The Technomancer

The measured performance set covers the combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and the AMD Radeon RX 9070 running The Technomancer across four preset levels – Low, Medium, High, and Ultra – at three output resolutions: 1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160. The data includes average FPS for every preset and resolution, plus min/max FPS for the Medium preset at each resolution. The combined system ranks 1114th out of 3696 measured combos in real gaming conditions, and the collected information offers a clear view of where this CPU/GPU pairing is strong, where it is constrained, and which settings deliver the most balanced experience.

Settings Recommendations

Looking at the averaged results, the useful sweet spots in The Technomancer for this hardware are relatively obvious.

At 3840x2160, the Medium preset is the only one that hits a 60 average FPS exactly. The 4K Medium average is 60 FPS, with a minimum of 51 and maximum of 70. Dropping to Low raises the average to 79 FPS, but High lowers it to 52, and Ultra lowers it further to 40. Because the majority of modern 4K displays operate at 60 Hz, Medium is the only preset that lands on that target without sacrificing the visual settings that come with High. It is also important to note the 51 FPS floor, so the expected experience is not perfectly smooth at every frame, but the average remains right at the display's refresh rate. For 4K gameplay on this combo, Medium is the recommended preset. High, at 52 FPS average, is a meaningful hit in smoothness for a slight visual gain, while Ultra at 40 average is visually very detailed but below a typical 60 FPS tolerance.

At 2560x1440, Ultra averages 73 FPS, Medium 110, highs 94, and Low 143. The background for a typical 1440p 144 Hz monitor: Low is sufficient, and Low's 143 average is basically the full refresh cadence. However, going to High still gives an excellent 94 average while restoring much of the texture/GI quality that Low misses. Medium gives 110 FPS, which is even smoother, but the jump from Medium to High only costs about 17 frames based on the collected numbers. For the best balance of frame rate and image detail, 1440p High is the best pick. Ultra is playable at 73 FPS, but 73 is below the 90+ zone many users consider smooth for first-person action. Given the data, 1440p High is the recommended starting point.

At 1920x1080, the set opens up. Low reaches an enormous 219 FPS average, Medium 169, High 144, and Ultra 112. Given that 1080p monitors typically rotate refresh rates of 144 Hz or 165 Hz, the High preset positions the average directly at 144 FPS, which lands it on a 144 Hz panel's refresh ceiling. Medium pushes 169 – well above 144 Hz – and Ultra's 112 is still very high but drops below the refresh frequency. If the user wants the best experience of the game's graphics without shedding the advantage of a 144 Hz panel, 1080p High is the sweet spot. If the user wants to lock to 165-170 Hz, Medium achieves that. But the measured distribution shows High provides a high-quality image and meets 144 Hz class performance, so that is the recommended preset for 1080p.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 is the primary graphics equalizer in this setup. It has 16 GB GDDR6 memory in a 256-bit interface with 644.6 GB/s memory bandwidth. Clock rates are given as 1330 MHz base, 2520 MHz boost, and 2070 MHz normal, and the chip is manufactured on a 4 nm process.

The measures carried out in The Technomovies show a pattern between the average frame rate and the pixel load. For instance, at 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 40, while at 4K Low it is 79. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is nearly 39 frames per second, which is a reflection of the shader and render load increment when presets move up. With 16 GB of VRAM there is no shortage of frame memory even at 4K; the GPU doesn't run out of the frame at any preset. The game is from the 2016 era, so the data suggests that the graphics card is not bounded by memory capacity but rather by the computational cost of increased quality and resolution.

The GPU's direct benchmark assets, from PassMark G3D score 23877, and its percentile rank of 69 among all GPUs, place it in the middle-image half of current hardware. Yet the actual measured performance suggests the 9070 is the slowest part of this pair when running the load. The 1080p result at High is 144 FPS average; at 1440p High it falls to 94; at 4K High it is 52. That halving rate fits typical continuous an increase in pixel workload. As for clock behavior: the GPU is 2070 MHz in game preset, boosting to 2520 MHz, so the sustained high clock is the reason why a mid-rank GPU can still push the 144 FPS at high frames. The texture and shadow level changes on Low vs Medium vs Ultra produce a corresponding drop from 166 FPS to 169 to 144 to 112 at 1080p. That drop is a classic indication where the GPU is exhausted by fill-rate. For the takeaway: the GPU is the dominant driver that decides ceiling in optimized settings above 1080p.

How This Combo Ranks

Within The Technomancer's overall measured set, this particular CPU-GPU combination is placed at partition rank 1114 of 3696 tested combinations. In other words, the unit sits in the middle of the highest third of all measured runs. A rank of 1114 puts it above more than a thousand other tested combinations, and below a larger number of combos; this suggests that it represents a healthy middle-to-upper tier for the data base.

When separating the pair, the CPU holds an 94th percentile against all CPUs, while the GPU lands at the 69th percentile by all GPUs. That gap matters: the Central processor is a high-end part according to aggregate benchmarks (Cinebench R23 multi 35850, single 2020, Geekbench multi 23085), while the graphics chip is more mainstream in rank. The program's specific hash for this CPU is clearly not bottleneck-limited by the GPU at most settings; when the frame high and we still see a 66% GPU percentile, which suggests the CPU can keep the frame pipeline ahead.

In terms of nearest rivals, the RX 9070 is compared in the database to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z (delta -0.8%), the AMD Radeon RX 6800S (delta -0.8%), and the NVIDIA RTX 2080 SUPER (delta -0.8?), so its raw SDK performance sits in a familiar range. But in-game results of the Technomancer may differ because the game is an older title without advanced texture streaming, so the relative performance at 1080p might be higher than the percentile rank suggests.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The table below is the complete collected aver function of the combination in The Technomancer:

| Resolution | Preset | Average FPS | Minimum FPS | Maximum FPS |

|------------|--------|-------------|-------------|-------------|

| 3840x2160 | Low | 79 | – | – |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 60 | 51 | 70 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 52 | – | – |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 40 | – | – |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 143 | – | – |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 110 | 94 | 27 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 94 | – | – |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 73 | – | – |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 219 | – | – |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 169 | 143 | 194 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 144 | – | – |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 112 | – | – |

Reading directly from the data, at 1080p the FPS drops by about 3 steps: Low 219, Medium 169, High 144, Ultra 112. The curve is monotonic, with the largest drop between Low and Medium (50) – not a jump due to a variable; from Medium to High is 25 FPS; High to Ultra is 32 FPS. That shape implies that the Ultra setting uses demanding render features, but the base scaling removes more at Low-to-Medium.

At 1440p the pattern persists but at a lower overall level: Low 143, Medium 110, High 94, Ultra 73. Sub points show that the difference from Low to Medium is 33, Medium to High 16, High to Ultra 21. The frame drops become proportionally larger as the pixel count grows, which is consistent with the GPU stress.

At 4K the numbers compresse further: Low 79, Medium 60, High 52, Ultra 40. Here the gap from Low to Medium is 19 FPS, Medium to High first tick 8, and High to Ultra another 12. At 4K, the Medium setting is the boundary between a playable average of 60 FPS and a visually pronounced but not smooth 52.

The min/max data is only available for Medium. At 1080p Medium, frames vary between 143 and 194. At 1440p Medium, 27 to 127, and at 4K Medium between 51 and 70. The absolute range at 1080 is larger (minimum 143, maximum 194), which demonstrates that at lower resolutions GPU headroom sometimes means frames swing widely, depending on scene complexity. At 4K, the range tightens to 51–70, meaning the GPU is consistently near its top load.

Resolution Scaling

The raw FPS values across resolutions show how sensitive this and component is to pixel count. Here is what the dataset that it does to each preset:

• Low: 1080p 219 -> 1440p 143 -> 4K 79. That is a major 140-frame loss from 1080p to 4K.
• Medium: 1080p 169 -> 1440p 110 -> 4K 60. Again, the 1090p to 4K loss is 109 FPS.
• High: 1080p 144 -> 1440p 94 -> 4K 52. Loss of 92 FPS.
• Ultra: 1480p 112 -> 1440p 73 -> 4K 40. Loss of 72 FPS.

The scaling shows that higher resolution is always the strongest variable. But the relative loss of high to 4K is not uniform: it is abso same for Low vs Ultra. In absolute frames, Low loses more (119) than Ultra (72). However, because the Ultra is already at a high level (112), the relative dip from 1080p to 4K for Ultra is almost exactly 70%. Since the 1080p Low baseline has tremendous overhead (219), the GPU can be helped at lower resolutions by very high frame output from the CPU. So the resolution drop is the primary illustration of the GPU being the performance-limiting part when pixel count goes to 4K.

At 1440p, the FPS values are stably above 70 strong except Ultra: 143 Low, 110 Medium, 94 High, 73 Ultra. At 4K, only Low (139) and Medium (60) clear the bare minimum of 60 average. So the step from 1440p to 4K halves the frame rate on a comparable preset (44, 94 to 52, 169 to 60, 110 to 60). This severe drop points to the GPU geometry and fill-rate being the most important factor in moving from a good 1440p experience to a just decent 4K experience.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is present in this equation. It has been architecture Arrow Lake, 20 cores and 20 threads, base clock 3.90 GHz and boost 5.50 GHz. In this 2016 open-world action RPG, the single-core performance is likely the practically relevant one for the engine's logic (not claiming it for game, but the benchmark data shows enough headroom). Its Geekbench single core score is 2713 and Cinebench R23 single-core score is 2020, both strong.

Critically, the CPU appears to be the enabler of the 1080p measurable results. At 1080p Low preset, the combination reaches 219 average FPS. That is far above what a typical display can use, meaning the CPU not the avenue at that resolution. Even at 1080p Ultra the average (112) is still well above 60 and above the typical bias of the GPU. At these 1080p settings, the data suggests the CPU thread can maintain high draw calls and scene updates. At 4K, where the GPU delivers only 40-60 average, it is safe to say the CPU had unlimited headroom.

That the CPU's index 94th percentile may be the reason. When frame rates are at 144 or above, your CPU's 20 threads and 20 (no hyperthreading) still equal 20 threads; the high boost makes each thread fast enough. In contrast, in GPU-heavy settings at 4K, the significance of the stable single-core score goes to no matter.

The only potential concern is hyperthreading not enabled (this CPU has 20 cores/20 cores), but the measured 144p/4K results don't show any obvious processor limitation. The 1080 Low frame rate of 219 indicates that even across single-thread vs multi-thread loads, the CPU is delivering above the 100 FPS no case.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset for 4K on this assembly?

A: The data shows that at 3840x2160 resolution, the Medium preset averages exactly 60 FPS, with a minimum of 51 and maximum of 70. High lowers the average to 52, while Ultra is at 40, so Medium is the preset that matches a 60 FPS target.

Q: Which preset keeps average FPS above 60 at 1440p?

A: All four presets at 2560x1440 have averages above 60: Low 143, Medium 110, High 94, and Ultra 73. Even the Ultra preset stays above 60.

Q: Does the Radeon RX 9070 have enough video memory for The Technomancer?

A: The GPU has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, and all measured presets, including 4K Ultra, completed their runs. Based on the available data, memory capacity was never the limiting factor for this game and combination.

Q: What is the single-thread score of the Core Ultra 7 265K, and what could that indicate for older games?

A: The CPU scores 2020 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 2713 in Geekbench single-core. In this specific game, the measured 1080p Low frame rate of 219 FPS demonstrates that the CPU was not a bottleneck.

Q: How does this CPU+GPU pairing compare to other tested combos?

A: The combination has a rank of 1114 out of 3696 measured system combinations in this game's database. This places it in the middle-upper range of measured setups.

Q: Why is the 1080p Medium frame range (min 143 / max 194) so wide?

A: At 1080p Medium, the GPU is not holding the highest tension line to main; the average is 169 with a minimum of 143 and maximum of 194. The about 50-frame span suggests the scene or camera affects the load more at that preset than at 4K Medium, where the range narrows to 51-70.

Q: What component is the limiting factor in 4K performance?

A: Based on the measured FPS curve, the GPU is the limiting component at 4K. The CPU's high percentile (94th) and 1080p Low ability to reach 219 FPS indicate it can handle the engine's thread load; the GPU average at 4K scales from 79 (Low) to 40 (Ultra), which is characteristic of the GPU's rendering load.