The Technomancer

The Technomancer, an Action RPG from 2016, shows a clear split between CPU and GPU responsibilities when paired with the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile. The CPU is a 24-core, 24-thread Arrow Lake-HX part with a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, built on a TSMC 3 nm process. Its benchmark profile is strong, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35589 and a single-core score of 2204, placing it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. The GPU is a Blackwell 2.0 part with 4608 shading units, 8 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus, and a boost clock of 1425 MHz. Its PassMark G3D score of 20355 places it in the 75th percentile of all GPUs. The measured frame rates across resolutions and settings reveal that this game, released in 2016, is far more taxing on the GPU than the CPU, with the CPU rarely acting as the limiting factor.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX brings substantial processing power to this pairing. With 24 cores and 24 threads, it is a high-core-count mobile processor, and its boost clock of 5.40 GHz ensures strong single-thread performance when needed. The L3 cache is 36 MB shared, and the CPU supports DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU achieves a Geekbench single-core score of 2458 and a multi-core score of 20795, while PassMark single-thread and multithread scores are 4713 and 55759, respectively. The data shows this CPU sits at the 94th percentile versus all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 67469. Its nearest rivals are close: the Intel Xeon w5-3525 scores 67673 (0.3% higher), the AMD EPYC 4484PX scores 67822 (0.5% higher), and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5955WX scores 67868 (0.6% higher). The Intel Xeon 6515P scores 67006, which is 0.7% lower.

For The Technomancer, the CPU role appears secondary. The measured FPS data shows that at 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average frame rate reaches 166 FPS. This high frame rate at a CPU-friendly resolution and low graphical load suggests the processor is more than capable of feeding the GPU. At 2560x1440 Low, the average is 109 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Low, it drops to 60 FPS. The consistent drop as resolution increases points to the GPU becoming the bottleneck, not the CPU. The CPU’s single-core performance, as measured by a Cinebench R15 single-core score of 334, is adequate for the game’s logic, but the game does not appear to leverage the full 24-core capacity. The data implies that even at the lowest settings, the CPU has headroom left, as frame rates are governed by the GPU’s output limits rather than by processor stalls.

The CPU’s integrated graphics, Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, are present but irrelevant here since the discrete RTX 5070 Mobile handles rendering. The CPU’s 3 nm process node and 55 W TDP indicate efficiency, but that does not translate into higher game FPS. Instead, the benchmark results show that the CPU’s role is to maintain a stable platform, which it does admirably, given that even the 4K Low result of 60 FPS is likely limited by the GPU’s pixel throughput. The fact that the CPU ranks in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 75th percentile, further suggests an imbalance in this specific game where the CPU is overqualified for the workload presented.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile is the primary driver of frame rates in The Technomancer. It features 8 GB of GDDR7 memory with a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s. The base clock is 907 MHz, with a boost clock of 1425 MHz, and the memory runs at 1500 MHz with 24 Gbps effective speed. The GPU has 144 texture mapping units and 48 raster output pipelines, with a pixel rate of 68.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 205.2 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance is 13.13 TFLOPS. In synthetic benchmarks, the GPU scores 122238 in Geekbench OpenCL and 116960 in Geekbench Vulkan, while PassMark G3D is 20355 and PassMark GPU Compute is 8279. The GPU sits in the 75th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29928. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti at 29945 (0.1% higher), the RTX 2080 Ti at 29783 (0.5% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 6800 at 30095 (0.6% higher), and the AMD Radeon RX 6700 at 30433 (1.7% higher).

The GPU’s role is dominant in this game. At 1080p High, the average FPS is 109, but at 4K High, it falls to 39 FPS. This steep decline is directly tied to the GPU’s rendering workload. The 8 GB VRAM is a notable factor; The Technomancer, despite its 2016 release, appears to use significant memory at higher resolutions and settings. The data shows that at 4K Ultra, the average FPS is only 31, which indicates the GPU is severely strained. The boost clock of 1425 MHz is modest compared to the CPU’s boost, but the GPU’s performance is more dependent on memory bandwidth and shader count. The 128-bit bus and 384.0 GB/s bandwidth may become a limiting factor at 4K, where the demand for texture and geometry data outpaces what the bus can deliver. The measured results support this: moving from 1080p to 4K at the same High settings drops FPS from 109 to 39, a reduction of 70 FPS, which is a larger absolute drop than what a CPU bottleneck would produce.

The GPU’s percentile rank of 75th is lower than the CPU’s 94th, reinforcing that the GPU is the weaker link in this combo for this title. The GPU’s nearest rival, the RTX 3070 Ti, is nearly identical in average score, but the RTX 5070 Mobile’s 8 GB VRAM capacity might be a concern for texture-heavy scenes. The data suggests that the GPU is capable at 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, it falls below the 60 FPS threshold even at Medium settings, where the average is 46 FPS. The GPU’s role is clear: it sets the ceiling for performance, and the CPU rarely interferes with that ceiling.

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

The resolution scaling data reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 166, which is exceptionally high. Moving to 1440p Low, the average drops to 109 FPS, a 34.3% reduction. Moving to 4K Low, the average falls to 60 FPS, a 44.9% reduction from 1440p. These percentage drops are consistent with a GPU that is increasingly taxed by pixel count. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions because the CPU workload does not change with resolution. Instead, the data shows a linear decline, which is the signature of GPU limitation.

At High settings, the scaling is even more pronounced. 1080p High yields 109 FPS, 1440p High drops to 71 FPS (a 34.9% drop), and 4K High falls to 39 FPS (a 45.1% drop from 1440p). The consistency of these percentages across Low and High settings indicates that the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth are the primary constraints. The 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit bus are likely contributors, as higher resolutions require more memory bandwidth for frame buffer operations. The Medium settings data includes min and max FPS values, which show the variance. At 1080p Medium, the average is 128 FPS with min 108 and max 147. At 1440p Medium, the average is 83 FPS with min 71 and max 96. At 4K Medium, the average is 46 FPS with min 39 and max 53. The min FPS values at each resolution are roughly 80% of the average, indicating occasional dips but no severe stuttering.

The limiting component is unambiguously the GPU. The CPU’s high single-core and multi-core scores do not manifest in higher FPS at lower resolutions beyond what the GPU can output. At 1080p Low, the 166 FPS average is likely near the GPU’s maximum output for that setting, not a CPU limitation. If the CPU were the limit, the FPS would be similar across resolutions, but the data shows a steep decline. This suggests that for The Technomancer, the RTX 5070 Mobile’s 13.13 TFLOPS and 384.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for 4K Ultra (31 FPS) but adequate for 1080p Ultra (85 FPS). The resolution scaling analysis points to a GPU bottleneck that intensifies with pixel count, making the CPU’s role secondary in this specific title.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile ranks 2040 out of 3696 tested combos in The Technomancer. This places it in the 44.8th percentile of all tested combinations, meaning roughly 55% of combos perform better. This rank is lower than what the individual component percentiles might suggest. The CPU alone is in the 94th percentile, and the GPU is in the 75th percentile, but the combo’s rank is below the midpoint. This discrepancy indicates that the game’s performance is heavily weighted toward the GPU, and the CPU’s strength does not compensate for the GPU’s relative weakness in this title.

The combo rank of 2040 suggests that many other CPU-GPU pairings achieve higher frame rates, likely due to more powerful GPUs. The RTX 5070 Mobile’s nearest rivals, such as the RTX 3070 Ti and RTX 2080 Ti, are desktop-class cards with similar benchmark scores, but the mobile form factor and 50 W TDP may limit sustained performance. The data shows that the combo is not a top-tier performer for this game, but it is also not at the bottom. The rank of 2040 out of 3696 means it outperforms 1656 combos, which is a solid mid-pack result. However, for a CPU that ranks in the 94th percentile, the combo rank is disappointing, reinforcing that the GPU is the limiting factor.

The benchmark results indicate that the combo’s performance is dictated by the GPU’s 75th percentile standing. If the CPU were paired with a higher-ranked GPU, the combo rank would likely improve substantially. The data implies that the CPU has headroom, as its benchmarks are far above the game’s requirements, but the GPU’s scores are merely adequate. The combo rank of 2040 is a data point that reflects the balance of the pairing, and in this case, the balance is skewed toward the CPU being underutilized. The game’s 2016 release date also matters; it likely does not use multi-core CPUs effectively, so the 24-core CPU provides no benefit over a 6-core part in this title, while the GPU’s raw rasterization power is what matters.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, all settings are playable. Low yields 166 FPS, Medium yields 128 FPS, High yields 109 FPS, and Ultra yields 85 FPS. For a 60 FPS target, any setting works, but for a high-refresh-rate display, Low or Medium is preferable. The data shows that High at 1080p provides a 109 FPS average, which is smooth, but Ultra drops to 85 FPS, sacrificing 24 FPS for marginal visual gains. The best experience at 1080p is likely High, as it balances visual quality with a frame rate well above 60 FPS, while Medium offers 128 FPS for those prioritizing smoothness.

At 2560x1440, the options narrow. Low yields 109 FPS, Medium yields 83 FPS, High yields 71 FPS, and Ultra yields 56 FPS. For a 60 FPS target, High is the highest setting that maintains an average above 60 FPS. Ultra falls below 60 FPS, which may result in noticeable stutter. Medium at 83 FPS provides headroom, and High at 71 FPS is also acceptable. The data suggests that High is the best choice at 1440p, as it offers a good balance, while Ultra should be avoided due to the 56 FPS average. Low is overly conservative for this resolution, as 109 FPS is far above the target.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is severely limited. Low yields 60 FPS, Medium yields 46 FPS, High yields 39 FPS, and Ultra yields 31 FPS. Only Low achieves a 60 FPS average, and it does so exactly at the threshold. Medium is the next step, but at 46 FPS, it is below 60 FPS. For 4K, the data indicates that Low is the only playable preset for a smooth experience, but Medium may be acceptable for those tolerant of lower frame rates. The 4K Medium data shows min 39 and max 53, which means frame times will vary. The best experience at 4K is Low, as it is the only setting that meets the 60 FPS mark, while Medium offers better visuals but sacrifices smoothness. Overall, the recommendation is to use High at 1080p and 1440p, and Low at 4K, based on the measured averages.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: The average FPS at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 85 FPS.

Q: Does this combo maintain 60 FPS at 4K?

A: Only at Low settings does the combo achieve a 60 FPS average at 3840x2160. Medium yields 46 FPS, High yields 39 FPS, and Ultra yields 31 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival in benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX has an average benchmark score of 67469, which is 0.3% lower than the Intel Xeon w5-3525 (67673) and 0.7% higher than the Intel Xeon 6515P (67006).

Q: What is the GPU’s memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile has a memory bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s, using 8 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested combinations?

A: The combo ranks 2040 out of 3696 tested combos in The Technomancer.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1440p High?

A: At 2560x1440 High, the average FPS is 71. Given the CPU’s high benchmark scores, the GPU is the limiting factor, as the frame rate drops significantly with resolution increases.

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

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS varies by preset. Low settings produce an average of 166 FPS. Medium settings produce an average of 128 FPS, with a minimum of 108 FPS and a maximum of 147 FPS. High settings produce an average of 109 FPS. Ultra settings produce an average of 85 FPS. The data shows a clear progression: each step up in settings costs roughly 20-30 FPS, with Ultra being the most demanding.

At 2560x1440, the averages are lower. Low settings yield 109 FPS. Medium settings yield 83 FPS, with a minimum of 71 FPS and a maximum of 96 FPS. High settings yield 71 FPS. Ultra settings yield 56 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 53 FPS, showing that the GPU’s workload increases significantly with settings at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the averages are the lowest. Low settings yield 60 FPS. Medium settings yield 46 FPS, with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. High settings yield 39 FPS. Ultra settings yield 31 FPS. The 4K results show that only Low meets a 60 FPS target, and Medium’s minimum of 39 FPS indicates potential stuttering. The data for Medium settings includes min and max values at each resolution, providing insight into frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the range is 108-147 FPS; at 1440p Medium, it is 71-96 FPS; and at 4K Medium, it is 39-53 FPS. These ranges show that the variance is proportionally similar across resolutions, but the absolute values scale down with pixel count.