indicator that the CPU can handle the game’s single-threaded and multi-threaded demands without limiting performance. The 22 threads provide ample headroom for background tasks and the game’s engine, and the 24 MB of shared L3 cache helps reduce memory latency. The PassMark single-thread score of 3468 and multi-thread score of 24873 further corroborate that the processor has sufficient throughput for a title of this era, which typically scales well with fewer cores but benefits from higher clock speeds.

Comparing to nearest rivals, the Core Ultra 7 155H’s average benchmark score of 32697 is nearly identical to the Intel Core i5-14600T at 32707 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 at 32662 (0.1% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F at 32750 (-0.2% delta). This places the processor in a tight performance band, meaning that any FPS differences in The Technomancer would be negligible if the GPU were not the limiting factor. The fact that the system still shows large FPS drops when moving from 1080p to 4K, even at Low settings, confirms that the CPU is not the constraint, as a faster CPU would not address the GPU’s pixel throughput limitations.

The boost clock of 4.80 GHz is particularly relevant for a game like The Technomancer, which likely relies on a few primary threads for game logic. The single-core Cinebench R20 score of 1235 and R15 score of 255 indicate solid per-core performance, and the data shows that at 1080p High, the system reaches 103 FPS, which is a playable level. The CPU’s 28 W TDP and mobile design mean it operates within a power envelope that does not throttle under sustained gaming loads, as evidenced by the stable frame rates across repeated measurements. In summary, the CPU provides sufficient headroom, and the measured FPS curve is entirely dictated by the GPU’s capabilities.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for playable frame rates with this hardware?

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all presets exceed 60 FPS, with Low at 157 FPS, Medium at 120 FPS, High at 103 FPS, and Ultra at 80 FPS. At 2560x1440, only Low (102 FPS) and Medium (79 FPS) remain above 60 FPS, while High drops to 67 FPS and Ultra to 52 FPS. At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS, with the highest being Low at 56 FPS.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High in terms of FPS impact?

A: The Ultra preset consistently reduces average FPS by a significant margin across all resolutions. At 1080p, Ultra averages 80 FPS versus 103 FPS on High, a 23 FPS drop. At 1440p, Ultra averages 52 FPS versus 67 FPS on High, a 15 FPS drop. At 4K, Ultra averages 29 FPS versus 37 FPS on High, an 8 FPS drop. The relative penalty is largest at 1080p, around 22%.

Q: Is the AMD Radeon 8060S better than a dedicated desktop GPU?

A: The Radeon 8060S has an average benchmark score of 55757 and sits in the 87th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB, which scores 55698, a delta of 0.1%, meaning they perform nearly identically in synthetic benchmarks. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 scores 56083 (-0.6% delta), and the RTX 4080 scores 54247 (2.8% delta), indicating the 8060S is competitive with high-end desktop parts despite being an integrated solution.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The only preset with recorded minimum FPS values is Medium. At 3840x2160, the minimum is 37 FPS; at 2560x1440, the minimum is 67 FPS; and at 1920x1080, the minimum is 102 FPS. These minimums are notably lower than the averages, suggesting occasional frame hitches, but they remain playable at 1080p and 1440p.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H has an average benchmark score of 32697. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-14600T, scores 32707, a 0% delta. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 scores 32662 (0.1% delta), the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F scores 32750 (-0.2% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H scores 32812 (-0.4% delta). The differences are within 0.5%, making the CPU’s performance statistically equivalent to these alternatives.

Q: Can this system run The Technomancer at 4K with any preset?

A: Yes, but only at lower presets. The measured 4K averages are 56 FPS on Low, 43 FPS on Medium, 37 FPS on High, and 29 FPS on Ultra. For a consistent 60 FPS experience, 4K is not viable, as even Low falls short. Players targeting 4K would need to accept frame rates in the 30-50 range depending on preset.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across the three primary gaming resolutions. At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best results, with Low settings achieving an average of 157 FPS, which is smooth for any display. Medium settings yield 120 FPS average, with a minimum of 102 FPS and a maximum of 138 FPS, showing a tight frame time distribution. High settings produce 103 FPS average, and Ultra settings drop to 80 FPS average. All 1080p presets exceed the 60 FPS threshold, making this resolution the sweet spot for high-refresh monitors.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages decline noticeably. Low settings still deliver 102 FPS, which is excellent for 1440p. Medium settings average 79 FPS, with a minimum of 67 FPS and maximum of 90 FPS, indicating that while the average is above 60, there are occasional dips. High settings fall to 67 FPS, which is just above the smoothness threshold, and Ultra settings drop to 52 FPS, which may be too low for fast-paced action. The 1440p data suggests that Low and Medium are the most viable presets for a consistent experience.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain high frame rates. Low settings average 56 FPS, which is below 60, while Medium averages 43 FPS with a minimum of 37 FPS and maximum of 50 FPS. High settings average 37 FPS, and Ultra settings average 29 FPS. None of the 4K presets reach 60 FPS, and even Low falls short, meaning that 4K gaming is only possible with compromises on visual fidelity or by accepting sub-60 frame rates. The minimum FPS at 4K Medium of 37 FPS is close to the average of High, indicating that frame pacing may be inconsistent at this resolution.

The pattern across all presets is consistent: each step up in resolution reduces the average FPS by roughly 30-40%, and each step up in quality from Low to Ultra reduces it by another 20-25% at the same resolution. The Medium preset’s recorded minimum and maximum values provide insight into frame variance, with the 1080p minimum of 102 FPS being higher than the 4K average of 43 FPS, highlighting the dramatic impact of resolution scaling. The data confirms that the Radeon 8060S’s performance is the defining factor, as the CPU’s capabilities are sufficient to avoid becoming a limiting factor even at 1080p Low.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 8060S is an integrated graphics processor based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on a 4 nm process with a die size of 308 mm². It features 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, with a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. Its theoretical pixel rate is 185.6 GPixel/s and texture rate is 464.0 GTexel/s, with an FP32 performance of 14.85 TFLOPS. The GPU uses system-shared memory, meaning its bandwidth is system-dependent, which is a critical factor in a game like The Technomancer that can be memory-bandwidth sensitive.

In synthetic benchmarks, the Radeon 8060S scores 2162 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 84626 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 80483 in Geekbench Vulkan, placing it in the 87th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 55757 is virtually identical to the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55698, 0.1% delta) and slightly below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 (56083, -0.6% delta), while being above the RTX 4080 (54247, 2.8% delta). These comparisons indicate that the integrated GPU’s raw compute power is competitive with dedicated desktop cards, yet its performance in The Technomancer is constrained by its shared memory architecture.

The measured FPS data shows that the GPU is the limiting component at all resolutions. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 157 FPS, which is near the limits of what the GPU can produce given the CPU’s headroom. As the resolution increases, the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth become saturated, causing the steep FPS drops observed. The 64 ROPs and 14.85 TFLOPS of FP32 compute are sufficient for 1080p gaming, but at 4K, the pixel workload quadruples, and the integrated nature of the GPU means it must share memory bandwidth with the CPU, further reducing effective throughput.

The GPU’s boost clock of 2900 MHz is high for an integrated part, and the RDNA 3.5 architecture provides modern features like DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which are relevant for a 2016 title that may use older APIs. However, the system-shared memory, with no dedicated VRAM, means that texture streaming and frame buffer operations are dependent on the CPU’s memory controller, which is a bottleneck in high-resolution scenarios. The data shows that the GPU’s performance ceiling is around 157 FPS in this game, and anything beyond that is impossible regardless of CPU strength.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1920x1080, all presets are playable, but the High preset at 103 FPS average offers the best balance between visual quality and performance, as it remains well above 60 FPS while providing a significant visual uplift over Medium. Ultra at 80 FPS is also viable for players with 144Hz displays, but the 23 FPS penalty compared to High may not justify the marginal visual gains in a game from 2016. Low at 157 FPS is only necessary for competitive play or extremely high refresh rate monitors, as the graphical downgrade is substantial.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the recommended choice, with an average of 79 FPS and a minimum of 67 FPS, ensuring that frame rates rarely dip below 60. Low at 102 FPS is the only preset that offers a comfortable margin above 60, but it sacrifices too much visual fidelity. High at 67 FPS is technically above 60, but the minimum FPS is likely to be lower, and the average is too close to the threshold for consistent smoothness. Ultra at 52 FPS is not recommended, as it falls below the playable threshold in action sequences.

For 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS, so players must choose between Low at 56 FPS and Medium at 43 FPS. Low is the only preset that comes close to 60 FPS, and it is the recommended choice for 4K gaming, as the visual difference between Low and Medium is less impactful than the 13 FPS average difference. High at 37 FPS and Ultra at 29 FPS are not recommended, as they result in a noticeably stuttery experience. For the best overall experience, the data strongly supports 1080p High as the default recommendation, with 1440p Medium as an alternative for users with higher-resolution displays who can tolerate slightly lower frame rates. The measured minimum FPS data for Medium presets shows that 1080p has a minimum of 102 FPS, 1440p has a minimum of 67 FPS, and 4K has a minimum of 37 FPS, which should inform expectations for frame consistency at each resolution.