The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, places this specific configuration—the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H paired with the AMD Radeon 8060S—at a distinctive point in the performance hierarchy. With a combo rank of 1632 out of 2825 tested combinations, this system sits in the upper-middle portion of the database, meaning it delivers playable but not exceptional frame rates across most settings. The data measured for this page shows a clear pattern: the pairing is capable of smooth 1080p gameplay, remains respectable at 1440p, but struggles to maintain fluid motion at 4K, particularly when graphical presets are pushed to their limits. This analysis walks through the measured FPS figures, the GPU and CPU characteristics that shape them, and provides practical settings guidance based solely on the recorded benchmarks.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H and AMD Radeon 8060S achieves a rank of 1632 out of 2825 tested combos for The Technomancer. This places it in the 57th percentile of all configurations in our database, meaning roughly 58% of tested systems outperform it while about 42% deliver worse results. The ranking reflects a mid-tier standing—not a top performer, but far from a weak one. For a game released in 2016, this is a reasonable result, though the hardware is modern; the bottleneck appears to lie more in the GPU’s integrated nature than in the CPU’s processing power.

Looking at the individual components, the GPU’s percentile is notably higher than the combo’s overall rank. The AMD Radeon 8060S sits in the 87th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 55757. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (with a deltaPct of 0.1, meaning the 8060S is effectively tied), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 (0.6% behind), and the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (1.7% ahead). This suggests the GPU itself is a strong performer in general benchmarks. However, in The Technomancer specifically, the combo rank lags behind what the GPU’s standalone percentile might imply, indicating that either the game’s engine or the CPU-GPU pairing introduces inefficiencies.

The CPU, meanwhile, ranks in the 84th percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 34083. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is 0.3% ahead, while the AMD EPYC 4244P and AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 are both 0.4% behind, and the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is 0.5% behind. These tiny deltas show the Core Ultra 7 165H is very much in the middle of a competitive pack. For The Technomancer, the combo’s rank of 1632 suggests that while each component is individually solid, the integrated GPU’s reliance on shared system memory may cap performance in a way that a discrete GPU would not.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 8060S is an integrated graphics processor based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It features 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units, along with 40 ray tracing cores. Its clock speeds are notable: a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, which is a substantial boost ratio and helps explain why this IGP can perform as well as it does. The pixel rate is listed at 185.6 GPixel/s and the texture rate at 464.0 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance at 14.85 TFLOPS. These figures indicate a GPU that is far more capable than typical integrated solutions, approaching entry-level discrete graphics in raw throughput.

Crucially, the memory configuration is "System Shared" for size, type, bus width, and bandwidth. This means the GPU has no dedicated VRAM and instead borrows from the system’s main memory, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." In The Technomancer, this shared memory arrangement likely becomes a limiting factor at higher resolutions and settings, where texture data and frame buffers require more bandwidth than a shared pool can efficiently provide. The GPU’s benchmarks support this: it scores 2162 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 84626 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 80483 in Geekbench Vulkan. These are respectable numbers, but they don’t directly translate to the game’s measured FPS, which shows a steep drop-off at 4K.

The GPU’s TDP is listed at 55 W, and it’s an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, slot width of "IGP," and a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface. Its display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent," confirming this is a mobile-focused part. For The Technomancer, the data shows the GPU handles 1080p comfortably but begins to struggle at 1440p Ultra (52 FPS) and falls below 30 FPS at 4K Ultra (29 FPS). The gap between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution is substantial—at 1080p, Low yields 157 FPS while Ultra drops to 80 FPS, a 49% reduction—which points to the GPU being the primary driver of performance swings, with memory bandwidth constraints becoming more pronounced as settings increase.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear scaling pattern across resolutions, which helps identify the limiting component. At 1080p, the average FPS for Low settings is 157, which drops to 102 at 1440p and 56 at 4K. That’s a 35% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and another 45% reduction from 1440p to 4K. For High settings, the figures are 103 FPS at 1080p, 67 FPS at 1440p, and 37 FPS at 4K—a 35% drop from 1080p to 1440p, then a 45% drop to 4K. The consistency of these percentage drops across settings suggests the resolution scaling is largely uniform, which is typical of a GPU-bound scenario where pixel throughput is the main constraint.

Medium settings show a similar trend: 120 FPS at 1080p, 79 FPS at 1440p, and 43 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 34%, and from 1440p to 4K is 46%. Ultra settings, meanwhile, produce 80 FPS at 1080p, 52 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K—a 35% decline to 1440p and a 44% decline to 4K. This near-constant scaling ratio across all presets indicates that the GPU’s compute and memory resources are being taxed proportionally as resolution increases, with no sudden cliff that would suggest a CPU bottleneck. If the CPU were limiting, we’d expect to see smaller FPS differences between resolutions, especially at lower settings where the CPU has more headroom. Instead, the data shows that even at Low settings, 4K delivers only 56 FPS—far below the 1080p Low figure of 157 FPS—demonstrating that the GPU is the dominant factor at higher pixel counts.

The implications for gameplay are straightforward: for smooth 60 FPS gameplay, 1080p is the sweet spot for most settings, while 1440p requires Medium or Low to stay above 60 FPS (Medium gives 79 FPS, Low gives 102 FPS). At 4K, only Low settings approach playability at 56 FPS, with Medium falling to 43 FPS—barely acceptable for a slower-paced Action RPG, but not ideal for fast combat. The scaling data strongly suggests that the system’s shared memory architecture is a bottleneck at high resolutions, as the bandwidth demands of 4K textures and frame buffers exceed what the shared pool can efficiently deliver.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for The Technomancer provides a comprehensive view of performance across four resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the system delivers 157 FPS on Low, 120 FPS on Medium, 103 FPS on High, and 80 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset has additional detail: a minimum FPS of 102 and a maximum of 138, indicating some frame variance but generally smooth gameplay. The 157 FPS on Low is well above any refresh rate for most displays, making 1080p Low an excellent choice for high-refresh monitors. Even at 1080p Ultra, the 80 FPS average is playable, though it may not sustain 144 Hz on competitive panels.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance drops predictably. Low settings yield 102 FPS, which is still very playable. Medium provides 79 FPS with a minimum of 67 and maximum of 90—the minimum suggests occasional dips but nothing severe. High drops to 67 FPS, still acceptable for most players, while Ultra falls to 52 FPS, which is borderline for a game requiring precision. The 1440p data shows the system can handle the resolution with adjusted settings, but Ultra is not recommended for consistent smoothness.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes dramatically. Low settings produce 56 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. Medium averages 43 FPS with a minimum of 37 and maximum of 50—the minimum is notably low, suggesting stutter in demanding scenes. High drops to 37 FPS, and Ultra falls to 29 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay in an action-oriented RPG. The 4K results clearly indicate that this combo is not suited for high settings at this resolution, and even Medium may disappoint players who prioritize frame consistency.

Comparing settings within each resolution, the gap between Low and Ultra is significant: at 1080p, the difference is 77 FPS (157 vs. 80), at 1440p it’s 50 FPS (102 vs. 52), and at 4K it’s 27 FPS (56 vs. 29). The absolute drop from Low to Ultra is larger at lower resolutions, but the percentage drop is fairly consistent at around 49-52% across all resolutions. This suggests the GPU’s performance ceiling is being hit regardless of resolution, with settings having a proportional impact on frame rates.

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. It has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a TDP of 28 W. The cache hierarchy includes 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR5, with a dual-channel bus and a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. This CPU is designed for mobile use, as indicated by its Intel BGA 2049 socket and "Mobile" market segment.

In The Technomancer, the CPU’s role appears secondary to the GPU based on the scaling data. The game is an Action RPG from 2016, which typically doesn’t demand extreme CPU resources by modern standards. The CPU’s benchmark scores support its capability: a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 14551 and a single-core score of 1759, plus a Passmark multithread score of 25933 and a single-thread score of 3509. These numbers indicate a strong processor that should not bottleneck the GPU in most scenarios. The CPU’s percentile of 84 places it well above average, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.5% of its average benchmark score, showing it’s a competitive mid-to-high-end mobile chip.

The fact that FPS scales consistently with resolution and settings, without a plateau at lower resolutions, strongly suggests the CPU is not the limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the system hits 157 FPS, which is high enough that any CPU bottleneck would likely appear—yet the frame rate is still substantial. The CPU’s 22 threads and high boost clock of 5.00 GHz provide ample headroom for the game’s physics and AI calculations. However, the shared memory between CPU and GPU could introduce some latency or bandwidth contention, but the data doesn’t show a clear CPU-related penalty. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (157) versus 1080p Ultra (80) is a 49% difference, which is typical of GPU-bound performance rather than CPU limitation.

The CPU’s integrated graphics, the Arc Xe-LPG 128EU, is not used in this configuration since the discrete AMD Radeon 8060S is present. But the CPU’s memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s is shared with the GPU, and this could be a subtle factor in the game’s performance at high resolutions. For a game like The Technomancer, which likely has moderate CPU demands, the Core Ultra 7 165H is more than adequate, and the data confirms that the GPU is the primary determinant of frame rates.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall rank of this combo in The Technomancer?

A: This combo ranks 1632 out of 2825 tested combinations, placing it in the upper-middle tier of the database.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 8060S compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score is 55757, which is 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB, 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080, 1.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X, and 2.8% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080.

Q: What is the best resolution for smooth 60 FPS gameplay?

A: At 1080p, all settings except Ultra (80 FPS) exceed 60 FPS, with Low at 157 FPS, Medium at 120 FPS, and High at 103 FPS. At 1440p, Low (102 FPS) and Medium (79 FPS) stay above 60 FPS, while High (67 FPS) is borderline and Ultra (52 FPS) falls below.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming?

A: At 4K, only Low settings achieve a playable 56 FPS. Medium drops to 43 FPS, High to 37 FPS, and Ultra to 29 FPS, which is below smooth gameplay standards.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 165H has an average benchmark score of 34083, which is 0.3% lower than the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H, 0.4% higher than the AMD EPYC 4244P and AMD Ryzen AI 7 350, and 0.5% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded in the measured data?

A: The minimum FPS is recorded only for Medium settings: 102 FPS at 1080p, 67 FPS at 1440p, and 37 FPS at 4K. Other settings do not have min FPS data in the pack.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1080p, which is the most common gaming resolution, the data shows that High settings at 103 FPS provide an excellent balance of visual quality and smoothness, exceeding 60 FPS comfortably. Medium at 120 FPS is even smoother if players prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity, while Low at 157 FPS is ideal for competitive play or high-refresh displays. Ultra at 80 FPS is still playable and offers the best visuals, but the 23 FPS drop from High may not justify the graphical gains for most users. Given the Action RPG genre, which benefits from stable frame rates during combat, High settings at 1080p is the recommended default.

At 1440p, the data suggests Medium settings at 79 FPS is the best choice, as it stays above 60 FPS with a minimum of 67 FPS, ensuring minimal stutter. Low at 102 FPS is even smoother, but the visual downgrade might be noticeable on larger monitors. High at 67 FPS is playable but close to the 60 FPS threshold, and Ultra at 52 FPS is not recommended due to the risk of frame drops in busy scenes. For players with 1440p displays, Medium settings provide the best compromise between visual quality and performance, while Low is a fallback for those who demand higher frame rates.

At 4K, the data is less favorable. Low settings at 56 FPS is the only preset that approaches smooth gameplay, though it may still experience occasional dips. Medium at 43 FPS is borderline, and High at 37 FPS or Ultra at 29 FPS are not recommended for a game that requires responsive controls. If 4K is the target, players should accept Low settings and potentially reduce resolution scaling or other in-game options to improve frame rates, though the measured data does not include such adjustments. For most users, the recommendation is to prioritize 1080p or 1440p over 4K to maintain a playable experience.

The pattern across all resolutions is clear: Medium settings offer the most consistent performance, with only a small penalty compared to Low but a significant improvement in visuals. At 1080p, High is also a strong option, delivering 103 FPS with better textures and effects. The Ultra preset, while visually impressive, consistently reduces frame rates by roughly 50% compared to Low, making it a poor choice for this hardware in The Technomancer. Players should start with Medium as a baseline and adjust upward or downward based on their personal tolerance for frame rate fluctuations. The data indicates that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming at High or Medium settings, with 1440p Medium as a viable alternative for those with higher-resolution displays.