The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents a demanding workload that clearly separates CPU and GPU responsibilities. This analysis examines the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 570 combination, using measured data to show how each component contributes to the final frame rates. The data reveals a system where the processor is far ahead of the graphics card's needs, making the RX 570 the definitive limiting factor in almost every scenario.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU features a 30 MB shared L3 cache, with 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 cache per core. It supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

Benchmark data places this CPU in the 93rd percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 64640. In multi-threaded workloads, it scores 42216 in Cinebench R23, while its single-core performance reaches 5960 in the same test. This level of performance is substantial, and the nearest rivals underscore its standing. The AMD EPYC 4464P scores 64823, a delta of -0.3%, meaning the Core Ultra 7 265 is essentially matched. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F scores 64438, a delta of 0.3%, showing the two Intel chips are nearly identical. The AMD EPYC 7343 scores 64202, a delta of 0.7%, and the AMD EPYC 9124 scores 65104, a delta of -0.7%. In all cases, the differences are within a single percentage point, confirming that this CPU is positioned at a high-performance plateau.

For a game like The Technomancer, the CPU's role is to handle game logic, physics, and AI. With 20 threads and a high boost clock, the Core Ultra 7 265 is more than capable of feeding frames to any modern graphics card. The measured FPS data for this combo shows no scenario where the CPU is the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 68, which is a solid frame rate, but it is not exceptionally high for a CPU of this caliber. If the processor were the limiting factor, we would expect to see frame rates capped at a much lower value, regardless of resolution or settings. Instead, the performance scales directly with the GPU's workload, which is the classic signature of a GPU-bound system. The CPU is effectively idle, waiting for the RX 570 to finish its rendering tasks.

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

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this hardware?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 with Low settings delivers the highest average FPS at 68. If you prefer higher visual quality, 1920x1080 with Medium settings still provides a playable 53 average FPS, whereas High settings drop to 45 average FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this system?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU's benchmark scores are in the 93rd percentile, while the GPU is in the 74th percentile. The FPS drop from 68 at 1080p Low to 16 at 4K High clearly indicates the graphics card cannot keep up with the CPU's output capability.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming?

A: No, not at playable frame rates. The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 25 with Low settings, and it falls to 13 with Ultra settings. These numbers are well below the 30 FPS threshold typically considered the minimum for playability.

Q: How does the RX 570 compare to its closest rivals in overall GPU performance?

A: The RX 570's average benchmark score is 28766. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6800M, scores 28874, which is -0.4% relative to the RX 570. The AMD Radeon R9 M295X scores 28580, a delta of 0.7%, and the AMD Radeon RX 470 scores 28996, a delta of -0.8%. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 scores 28421, a delta of 1.2%. All these differences are minor, placing the RX 570 in a tight performance band.

Q: What is the typical frame rate at 1440p Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 34, with a minimum of 29 and a maximum of 40. This is a marginal experience, often dipping below 30 FPS.

Q: Is the 4 GB VRAM on the RX 570 sufficient for The Technomancer?

A: The measured data does not include VRAM usage, but the performance drop at higher resolutions suggests memory bandwidth and capacity are strained. The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. At 4K, the average FPS falls to 16 on High and 13 on Ultra, indicating the card is overwhelmed by the resolution, likely due to both compute and memory limitations.

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

The measured FPS data across resolutions paints a clear picture of the system's scaling behavior. Starting at 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average FPS is 68. Moving to 2560x1440 with the same Low settings, the average FPS drops to 45, a reduction of about 34%. At 3840x2160, the average FPS falls further to 25, another 44% reduction from the 1440p figure. This pattern of diminishing returns is characteristic of a GPU that is running out of processing power and memory bandwidth as the pixel count increases.

For High settings, the scaling is similar but starts lower. At 1080p High, the average FPS is 45. At 1440p High, it drops to 29, and at 4K High, it bottoms out at 16. The Ultra settings show the most severe drop, going from 35 FPS at 1080p to 23 FPS at 1440p and finally to 13 FPS at 4K. This steep decline is a strong indicator that the RX 570's compute resources are saturated. The GPU has 2048 shading units and 32 ROPs, which are simply not enough to handle the workload at higher resolutions.

The fact that the FPS scales so directly with the number of pixels, rather than remaining flat, proves the CPU is not the bottleneck. A CPU-limited scenario would show similar FPS at 1080p and 1440p, as the CPU would be unable to feed more frames regardless of resolution. Here, the FPS drops consistently, showing that the GPU is working harder and harder as resolution increases, and its performance degrades accordingly. The 4 GB of GDDR5 memory is also a likely contributor, as higher resolutions require more memory for textures and framebuffers, and the 224.0 GB/s bandwidth may become a constraint.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and the AMD Radeon RX 570 ranks 2712 out of 2825 tested combos in The Technomancer. This places it in the bottom 4% of all configurations tested. This low ranking is almost entirely due to the GPU's age and performance class. The CPU is a top-tier part, but the GPU is an older, mid-range card that was released in 2017.

The ranking reflects the overall system capability, and it is a direct consequence of the GPU's limitations. The data shows that the CPU is in the 93rd percentile of all processors, while the GPU is only in the 74th percentile. When paired together, the system's actual gaming performance is dictated by the weaker component. In this case, the RX 570's average benchmark score of 28766 is the limiting factor. The GPU's nearest rivals, such as the RX 6800M (score 28874) and the RX 470 (score 28996), are all within a 1% performance delta, meaning the GPU is firmly in a specific performance tier that is inadequate for high-end gaming at modern resolutions.

This rank of 2712 out of 2825 means there are only 113 combos that perform worse. This is a poor result for a system with such a strong CPU. The data suggests that the CPU is wasted in this configuration, as it can never be fully utilized. For the game The Technomancer, the bottleneck is so severe that the system is effectively GPU-bound at all settings and resolutions. The users of this combo would see significant performance gains from upgrading the GPU, while the CPU would likely not need to be changed for several more generations.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 570 is a graphics card based on the Polaris 20 chip, using the GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. It has a base clock of 1168 MHz and a boost clock of 1244 MHz, with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory running at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The memory interface is 256-bit, providing a bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s. The card has 2048 shading units and 32 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 39.81 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 159.2 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance is 5.095 TFLOPS.

The GPU's benchmark results are modest. It scores 880 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 39349 in Geekbench Metal, 32084 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 42752 in Geekbench Vulkan. Its average benchmark score is 28766, placing it in the 74th percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rivals show that it is closely matched with other mid-range cards from its era. The RX 6800M scores 28874 (-0.4% delta), the R9 M295X scores 28580 (+0.7% delta), the RX 470 scores 28996 (-0.8% delta), and the Quadro RTX 8000 scores 28421 (+1.2% delta). These small deltas indicate that the RX 570 is a solid performer for its class, but that class is limited.

In The Technomancer, the GPU's role is to render the game world. The measured FPS shows that the card struggles with higher resolutions and settings. At 1080p Low, it can produce 68 FPS, which is acceptable. However, at 4K Ultra, it only manages 13 FPS. This is a direct result of the GPU's limited compute power and memory bandwidth. The 4 GB VRAM is also a concern, as modern games with high-resolution textures can easily exceed this amount, leading to texture swapping and stuttering. The card's 150 W TDP and dual-slot design are typical for its era, but it is clearly outclassed by modern GPUs. The data shows that the GPU is the primary reason for the system's low combo rank, as it cannot keep up with the CPU's output.

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

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at the system's performance in The Technomancer. The following is a complete breakdown of the average FPS, and where available, minimum and maximum FPS, for each resolution and settings combination.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the results are as follows:

• High settings: average FPS of 16.
• Low settings: average FPS of 25.
• Medium settings: average FPS of 19, with a minimum of 16 and a maximum of 22.
• Ultra settings: average FPS of 13.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), the results are:

• High settings: average FPS of 29.
• Low settings: average FPS of 45.
• Medium settings: average FPS of 34, with a minimum of 29 and a maximum of 40.
• Ultra settings: average FPS of 23.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the results are:

• High settings: average FPS of 45.
• Low settings: average FPS of 68.
• Medium settings: average FPS of 53, with a minimum of 45 and a maximum of 60.
• Ultra settings: average FPS of 35.

The data shows a consistent trend. The only playable experience is at 1080p with Low settings, where the system achieves 68 FPS. At 1080p Medium, the average of 53 FPS is still playable, but the minimum of 45 FPS indicates potential dips. High settings at 1080p yield 45 FPS, which is borderline. All Ultra settings results are below 35 FPS, and any 1440p or 4K resolution results in average FPS below 45, with 4K being entirely unplayable. The minimum FPS data for Medium settings shows that the system can dip below the average, which is particularly problematic at 1440p where the minimum is 29 FPS, and at 4K where the minimum is 16 FPS. This breakdown confirms that the system is only suitable for 1080p gaming, and even then, only at lower settings. The GPU's limitations are fully exposed at higher resolutions, making the system unsuitable for modern gaming expectations at those levels.