The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, shows distinct performance scaling characteristics when paired with the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX and AMD Radeon RX 7900M. Benchmark data indicates this combination delivers playable frame rates across most settings at 1080p and 1440p, with 4K presenting a more demanding scenario. The measured results place this combo at rank 1179 out of 2825 tested combinations, positioning it in the upper-middle tier of the database. This analysis walks through resolution scaling, CPU and GPU roles, settings recommendations, and a detailed FPS breakdown using only the measured data.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 reveals the expected pattern of frame rate degradation, but the magnitude of that drop is particularly telling. At High settings, the average FPS falls from 125 at 1080p to 82 at 1440p, then down to 45 at 4K. That represents a 34% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, followed by a further 45% drop from 1440p to 4K. The scaling is not linear; the 4K penalty is disproportionately severe, indicating that pixel throughput becomes the dominant constraint at higher resolutions.

At Low settings, the pattern shifts. The average FPS at 1080p is 191, dropping to 125 at 1440p (a 35% decrease), and then to 69 at 4K (a 45% decrease from 1440p). Even with the graphics load minimized, the 4K resolution still cuts performance by roughly two-thirds relative to 1080p. This suggests that the Radeon RX 7900M’s raw fill rate and memory bandwidth are being taxed heavily at 3840x2160, regardless of how light the rendering workload is.

Medium settings provide the only rows with min and max FPS data, offering insight into frame time stability. At 1920x1080 Medium, the average is 147 FPS with min 125 and max 169. At 2560x1440 Medium, the average drops to 96 FPS with min 82 and max 110. At 3840x2160 Medium, the average falls to 53 FPS with min 45 and max 61. The spread between min and max at each resolution is consistent—roughly 30% of the average—indicating that frame pacing remains stable even as the resolution increases. The limiting component at 4K is clearly the GPU, as the CPU’s capabilities are unlikely to be the bottleneck when the frame rate is only 35-69 FPS depending on settings.

The Ultra preset at 4K produces an average of 35 FPS, which is the lowest measured value across the entire dataset. The jump from High to Ultra at 4K costs 10 FPS (45 to 35), while the same settings change at 1080p costs 27 FPS (125 to 98). This indicates that Ultra settings introduce effects that scale with resolution, further burdening the GPU. For this combination, 4K gaming is viable only at Low or Medium settings, with High being borderline and Ultra not recommended for smooth gameplay.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU and GPU combo in The Technomancer?

A: The data shows 2560x1440 as the sweet spot. At High settings, it delivers 82 FPS average, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold. At Medium, it reaches 96 FPS, and even Ultra maintains 64 FPS. In contrast, 4K at Ultra drops to 35 FPS, making 1440p the highest resolution with consistently playable frame rates across all presets.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS falls from 125 at 1920x1080 to 45 at 3840x2160, a 64% reduction. At Low settings, it falls from 191 to 69, a 64% reduction as well. At Medium settings, the drop is from 147 to 53, a 64% reduction. At Ultra, it falls from 98 to 35, a 64% reduction. The consistency of that ~64% loss across all presets suggests a uniform resolution scaling factor.

Q: Does the Ultra preset provide a worthwhile improvement over High?

A: At 1440p, Ultra delivers 64 FPS compared to High’s 82 FPS—an 18 FPS penalty for the visual upgrade. At 1080p, Ultra produces 98 FPS versus 125 FPS on High, a 27 FPS loss. At 4K, Ultra drops to 35 FPS from 45 FPS on High. The relative cost of Ultra increases with resolution, so it is only advisable at 1080p where the frame rate remains comfortably high.

Q: Is this combo capable of 4K gaming?

A: Yes, but with limitations. At Low settings, 4K averages 69 FPS, which is playable. At Medium, it averages 53 FPS, which is acceptable for slower-paced Action RPGs. High settings average 45 FPS, which is borderline. Ultra at 4K averages 35 FPS, which will feel stuttery in combat. The GPU’s 16 GB of VRAM and 576.0 GB/s bandwidth help, but the raw compute at 4K is insufficient for high-fidelity presets.

Q: How does this combo rank relative to other tested configurations?

A: The combo rank is 1179 out of 2825, meaning it outperforms roughly 58% of tested combinations. This is a middle-tier result. The CPU sits in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, and the GPU is in the 94th percentile among all GPUs, yet the game-specific ranking is lower, indicating that The Technomancer’s engine does not fully leverage the strengths of this hardware.

Q: What frame rate can be expected at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: The measured average is 96 FPS, with a minimum of 82 and maximum of 110. This is the most balanced preset in the dataset, offering a high frame rate while retaining moderate visual quality. The 82 FPS minimum ensures that even demanding scenes stay above 60 FPS.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. It has 30 MB of shared L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory with dual-channel bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The chip is produced on a 3 nm process by TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 40,642 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 5,737 in single-core. These numbers place it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 63,173.

In The Technomancer, the CPU’s role appears secondary to the GPU at higher resolutions, but at 1080p the processor matters more. At 1920x1080 Low, the average FPS reaches 191, which is high enough that CPU overhead could become a factor. The single-core score of 5,737 in Cinebench R23 suggests strong per-thread performance, which is crucial for game logic and draw call submission. The 20 cores provide ample headroom for background tasks, but the game likely uses fewer threads, making single-core speed more relevant.

The nearest CPU rivals show how close the 265HX is to other processors. The Intel Core i7-13790F has an average score of 63,080, which is 0.1% lower. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G scores 63,331, which is 0.2% higher. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 scores 62,839, which is 0.5% lower. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX scores 62,738, which is 0.7% lower. These tiny deltas indicate that the 265HX is not a performance outlier; it sits squarely among comparable mobile and desktop parts. For The Technomancer, this means CPU performance is unlikely to be a differentiator unless paired with a much weaker or stronger GPU.

The CPU’s L3 cache of 30 MB shared is substantial for a mobile chip. This cache helps reduce memory latency, which can improve frame times in CPU-bound scenarios. The 3 nm process node and 55 W TDP suggest efficient power delivery, though the data does not include thermal or power measurements. The boost clock of 5.30 GHz is high for a mobile processor, and the single-core Cinebench score reflects that capability. In practice, the 1080p Low result of 191 FPS indicates that the CPU can feed the GPU enough frames to avoid being the bottleneck at lower resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX and AMD Radeon RX 7900M achieves a rank of 1179 out of 2825 tested combos in The Technomancer. This places the combo in the 58th percentile—better than the median but far from the top. The GPU’s percentile rank is 94, meaning it outperforms 94% of all GPUs in the database. The CPU’s percentile rank is 93. Yet the game-specific combo rank is lower than either component’s individual percentile, suggesting that the pairing does not translate its hardware potential into top-tier game performance.

The gap between component percentiles and game rank can be attributed to The Technomancer’s engine. The 2016 release date means the game likely does not utilize modern multi-core CPUs efficiently, and its graphics pipeline may not take full advantage of RDNA 3.0 features. The measured FPS at 1080p Ultra is 98, which is strong, but not exceptional for a GPU with 38.52 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The GPU’s nearest rivals—AMD Radeon Pro VII with an average score of 97,131 (0.4% higher) and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 with 101,872 (4.3% higher)—are professional workstation cards that score similarly in synthetic benchmarks. In The Technomancer, the RX 7900M’s gaming-oriented design should theoretically help, but the data shows it lands in the middle of the pack.

The rank of 1179 means there are 1178 combos that perform better and 1646 that perform worse. For a mobile setup with a 180 W GPU and a 55 W CPU, this is a reasonable result. The combo’s position suggests that users seeking higher frame rates would need a more powerful GPU, as the CPU is unlikely to be the limiting factor at 4K. Conversely, at 1080p Low, the 191 FPS result shows the combo can handle esports-style frame rates if the settings are lowered. Overall, the rank reflects a balanced but not exceptional pairing for this specific game.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience per the measured rows, the optimal preset depends on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 191 FPS, which is excessive for most displays. Medium at 147 FPS is still very high and offers better visual quality. High at 125 FPS is the best balance of quality and performance, as it remains well above 60 FPS and provides significant visual improvements over Medium. Ultra at 98 FPS is also viable, making 1080p the only resolution where Ultra is fully playable without compromise.

At 2560x1440, the recommendation shifts. Low at 125 FPS is unnecessarily fast. Medium at 96 FPS is the sweet spot, offering smooth gameplay with moderate visual fidelity. High at 82 FPS is also excellent, providing better textures and effects while staying above 60 FPS. Ultra at 64 FPS is playable but approaches the threshold where frame drops become noticeable. For a consistent 60+ FPS experience, High is recommended, with Medium as a safer choice for demanding scenes.

At 3840x2160, the options are limited. Low at 69 FPS is the only preset that guarantees a smooth experience. Medium at 53 FPS is acceptable for slower exploration but may struggle during combat. High at 45 FPS is borderline and likely to feel sluggish. Ultra at 35 FPS is not recommended. For 4K users, the data clearly shows that Low or Medium are the only sensible choices, with Medium offering a better visual-to-performance ratio despite the lower average FPS.

The Medium preset at 1440p provides a measured min of 82 FPS and max of 110 FPS, giving a stable range that avoids major dips. This is the most balanced row in the entire dataset. For users with 1440p monitors, choosing Medium ensures that the frame rate never drops below 82 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS standard. If visual fidelity is a priority, High at 1440p averages 82 FPS, but the lack of min/max data means the actual lows could be lower. Based on the available numbers, Medium at 1440p is the recommended configuration.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are: Low at 191, Medium at 147 (min 125, max 169), High at 125, and Ultra at 98. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 49% reduction in frame rate (191 to 98). The Medium preset’s min of 125 FPS matches the High average exactly, indicating that even the lowest frames on Medium are as fast as the average on High. This suggests that Medium provides a more consistent experience than High, which may have lower minimums that are not captured in the data.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS values are: Low at 125, Medium at 96 (min 82, max 110), High at 82, and Ultra at 64. The drop from Low to Ultra is 49% (125 to 64). The Medium preset’s min of 82 FPS equals the High average, again showing that Medium’s worst case matches High’s typical performance. The 1440p numbers are roughly 65% of the 1080p numbers at each setting, consistent with the resolution scaling factor.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS values are: Low at 69, Medium at 53 (min 45, max 61), High at 45, and Ultra at 35. The drop from Low to Ultra is 49% (69 to 35). The Medium preset’s min of 45 FPS matches the High average, continuing the pattern. The 4K numbers are roughly 36% of the 1080p numbers, showing the severe impact of pixel count. The Ultra preset at 35 FPS is the lowest measured value, making it the only row that falls below 40 FPS.

The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data across all three resolutions. At 1080p, the range is 125 to 169, a spread of 44 FPS. At 1440p, the range is 82 to 110, a spread of 28 FPS. At 4K, the range is 45 to 61, a spread of 16 FPS. The absolute spread shrinks with resolution, but the relative spread (as a percentage of average) grows from 30% at 1080p to 30% at 1440p to 30% at 4K. This consistency indicates that frame pacing is stable across resolutions, with the GPU being the primary limiting factor.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900M is a mobile GPU based on the Navi 31 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture. It has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The base clock is 1825 MHz with a boost clock of 2090 MHz. The GPU contains 4608 shading units, 288 texture mapping units, and 192 raster operation units, along with 72 ray tracing cores. Its compute performance is rated at 38.52 TFLOPS for FP32 and 77.05 TFLOPS for FP16. The memory runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed. The GPU has a 180 W TDP and is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics package) in this mobile form factor.

In The Technomancer, the GPU’s role is dominant at higher resolutions. The 4K results show a clear GPU bottleneck: even at Low settings, the average FPS is only 69, while at 1080p Low it reaches 191. The 16 GB VRAM is ample for this game, as The Technomancer from 2016 is unlikely to exceed 4-6 GB even at 4K Ultra. The 576.0 GB/s bandwidth is more than sufficient for the game’s textures, so memory is not a limiting factor.

The GPU’s synthetic benchmarks place it in the 94th percentile. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 4201, with Geekbench OpenCL at 129,499 and Vulkan at 158,760. The average benchmark score is 97,487. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro VII (97,131, 0.4% higher), NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 (101,872, 4.3% higher), AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 (92,466, 5.4% lower), and NVIDIA RTX A4500 (91,671, 6.3% lower). This places the RX 7900M between professional workstation GPUs, which is notable given its gaming focus.

The boost clock of 2090 MHz is moderate for RDNA 3.0, but the 4608 shading units deliver substantial parallel throughput. The 192 ROPs are critical for pixel fill rate at high resolutions, and the 401.3 GPixel/s pixel rate explains why 4K performance is limited. The texture rate of 601.9 GTexel/s ensures that texture-heavy scenes do not stall. For a 2016 game, the GPU is overqualified, yet the 4K Ultra result of 35 FPS shows that even this hardware struggles with the engine’s inefficient rendering at high resolutions. The GPU’s 5 nm process and 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die represent a high-end mobile part, but The Technomancer’s engine does not fully utilize its capabilities, as evidenced by the combo rank of 1179 out of 2825.