The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents an extreme challenge for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 paired with the Intel Arc B390. The measured data places this combination in the 2500th position out of 2825 tested combos, indicating that the graphics solution is the primary bottleneck across all tested resolutions and settings. The Arc B390, with its 9th percentile ranking among all GPUs, delivers frame rates that are only playable at the lowest settings and resolution, while the Core Ultra 7 265’s high-end processing capabilities remain largely underutilized due to the GPU's limitations.

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, operating at a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. This processor features a substantial 30 MB of shared L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU demonstrates significant multi-threaded strength, scoring 42,216 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 5,960 in single-core, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 64,640 is nearly identical to the AMD EPYC 4464P, which scores 64,823, showing only a -0.3% difference, and it slightly outperforms the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F by 0.3%.

In the context of The Technomancer, however, the CPU's raw power does not translate into high frame rates. The data shows that across all settings at 1080p, frame rates are limited by the GPU. For instance, at 1080p Low, the average FPS is 79, and at 1080p High, it drops to 52. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see a smaller difference between these settings as the game becomes more GPU-bound at higher presets. Instead, the significant drop with increased graphical load suggests that the Intel Arc B390, with its low 9th percentile GPU ranking, is saturated before the CPU can be fully utilized. The CPU’s high Cinebench scores are irrelevant when the GPU can only produce an average of 40 FPS at 1080p Ultra, showcasing a classic bottleneck scenario where the processor’s performance headroom is not the deciding factor.

The Arc B390's specifications further confirm this imbalance. It has a boost clock of 2500 MHz and 1,536 shading units, but its memory is "System Shared," meaning it relies on the system's DDR5 memory rather than dedicated VRAM. This architecture contributes to its low performance ceiling, as evidenced by its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1,482. This score places it just 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX and 2.7% ahead of the GeForce GT 710, both of which are legacy entry-level GPUs. The data suggests that for The Technomancer, the 20-core CPU is a non-factor in determining the final frame rate, as the GPU is the definitive limiting component.

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

*Q: What is the best average frame rate this combo can achieve in The Technomancer?*

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 79 FPS, which occurs at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only tested configuration that approaches a high-refresh-rate experience.

*Q: Is this configuration capable of 4K gaming in The Technomancer?*

A: No. At 3840x2160 resolution, the average frame rates range from 15 FPS on Ultra settings to 28 FPS on Low settings. None of these results approach a playable 30 FPS baseline, let alone 60 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Arc B390's average benchmark score of 1,482 is only 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1,463) and 2.5% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1,446). This indicates performance parity with very old, low-end graphics cards.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 have enough processing power for this game?

A: Yes, the CPU is more than sufficient. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,216 and 93rd percentile ranking show it is a top-tier processor. The frame rates are limited by the GPU, not the CPU.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the average frame rate drops from 79 FPS on Low settings to 40 FPS on Ultra settings. This represents a 39 FPS or approximately 49% reduction in performance when increasing the graphical preset.

Q: What is the combo's overall ranking among all tested system configurations?

A: The combo ranks 2500th out of 2825 tested combinations. This places it in the bottom 12% of all tested systems, confirming its status as a low-performance pairing for this title.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and Intel Arc B390 combination ranks 2500th out of 2825 tested system configurations in The Technomancer. This places the combo in the bottom 11.5% of all tested systems, a clear indicator of its performance tier. This low ranking is directly attributable to the GPU, which sits in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, rather than the CPU, which is in the 93rd percentile.

The data suggests that this pairing is severely imbalanced for gaming. The CPU is a high-end desktop processor, evidenced by its average benchmark score of 64,640, which rivals server-class chips like the AMD EPYC 9124 (score 65,104, 0.7% faster). In contrast, the GPU's average benchmark score of 1,482 is comparable to GPUs from a bygone era, such as the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (score 1,460, 1.5% slower). This mismatch means that while the system can handle complex calculations and multi-threaded workloads, its graphical output is bottlenecked to the performance level of entry-level hardware from over a decade ago. The combination's 2500th rank is a direct consequence of this GPU-bound performance, as the system's overall gaming capability is dictated by its weakest link.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a consistent pattern of performance degradation as resolution and settings increase. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers an average of 79 FPS on Low settings, 61 FPS on Medium (with a minimum of 52 and maximum of 70), 52 FPS on High, and 40 FPS on Ultra. This shows a steady decline of roughly 9-12 FPS with each step up in the settings preset.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average frame rates drop significantly. The Low preset yields 52 FPS, Medium produces 40 FPS (minimum 34, maximum 46), High drops to 34 FPS, and Ultra falls to 26 FPS. At this resolution, even the Low settings are only just playable, and the Ultra preset falls below the 30 FPS playability threshold. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 26 FPS, which is a 50% reduction from the Low setting's baseline.

At 3840x2160, the performance is largely non-playable. The best result is 28 FPS on Low settings. The Medium preset averages 22 FPS (with a minimum of 19 and maximum of 25), High drops to 19 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 15 FPS. The data shows that this combination is not viable for 4K gaming in The Technomancer, as every preset fails to maintain a consistent 30 FPS. The 1080p Medium preset is the only configuration in the entire data set that provides a minimum FPS above 50, indicating that it is the only setting that offers a consistently smooth experience.

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

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K provides clear evidence of a GPU-bound system. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 79 at 1920x1080 to 52 at 2560x1440, and finally to 28 at 3840x2160. This represents a 65% reduction in performance when moving from 1080p to 4K. The scaling is similar for the High preset, which drops from 52 FPS at 1080p to 34 FPS at 1440p and 19 FPS at 4K, a 63% reduction.

These steep declines are characteristic of a GPU that is overwhelmed by the increasing pixel count. The Arc B390's shared memory architecture and low pixel fill rate (60.00 GPixel/s) mean that its performance degrades rapidly as the rendering resolution increases. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate would remain relatively flat across resolutions, as the CPU's workload does not change significantly with resolution. Instead, the linear and substantial drop in FPS with each resolution increase indicates that the GPU is operating at its maximum capacity even at 1080p, and any additional pixel workload causes a proportional decrease in performance. The 28 FPS result at 4K Low versus the 79 FPS at 1080p Low underscores how the GPU's limited bandwidth and processing power are the definitive constraints in this system.

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

Based on the measured data, the only configurations that offer a smooth gaming experience are at 1920x1080 resolution. The Low preset achieves an average of 79 FPS, while the Medium preset averages 61 FPS with a minimum of 52 FPS. The Medium preset is the optimal choice for a balance of visual quality and performance, as its minimum frame rate of 52 FPS ensures no significant stuttering, and it provides a 9 FPS improvement over the High preset's 52 FPS average.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset is the only viable option, with an average of 52 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p drops to 40 FPS, which may be acceptable for some players, but the High and Ultra presets are too demanding, falling to 34 FPS and 26 FPS respectively. For 4K gaming, no settings are recommended, as even the Low preset's 28 FPS average is below the standard playability threshold, and the Ultra preset's 15 FPS is a slideshow.

The data indicates that players should target 1080p with the Medium preset for the most consistent experience. If visual fidelity is a priority, the High preset at 1080p is still playable at 52 FPS, but the jump to Ultra is not worth the significant performance cost of 12 FPS. In summary, the system is only suitable for 1080p gaming, and Medium settings provide the best frame time consistency and overall experience.