The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents an interesting test for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT. This combination ranks 628th out of 1656 tested combos for this specific game, placing it in the upper-middle tier of the database. The ranking indicates that while this is not a top-tier pairing for this title, it delivers a solid performance that should handle the game's demands comfortably at most settings. The data suggests a system that balances a high-end CPU with a capable GPU, resulting in a configuration that is well-suited for high-refresh-rate 1080p and smooth 1440p gameplay.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 628 out of 1656 tested combinations places it in the 62nd percentile of all systems tested with this game. This is a respectable position, suggesting that the pairing is better than a majority of configurations, though it is not at the very top of the performance spectrum. The CPU in this system, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K, holds a 97th percentile rank against all CPUs in the database, indicating that it is a top-tier processor. Its average benchmark score of 79,102 places it in close competition with its nearest rivals, including the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF and Intel Core i9-14900KF, with negligible performance deltas of -0.2%. The GPU, the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT, holds a 76th percentile rank against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32,619.

The disparity between the CPU's high percentile and the GPU's lower one suggests that the graphics card may be the limiting factor in this pairing, especially at higher resolutions. The combo's overall rank is likely more influenced by the GPU's performance in The Technomancer than the CPU's, as the game's engine appears to be more dependent on graphics processing. The data indicates a well-balanced system where the CPU provides ample headroom, but the GPU dictates the final frame rates. This is a common scenario for gaming systems, where the graphics card is the primary bottleneck.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT, built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 32 chip, is the primary driver of the frame rates in this game. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides a memory bandwidth of 624.1 GB/s, which is ample for the textures and assets in a 2016 title. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 2430 MHz, with a game clock of 2124 MHz. These clocks, combined with 3840 shading units and 96 ROPs, deliver a pixel rate of 233.3 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 583.2 GTexel/s. The GPU's 37.32 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is a strong indicator of its raw compute capability.

The benchmarks for this GPU show a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4,157, which is a modern test that may not be fully representative of this older game's workload. The PassMark G3D score of 24,176 and G2D score of 1,177 provide a broader view of its performance. The GPU's percentile rank of 76 places it above average, but its nearest rivals, such as the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 and NVIDIA P104-100, are within a 0.7% performance delta. This indicates that the RX 7800 XT is a solid mid-to-high-end performer, but not an outlier. The data shows that the GPU's performance is sufficient to produce high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, but it begins to show its limits at 4K, especially at higher settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of performance scaling across resolutions. At 1080p, the system produces high frame rates, with an average of 139.9 FPS at High settings. Moving to 1440p, the average drops to 88.3 FPS at High settings, a reduction of approximately 37%. At 4K, the average further drops to 52 FPS at High settings, a 41% reduction from the 1440p figure. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor, as the frame rate drops are consistent with the increasing pixel count and rendering load.

The data at Low settings shows a similar trend. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 210.9 FPS, which drops to 133.3 FPS at 1440p and 74.3 FPS at 4K. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is a 65% reduction, which is significant. This suggests that even at the lowest settings, the GPU is still heavily taxed at 4K. The difference in frame rates between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution is also substantial. At 1080p, the difference between Low (210.9 FPS) and Ultra (106.7 FPS) is over 100 FPS, while at 4K, the difference is only 34.8 FPS (74.3 vs. 39.5). This indicates that at 4K, the GPU is so saturated that graphical settings have a reduced relative impact on performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The benchmark results provide a detailed look at the system's performance across all settings and resolutions. At 1920x1080, the system delivers excellent frame rates, with an average of 210.9 FPS at Low settings. The Medium settings produce 161.3 FPS, High settings produce 139.9 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 106.7 FPS. These numbers indicate that the system is well-suited for high-refresh-rate monitors at this resolution, even at Ultra settings, which maintain an average above 100 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance remains strong but begins to show the GPU's limitations. The Low setting average is 133.3 FPS, which is still smooth for most displays. The Medium setting produces 102.7 FPS, and the High setting produces 88.3 FPS. The Ultra setting is the only one that drops below the 60 FPS mark, with an average of 68.2 FPS. This suggests that for a consistent 60 FPS experience at 1440p, players can use High settings, while those with adaptive sync displays can push to Ultra.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain high frame rates. The Low setting produces 74.3 FPS, which is playable, but the Medium setting drops to 59.8 FPS, and High drops to 52 FPS. The Ultra setting produces an average of 39.5 FPS, which is not ideal for a smooth experience. The data shows that 4K gaming is only viable at Low or Medium settings for this title, and even then, frame rates can be inconsistent. The overall trend is clear: the system excels at 1080p, performs well at 1440p, and is limited at 4K.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is a powerful processor that provides ample computational headroom for The Technomancer. With 20 cores and 20 threads, a base clock of 3.90 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, this CPU has more than enough processing power for a game released in 2016. The CPU's architecture, Arrow Lake, is built on a 3 nm process node and features a 30 MB shared L3 cache. Its performance in synthetic benchmarks is impressive, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 50,009 and a single-core score of 7,060. The PassMark multi-thread score of 58,838 further confirms its high level of performance.

In the context of this game, the CPU's role is likely to be less critical than the GPU's, as The Technomancer is not a CPU-intensive title by modern standards. The benchmark data shows that the CPU can easily feed the GPU with data, as evidenced by the high frame rates at lower resolutions. The CPU's percentile rank of 97 and its average benchmark score of 79,102, which is on par with the Intel Core i9-14900K (with a delta of -0.9%), suggest that it is not a bottleneck in this system. The 20 cores and 20 threads provide plenty of parallel processing capability for background tasks, but the game likely only utilizes a fraction of them. The data indicates that the CPU is a robust foundation for this configuration, ensuring that the GPU is the only factor limiting performance in The Technomancer.