The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, is not a game that will flatter modern high-end hardware. The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX and the AMD Radeon 880M integrated GPU produces results that are firmly in the lower tier of tested configurations. With a combo rank of 2761 out of 2825, this pairing is near the bottom of the database, indicating a significant bottleneck that makes the experience largely dependent on the integrated graphics solution. The data shows a system that can handle the game at lower resolutions and settings, but struggles to maintain playable frame rates at higher demands. This analysis will break down the CPU's role, answer common questions, provide settings recommendations, and detail the measured performance across different resolutions and quality presets.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX is a mobile processor built on the Arrow Lake-HX architecture, featuring 20 cores and 20 threads. Its base clock is 2.60 GHz, which can boost up to 5.30 GHz. This CPU is a capable part in its own right, as evidenced by its benchmark scores. For instance, it achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 40642 and a single-core score of 5737. In PassMark, it scores 47985 in multithread and 4500 in single-thread tests. These results place it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, meaning it outperforms the vast majority of processors in general compute tasks. Its nearest rivals, based on average benchmark scores, include the Intel Core i7-13790F (0.1% faster), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G (0.2% slower), and the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX (0.7% slower). This shows the 265HX is a very strong CPU, with performance essentially on par with its closest competition.

However, the CPU's role in The Technomancer is largely secondary to the GPU. The game, being from 2016, is not particularly demanding on processor threads. The 20-core, 20-thread configuration of the 265HX is massive overkill for this title. The bottleneck is not the CPU's ability to process game logic or physics, but rather its integrated graphics counterpart. The CPU is paired with the AMD Radeon 880M, an integrated GPU with a TDP of just 15 W. This iGPU, based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Its boost clock is 2900 MHz, and it offers 4.454 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. While this is a capable iGPU for light gaming, it is fundamentally outclassed by the CPU's potential.

The massive gap in capability is clear when looking at the overall system performance. While the CPU sits in the 93rd percentile, the GPU only manages the 43rd percentile for all GPUs. The measured frame rates in The Technomancer reflect this imbalance. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 66 FPS, which is playable, but at 1080p Ultra, it drops to 34 FPS. The CPU is not the limiting factor here; it is the Radeon 880M that is struggling to render the scene. The CPU's high single-thread performance (5737 in Cinebench R23) ensures that it can feed the GPU with data without becoming a bottleneck, but this does not translate into higher frame rates. The data suggests that the CPU is effectively idle, waiting for the GPU to catch up. The performance is dictated by the iGPU's limits, making this a classic case of a strong processor being held back by a weak graphics solution in a gaming scenario.

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

Q: What is the best performance this CPU and GPU combo can achieve in The Technomancer?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 66 FPS, which is achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with the Low settings preset. This is the only setting combination that approaches a stable 60 FPS experience. All other tested settings and resolutions result in lower average frame rates.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX compare to its nearest rivals in terms of overall CPU performance?

A: The 265HX has an average benchmark score of 63173. This places it 0.1% faster than the Intel Core i7-13790F (score 63080) and 0.7% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX (score 62738). It is 0.2% slower than the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G (score 63331). These differences are negligible, putting all four processors in the same performance class.

Q: Is this system capable of running The Technomancer at 4K resolution?

A: The data shows that 4K (3840x2160) performance is very poor. At 4K Ultra, the average frame rate is only 12 FPS, and at 4K High it is 16 FPS. Even at 4K Low, the average is just 24 FPS. These frame rates are not playable, indicating that the AMD Radeon 880M does not have enough rendering power for 4K in this title.

Q: What is the difference in performance between the Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset yields an average of 43 FPS, while the Ultra preset yields an average of 22 FPS. This represents a significant 21 FPS drop, or about a 49% reduction in frame rate, when moving from the lowest to the highest quality settings. The Medium and High presets fall in between, with 33 FPS and 28 FPS respectively.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX have a high number of cores and threads?

A: Yes, the processor features 20 cores and 20 threads. This is a high count that is well-suited for multi-threaded productivity workloads, as reflected in its Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 4096 and Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 17069. However, this core count provides no tangible benefit for a game like The Technomancer, which is limited by the GPU.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 880M's benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Radeon 880M has an average benchmark score of 8436. This makes it 0.1% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (score 8427) and 1.3% faster than the AMD Radeon R9 M375X (score 8325). It is 0.3% slower than both the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (score 8458) and the AMD Radeon HD 8870M (score 8462). This places it in the same performance bracket as these older discrete mobile GPUs.

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

Given the measured data, the only viable path to a smooth experience with this hardware is to use the Low settings preset at 1920x1080, which produces an average frame rate of 66 FPS. This is the highest average FPS recorded across all tested configurations and is the only one that consistently stays above the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset at 1080p is the next best option, with an average of 51 FPS, but this is still a noticeable step down and may result in occasional stutter or frame drops. The measured minimum for 1080p Medium is 43 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target. For a more consistent experience, the Low preset is the clear choice.

Moving up to 1440p, the performance becomes more challenging. The Low preset at 2560x1440 yields an average of 43 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. The Medium preset drops to 33 FPS, and the High preset to 28 FPS, making these less desirable for smooth gameplay. At 4K, all settings are effectively unplayable, with the highest average being 24 FPS on Low. Therefore, the data strongly recommends using the Low preset at 1080p for the best balance of visual quality and performance. If a higher resolution is desired, 1440p Low is the only reasonable option, but users should expect a less fluid experience. The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution due to the substantial performance cost, with the highest average being 34 FPS at 1080p. The data indicates that this integrated GPU is not designed for high-fidelity gaming, so prioritizing frame rate over visual fidelity is essential.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX and the AMD Radeon 880M is not a strong performer in The Technomancer. The data shows that this pairing ranks 2761 out of a total of 2825 tested combos. This places it in the bottom 2% of all systems tested for this game. This is a remarkably low ranking, indicating that nearly all other hardware configurations, including many older or less expensive parts, deliver better frame rates. The only combos that perform worse are the 64 systems that rank below this one.

This poor ranking is a direct result of the GPU's limitations. The Radeon 880M, while a modern integrated graphics solution, is simply not powerful enough for this game. Its 43rd percentile ranking among all GPUs, compared to the CPU's 93rd percentile, highlights the massive imbalance in this system. The CPU is a top-tier part, but it is paired with a GPU that is in the lower half of all graphics processors. This mismatch is what causes the system to be placed so low in the rankings. The data suggests that this combo is effectively a strong general-purpose laptop that can play some games at low settings, but it is not a gaming machine. The low rank is a clear indicator that users should not expect a high-performance gaming experience from this specific configuration in The Technomancer. The processor's power is effectively wasted in this scenario, as the system is always limited by the integrated GPU.

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

The measured frame rates across different resolutions show a clear and predictable pattern of decline as resolution increases, which confirms that the AMD Radeon 880M is the primary limiting component. At the Low settings preset, the average frame rate drops from 66 FPS at 1920x1080 to 43 FPS at 2560x1440, and finally to 24 FPS at 3840x2160. This is a drop of 23 FPS from 1080p to 1440p, and a further drop of 19 FPS from 1440p to 4K. The scaling is not linear, but the trend is consistent: every increase in resolution results in a significant decrease in performance.

This behavior is characteristic of a GPU-bound system. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the frame rates would remain relatively similar across resolutions, as the CPU's workload (game logic, physics) does not change significantly with resolution. However, the GPU's workload increases dramatically with resolution, as it has to render more pixels. The sharp decline in FPS with each resolution step is a classic sign that the GPU is saturated and cannot keep up with the increasing pixel count. The data for the High and Ultra presets shows the same pattern. For High, the average drops from 44 FPS at 1080p to 28 FPS at 1440p and 16 FPS at 4K. For Ultra, it drops from 34 FPS at 1080p to 22 FPS at 1440p and 12 FPS at 4K. In every case, the frame rate is roughly halved when moving from 1080p to 4K, which is a strong indicator of a GPU bottleneck. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX, with its high single-core and multi-core performance, is not the cause of this bottleneck; it is the 15 W integrated GPU that is struggling to handle the rendering load. The resolution scaling clearly points to the AMD Radeon 880M as the component that dictates the system's gaming performance.

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

The complete dataset for The Technomancer provides a detailed look at the performance of this hardware combination. All frame rates are average values unless otherwise specified. The minimum and maximum frame rates are only provided for the Medium settings at each resolution.

1920x1080

At the standard 1080p resolution, the performance is as follows:

• Low: The average frame rate is 66 FPS. This is the highest average FPS recorded for this system.
• Medium: The average frame rate is 51 FPS, with a minimum of 43 FPS and a maximum of 59 FPS.
• High: The average frame rate drops to 44 FPS.
• Ultra: The average frame rate is 34 FPS, the lowest at this resolution.

2560x1440

Moving to the higher 1440p resolution, the performance decreases significantly:

• Low: The average frame rate is 43 FPS.
• Medium: The average frame rate is 33 FPS, with a minimum of 28 FPS and a maximum of 38 FPS.
• High: The average frame rate is 28 FPS.
• Ultra: The average frame rate is 22 FPS.

3840x2160

At 4K resolution, the system is unable to provide a playable experience at any setting:

• Low: The average frame rate is 24 FPS.
• Medium: The average frame rate is 18 FPS, with a minimum of 16 FPS and a maximum of 21 FPS.
• High: The average frame rate is 16 FPS.
• Ultra: The average frame rate is 12 FPS, the lowest recorded for this system.

The data shows a clear hierarchy. The only configuration that delivers a consistently smooth experience is 1080p Low. The 1440p Low setting is marginal, and 4K is not viable. The difference between the Low and Ultra presets at each resolution is substantial, ranging from a 32 FPS drop at 1080p to a 12 FPS drop at 4K. This breakdown confirms that the AMD Radeon 880M is the dominant factor in determining frame rates, and users should adjust their settings accordingly to prioritize playability.