The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents an interesting stress test for a modern high-end pairing like the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070. The benchmark data reveals a system with immense headroom, particularly at lower resolutions, but also exposes the expected scaling bottlenecks as graphical load increases. This analysis breaks down the measured performance to understand where this combination excels and where its limits lie.

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 built on the Arrow Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. For a game released in 2016, this represents an overwhelming amount of processing power. The game’s engine was designed for a generation of CPUs with far fewer cores and lower clock speeds, meaning the Ultra 7 265 is unlikely to be the limiting factor in most scenarios.

The data strongly supports this interpretation. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 249 FPS. This is a massive frame rate that is nearly impossible for a 2016-era game to demand from a CPU. The fact that the processor can feed the GPU enough data to produce this many frames indicates that its 20 cores and high boost clock are more than sufficient for the game's threading model. The 30 MB of shared L3 cache and the dual-channel DDR5 memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s further ensure that the CPU can keep up with the game’s data requests without becoming a bottleneck.

In the broader context of CPU performance, the Ultra 7 265 sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 64640. Its nearest rivals, such as the AMD EPYC 4464P and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F, are within a fraction of a percent in performance (deltaPct of -0.3 and 0.3, respectively). This suggests that while the CPU is a top-tier part, its performance is not unique; other high-end processors would likely deliver similar frame rates in this title. The game’s demands are so low that the difference between a 93rd percentile CPU and a slightly faster or slower one is negligible in practice, as evidenced by the frame rates not being capped by the processor even at the highest settings. The data implies the game is simply not coded to utilize the full potential of this modern processor, leaving its capabilities largely untapped.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 is the other half of this equation, and its role is far more dynamic. With a 12 GB GDDR7 memory pool on a 192-bit bus, it offers a bandwidth of 672.0 GB/s. Its high boost clock of 2512 MHz ensures it can process the graphical data from The Technomancer with ease. For a game of this era, the GPU is the primary driver of performance, especially as resolution and settings increase.

The benchmark results confirm this. At 1080p Low, the GPU is producing 249 FPS. As we move from Low to Medium, the average drops to 191 FPS, and then to 163 FPS at High. This scaling shows the GPU is being tasked with more work. However, the most telling evidence of the GPU's role comes from the 4K results. At 2160p, the frame rates drop significantly, with the Ultra setting yielding just 46 FPS. This massive reduction from the 1080p numbers demonstrates that the RTX 5070 is being pushed to its limits at this resolution with the highest settings.

The GPU sits in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 40377. Its nearest rivals, like the AMD Radeon Pro 580 and the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile, have similar average scores but are from completely different market segments (professional and mobile). This highlights that the RTX 5070 is a high-performance consumer part, but its 12 GB of VRAM might be a consideration for future titles, though not for this one. In The Technomancer, the GPU's raw compute power is what matters, and the data shows it can deliver high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, but it begins to struggle to maintain playable frame rates at 4K Ultra, indicating that the game's graphical demands are significant at that resolution.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combined performance of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 in The Technomancer places it in the 532nd position out of 2825 tested combos. This puts it in the top 20% of all systems tested, which is a strong showing. However, the rank is not higher, which is surprising given the power of the individual components.

This rank suggests that many other combinations, likely those with even more powerful GPUs, are able to achieve higher frame rates, particularly at the 4K resolution. The data shows that the RTX 5070 is the limiting factor in this pairing. While the CPU has an enormous amount of headroom, the GPU cannot push the frame rate high enough to climb the rankings further. The fact that this combo ranks 532nd, despite having a top-tier CPU, indicates that the GPU is the primary constraint for this game.

It is important to note that the rank is against all other tested combos, which will include systems with higher-end GPUs like the RTX 5080 or 5090. The performance difference between these tiers is most pronounced at higher resolutions. The 4K data supports this, as the combo struggles to maintain 60 FPS at High settings (59 FPS) and drops to 46 FPS at Ultra. In contrast, at 1080p, the combo is likely near the top of the charts, but the overall rank is dragged down by its relative performance at 4K. The data implies that for the best ranking, a more powerful GPU would be needed to complement the CPU's capabilities.

FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average frame rate this combo achieves in The Technomancer?*

A: The highest measured average frame rate is 249 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: At which resolution and settings does the combo fail to maintain a 60 FPS average?

A: At 3840x2160 (4K) resolution with Ultra settings, the combo averages 46 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How much faster is the combo at 1080p Low compared to 4K Low?

A: The average frame rate at 1080p Low is 249 FPS, while at 4K Low it is 89 FPS. This represents a 160 FPS difference, or approximately a 2.8x reduction in performance.

Q: What is the only setting at 1440p that provides a minimum FPS above 100?

A: At 2560x1440 resolution, the Medium settings provide a minimum FPS of 106, with an average of 125 FPS. The Low setting has a higher average (162 FPS) but its minimum FPS was not measured.

Q: How does the CPU's benchmark score compare to its closest rival?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score of 64640. Its closest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P, has a score of 64823, which is 0.3% higher.

Q: What is the GPU's memory bandwidth and how does it relate to 4K performance?

A: The GPU has a memory bandwidth of 672.0 GB/s. This is likely a contributing factor to the performance drop at 4K, as the higher resolution demands more data to be transferred, and the data shows a significant frame rate reduction at that resolution.

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

Analyzing the performance scaling across resolutions reveals a clear trend: the GPU is the primary bottleneck. The data shows a predictable and significant drop in frame rates as the resolution increases, which is a classic sign of a GPU-limited scenario.

At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 249 FPS at 1080p to 162 FPS at 1440p, and then to 89 FPS at 4K. This is a reduction of 87 FPS (35%) from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 73 FPS (45%) from 1440p to 4K. This consistent and large percentage drop indicates that the GPU is being progressively overwhelmed by the increasing pixel count.

The pattern is similar at other settings. At High settings, the frame rate drops from 163 FPS at 1080p to 107 FPS at 1440p, and then to 59 FPS at 4K. The fact that the frame rate nearly halves from 1440p to 4K at High settings (107 FPS to 59 FPS) is a strong indicator that the RTX 5070 is the limiting component. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see a smaller drop in performance at higher resolutions, as the GPU would have more time to wait for the CPU. Instead, the dramatic drop confirms that the GPU's rendering capabilities are being saturated.

The data also shows that the relative performance drop is more severe at higher settings. For example, from 1080p to 4K, the Low setting drops by 64% (249 to 89 FPS), while the Ultra setting drops by 64% (127 to 46 FPS). This consistency shows that the game’s settings scale the GPU load in a linear fashion, further reinforcing that the GPU is the main constraint. The CPU's performance is so far ahead of what the game requires that it effectively becomes a constant, allowing the GPU's performance to be the sole determinant of the frame rate.

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

Given the measured data, the optimal settings for this combo depend entirely on the user's target resolution and desired frame rate. The data provides clear thresholds for a smooth experience.

For a 1080p display, all settings provide playable frame rates. The Low preset gives an exceptional 249 FPS, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. However, the Medium preset, with an average of 191 FPS and a minimum of 162 FPS, offers a better balance of visual quality and performance, ensuring a high frame rate even in demanding scenes. The High preset at 163 FPS is also excellent, and it is likely the recommended choice for most users, as it provides a significant visual upgrade over Medium with no risk of dropping below 60 FPS. The Ultra preset at 127 FPS is also perfectly playable and is the best choice if visual fidelity is the top priority.

For a 1440p display, the Ultra preset, with an average of 83 FPS, is a solid choice for a high-quality experience. The High preset at 107 FPS is even better, providing a smoother experience with a minor visual compromise. The Medium preset, with an average of 125 FPS and a minimum of 106 FPS, is the safest option for competitive play or for those who prioritize a high and stable frame rate. The Low preset at 162 FPS is overkill for most, as the visual quality would be too poor.

For a 4K display, the choice is more constrained. The High preset, with an average of 59 FPS, is the best option for a near-60 FPS experience. The Medium preset, at 69 FPS, is also viable and offers a better frame rate. The Ultra preset, at 46 FPS, is not recommended for a smooth gameplay experience, as it falls below the 60 FPS threshold. The Low preset at 89 FPS is an option for those who prioritize frame rate above all else, but the visual quality would be severely compromised. The data suggests that for 4K, High or Medium settings are the sweet spot for this combo.

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

The following breakdown details the exact average frame rates measured for this combo in The Technomancer.

1920x1080 (1080p)

• Low: The average FPS is 249.
• Medium: The average FPS is 191, with a minimum of 162 FPS and a maximum of 220 FPS.
• High: The average FPS is 163.
• Ultra: The average FPS is 127.

2560x1440 (1440p)

• Low: The average FPS is 162.
• Medium: The average FPS is 125, with a minimum of 106 FPS and a maximum of 143 FPS.
• High: The average FPS is 107.
• Ultra: The average FPS is 83.

3840x2160 (4K)

• Low: The average FPS is 89.
• Medium: The average FPS is 69, with a minimum of 58 FPS and a maximum of 79 FPS.
• High: The average FPS is 59.
• Ultra: The average FPS is 46.

The data shows a clear and consistent scaling pattern. The Medium presets at each resolution are the only ones with complete min/max data, providing a useful point of reference for frame-time consistency. The performance gap between Low and Ultra is substantial at every resolution, but it narrows proportionally as resolution increases, confirming the GPU-bound nature of the system in this title.