The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents a demanding workload for the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H and AMD Radeon 760M combination. This mobile platform, featuring a Meteor Lake CPU and an RDNA 3.0 integrated GPU, delivers a measurable performance profile that is heavily constrained by the graphics subsystem across all tested resolutions. The data indicates a system that prioritizes CPU compute capability, but the integrated graphics solution limits the playable experience to lower resolutions and settings, with the benchmark results placing this specific combo at rank 2817 out of 2825 tested combinations.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep performance cliff as resolution increases, a classic indicator of a GPU-bound scenario. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 48 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same Low preset drops the average to 32 FPS, a reduction of 33.3%. Pushing further to 3840x2160 at Low settings yields only 17 FPS, which is a 46.9% decline from the 1440p figure and a 64.6% drop from the 1080p result. This pattern shows that the rendering load is scaling almost directly with the pixel count, meaning the AMD Radeon 760M’s processing units are saturated well before the CPU can become a limiting factor.

The scaling behavior under High settings reinforces this analysis. At 1080p High, the average FPS is 32. Dropping the resolution to 1440p High yields 21 FPS, a 34.4% decrease. At 4K High, the system manages only 11 FPS, which is a 65.6% reduction from the 1080p baseline. The consistent proportional drops across different quality presets suggest that the integrated GPU’s shading units, texture mapping units, and render output units are the primary bottleneck. The CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and geometry, but at these frame rates, the GPU is unable to process the frames quickly enough for the CPU’s 5.00 GHz boost clock to make a significant difference.

The transition from Medium to Ultra settings at each resolution provides further insight into the scaling curve. At 1080p, the average FPS moves from 37 on Medium down to 25 on Ultra, a 32.4% performance penalty for the highest quality preset. At 1440p, the same settings transition results in a drop from 24 to 16 FPS, a 33.3% reduction. At 4K, Medium produces 13 FPS, while Ultra produces just 9 FPS, a 30.8% decline. The fact that the percentage penalty for enabling Ultra remains relatively stable across resolutions indicates that the additional rendering work is proportional, and the GPU is consistently overwhelmed. The low minimum FPS figures, such as 11 FPS at 4K Medium and 32 FPS at 1080p Medium, highlight the lack of headroom in the graphics pipeline.

The data strongly suggests that the limiting component in this configuration is the GPU. The performance degradation from 1080p to 4K is severe, with the system failing to maintain a playable frame rate at any setting above 1080p Low. The 4K results, ranging from 9 to 17 FPS, are uniformly below the threshold for smooth gameplay, indicating that the AMD Radeon 760M, with its 512 shading units and 16 ROPs, simply does not have the pixel throughput necessary for high-resolution rendering in this title. The benchmark results indicate that the CPU’s 16 cores and 22 threads are not the limiting factor, as the frame rate scales inversely with pixel count, a hallmark of a graphics-bound workload.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H is a 16-core, 22-thread processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture, built on Intel’s 7 nm process node. It features a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a 24 MB shared L3 cache. In the context of The Technomancer, this CPU provides substantial compute headroom, but the benchmark data shows that its potential is largely untapped due to the GPU bottleneck. The processor’s average benchmark score of 34083 places it in the 84th percentile of all CPUs, indicating strong general processing capability. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H with a score of 33989 (0.3% delta), the AMD EPYC 4244P with 34220 (-0.4% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X with 34260 (-0.5% delta). These figures show that the Core Ultra 7 165H is competitively positioned in synthetic workloads, but such tests do not translate directly to gaming performance when paired with a weak GPU.

In gaming, the CPU’s role is to handle game logic, physics, and draw call submission. The measured FPS data, however, shows that the frame rate is primarily dictated by resolution and settings, not by CPU workload. For instance, at 1080p Low, the system achieves 48 FPS. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar frame rates regardless of resolution, as the CPU’s workload would remain constant while the GPU’s workload changed. Instead, the frame rate drops to 32 FPS at 1440p and 17 FPS at 4K, proving that the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU is likely idling or waiting for the GPU to finish rendering, leaving its 22 threads underutilized.

The processor’s single-thread performance, as measured by Cinebench R23, is 1759 points, while its multi-core score is 14551. These scores suggest that the CPU can handle the single-threaded tasks common in game engines, but the game’s performance is not sensitive to this capability given the GPU constraint. The PassMark multithread score of 25933 and single-thread score of 3509 further illustrate the CPU’s balanced performance profile. However, none of these scores can overcome the fundamental limitation of the AMD Radeon 760M, which has an average benchmark score of 6019 and sits in the 35th percentile of all GPUs. The CPU’s high percentile ranking (84th) versus the GPU’s low percentile ranking (35th) creates a significant imbalance, where the processor is capable of much higher frame rates than the graphics solution can deliver.

The architecture’s memory bandwidth, rated at 89.6 GB/s with dual-channel support, is another factor. While this is ample for CPU tasks, the integrated GPU shares this system memory, and the bandwidth is "System Dependent" according to the GPU’s specifications. In a game like The Technomancer, which appears to be heavy on pixel shading, the shared memory bandwidth could exacerbate the GPU bottleneck, though the primary constraint remains the GPU’s compute units. The CPU’s 5.00 GHz boost clock ensures that any CPU-bound sections of the game, such as loading or AI calculations, are handled swiftly, but the average FPS data shows that these moments are not the determining factor in overall performance.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play The Technomancer with this hardware?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the system achieves an average FPS above 30. At 1080p Low, the average is 48 FPS, while at 1080p High, it drops to 32 FPS. Higher resolutions yield average frame rates below 32 FPS, with 1440p ranging from 16 to 32 FPS and 4K ranging from 9 to 17 FPS.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H has an average benchmark score of 34083. This is 0.3% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H (33989), 0.4% higher than the AMD EPYC 4244P (34220 is 0.4% higher than the 165H, so the 165H is 0.4% lower), and 0.5% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X (34260). The differences are all within 0.5%, indicating near-identical synthetic performance.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the main bottleneck in this game?

A: The benchmark results clearly indicate the GPU is the limiting component. For example, at Low settings, the average FPS drops from 48 at 1080p to 32 at 1440p and 17 at 4K. This linear scaling with resolution is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck, as the CPU’s workload remains constant while the GPU’s rendering load increases.

Q: What is the average FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 48 FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves an average of 25 FPS. This represents a 23 FPS difference, or a 47.9% reduction in performance when moving from the lowest to the highest quality settings.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon 760M support modern graphics APIs?

A: Yes, the GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This allows the game to run with modern rendering features, but the GPU’s raw performance, with a PassMark G3D score of 5310, limits the practical use of these APIs at high resolutions.

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

A: At 3840x2160 with Medium settings, the system produces an average FPS of 13, with a minimum of 11 FPS and a maximum of 15 FPS. This is below the threshold for smooth gameplay, making 4K resolution impractical for this title on this hardware.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system’s performance across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best results. The Low preset yields an average of 48 FPS, which is the highest frame rate recorded in the entire dataset. The Medium preset drops to 37 FPS, with a minimum of 32 FPS and a maximum of 43 FPS. The High preset produces 32 FPS, and the Ultra preset falls to 25 FPS. This progression shows a consistent performance penalty for higher quality settings, but even the Ultra preset remains playable at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance degrades significantly. The Low preset achieves an average of 32 FPS, which is a 33.3% drop from the 1080p Low result. The Medium preset averages 24 FPS, with a minimum of 21 FPS and a maximum of 28 FPS. The High preset produces 21 FPS, and the Ultra preset falls to 16 FPS. None of these averages reach the 30 FPS mark, indicating that 1440p is only marginal for the Low preset and not suitable for higher quality settings.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playable frame rates. The Low preset averages 17 FPS, while the Medium preset averages 13 FPS, with a minimum of 11 FPS and a maximum of 15 FPS. The High preset drops to 11 FPS, and the Ultra preset yields just 9 FPS. These results show that 4K resolution is not viable for this game on this hardware, as even the lowest settings fail to reach 20 FPS. The minimum FPS values at 4K Medium (11 FPS) and 1080p Medium (32 FPS) provide additional context, showing that the system can experience significant frame time spikes under load.

The data also reveals a consistent pattern of performance scaling. From Low to Ultra at 1080p, the FPS drops by 47.9%. At 1440p, the drop from Low to Ultra is 50%. At 4K, the drop is 47.1%. This consistency suggests that the quality presets have a similar impact on the GPU workload regardless of resolution. The lack of min/max FPS data for many of the settings, such as High and Ultra, limits the analysis of frame time consistency, but the available data points, like the 32 FPS minimum at 1080p Medium, indicate that the system can maintain relatively stable frame rates at lower resolutions.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 760M is an integrated graphics processor based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 4 nm process node. It features 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units, with a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2599 MHz. The GPU has 8 ray tracing cores and delivers a peak FP32 performance of 5.323 TFLOPS. Its memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it relies on the host system’s DDR5 memory, with bandwidth that is "System Dependent." The GPU’s average benchmark score is 6019, placing it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs, which is notably low compared to the CPU’s 84th percentile. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6400 with a score of 6001 (0.3% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M with 6000 (0.3% delta), and the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 with 6049 (-0.5% delta).

In The Technomancer, the GPU’s limitations are the defining factor in the benchmark results. The measured FPS data shows that the GPU cannot handle the rendering load at high resolutions or settings. The 512 shading units are responsible for pixel and vertex processing, and the 16 ROPs handle final pixel output. At 4K resolution, there are over 8 million pixels to process, and the GPU’s pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s is insufficient to maintain high frame rates. This is evident in the 4K results, where even the Low preset only achieves 17 FPS. The texture rate of 83.17 GTexel/s is also a limiting factor, as the 32 TMUs struggle to filter textures for the large number of fragments generated at high resolutions.

The GPU’s boost clock of 2599 MHz is relatively high for an integrated solution, but it cannot compensate for the limited number of compute units. The FP32 performance of 5.323 TFLOPS is modest compared to dedicated graphics cards, and the lack of dedicated VRAM means that the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth. The system’s memory bandwidth is rated at 89.6 GB/s, but this is shared, and the actual bandwidth available to the GPU is system-dependent. In a game like The Technomancer, which likely has complex shaders and high-resolution textures, this shared memory configuration can lead to additional performance penalties beyond the raw compute limitations.

The GPU’s benchmark scores provide further context. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 400 is very low, reflecting the GPU’s struggles with modern rendering workloads. The PassMark G3D score of 5310 and PassMark GPU Compute score of 2840 are also indicative of a low-end graphics solution. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 20255 and Vulkan score of 30336 show that the GPU can execute compute tasks, but these do not translate to gaming performance. The DirectX 11 PassMark score of 52 and DirectX 12 score of 25 suggest that the GPU’s driver overhead and hardware capabilities are limited, which can further impact performance in a DirectX-based game like The Technomancer.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal configuration for The Technomancer on this hardware is the 1920x1080 resolution with the Low preset. This combination produces an average FPS of 48, which is the only result in the dataset that exceeds 40 FPS. The Low preset at 1080p provides a playable experience with some headroom for frame rate fluctuations. The Medium preset at 1080p, with an average of 37 FPS, is also viable, offering a balance between visual quality and performance. The minimum FPS of 32 at this setting suggests that the system can maintain a relatively stable frame rate, though dips may occur in demanding scenes.

The High preset at 1080p, with an average of 32 FPS, is borderline playable. It offers better visual fidelity than Low or Medium, but the frame rate is at the edge of what is considered smooth for an action RPG. The Ultra preset at 1080p, with an average of 25 FPS, is not recommended, as the performance drop is significant and the visual improvements may not justify the reduced responsiveness. For users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate, the Medium preset at 1080p is the best compromise, as it provides a 37 FPS average while still offering improved textures and effects over Low.

At 2560x1440, only the Low preset, with an average of 32 FPS, is worth considering. This setting provides a higher resolution image but sacrifices most visual details. The Medium preset at 1440p, with 24 FPS, is too slow for comfortable gameplay, and the High and Ultra presets, at 21 and 16 FPS respectively, are unplayable. The 3840x2160 resolution should be avoided entirely, as all settings produce average FPS values below 17, which is well below the minimum threshold for playability. The data clearly shows that this hardware is not suited for high-resolution gaming in The Technomancer, and users should stick to 1080p with lower presets to achieve a smooth experience.

The benchmark results also suggest that the system is more sensitive to resolution changes than to settings changes. For example, moving from 1080p Low to 1440p Low results in a 16 FPS drop, while moving from 1080p Low to 1080p High results in a 16 FPS drop as well. This means that users can achieve similar performance gains by either lowering the resolution or lowering the quality settings. However, the 1080p Low preset offers the highest frame rate, making it the clear choice for those seeking the smoothest gameplay experience. The Medium preset at 1080p is a reasonable alternative for users who want a better-looking game without sacrificing too much performance.