The Technomancer

# Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for The Technomancer with the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT reveals a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo delivers 91 FPS average. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same settings drops that to 60 FPS, a reduction of roughly 34%. Pushing further to 3840x2160 High yields only 33 FPS average, which represents a 64% drop from the 1080p figure. This scaling behavior is typical of a GPU-bound scenario, where the rendering load grows quadratically with pixel count.

The Low settings preset tells a similar story but with steeper relative declines. At 1080p Low, the system produces 139 FPS average. At 1440p Low, it falls to 91 FPS, and at 4K Low, it reaches 50 FPS. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is about 64%, nearly identical to the High preset's decline. This consistency across settings presets suggests that the limiting component is not the CPU — if it were, we would expect to see larger gaps between Low and High settings at the same resolution, since lower graphics settings reduce GPU load and expose CPU bottlenecks. Instead, the data shows that even at Low settings, the GPU is the constraining factor.

Medium settings provide the only rows with minimum and maximum FPS values, offering additional insight into frame pacing. At 4K Medium, the average is 38 FPS with a minimum of 33 and a maximum of 44. At 1440p Medium, the average is 70 FPS with a range of 59 to 80. At 1080p Medium, the average is 107 FPS with a range of 91 to 123. The spread between minimum and maximum FPS is roughly 11-16 FPS across all three resolutions at Medium settings, suggesting that frame times are relatively stable and there are no severe hitches or stutters. This stability implies that the CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU consistently, even with 24 cores available.

The Ultra preset delivers the lowest frame rates across the board: 26 FPS at 4K, 47 FPS at 1440p, and 71 FPS at 1080p. The fact that 1080p Ultra cannot reach 60 FPS average — it sits at 71 FPS — while 1440p High achieves exactly 60 FPS average suggests that Ultra settings impose a significant additional GPU workload compared to High. The gap between High and Ultra at 1080p is 20 FPS (91 to 71), while at 1440p the gap is 13 FPS (60 to 47), and at 4K it is 7 FPS (33 to 26). This narrowing gap at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is becoming progressively more saturated, and the additional cost of Ultra settings is relatively smaller when the baseline workload is already heavy.

What does this scaling pattern indicate about the limiting component? The data strongly points to the GPU as the primary bottleneck. The RX 5700 XT, with its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, appears to be the constraining factor at all resolutions and settings combinations. The CPU, with 24 cores and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, is likely underutilized in this title. The Technomancer is an Action RPG from 2016, and its engine was designed for the hardware of that era, so a modern high-core-count processor should have no trouble keeping up with the GPU's frame output.

FAQ

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

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 139 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only measured configuration that exceeds 120 FPS average, making it the peak performance point in the dataset.

Q: Can this system maintain 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: Yes, but only with specific settings. At 1440p High, the average FPS is exactly 60. At 1440p Medium, it reaches 70 FPS average. However, at 1440p Ultra, the average drops to 47 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High at 1080p?

A: At 1080p, High delivers 91 FPS average while Ultra delivers 71 FPS average. That is a 20 FPS reduction, or roughly 22% lower performance, for the additional visual fidelity of Ultra settings.

Q: What is the combo's ranking among tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 2100 out of 2825 tested combinations for this game. This places it in the lower half of the database, indicating that many other CPU-GPU pairings achieve higher frame rates in The Technomancer.

Q: Are there any resolution and settings combinations where the system struggles to stay playable?

A: At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 26, which is below the commonly accepted 30 FPS playability threshold. At 4K High, the average is 33 FPS, just above that threshold. For smoother gameplay, the data suggests avoiding 4K with high or ultra settings.

Q: Does the GPU's VRAM capacity become a limiting factor?

A: The RX 5700 XT has 8 GB of VRAM, and while the benchmark data does not explicitly show VRAM usage, the significant performance drops at 4K resolution (33 FPS at High, 26 FPS at Ultra) are consistent with the GPU hitting memory bandwidth or capacity limits at higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT achieves a combo rank of 2100 out of 2825 tested combinations in The Technomancer. This percentile placement — roughly the 26th percentile — indicates that this pairing falls well below the median performance tier for this game. The data shows that most tested combinations outperform this setup, which is noteworthy given the CPU's high-end positioning.

The CPU itself holds a 96th percentile ranking among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 84003. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K with a delta of 0.2%, the AMD EPYC 4584PX at 1.1%, and the AMD EPYC 9135 at 1.2%. The only rival that outperforms it is the AMD EPYC 7F72 at -1.3% delta, meaning the 290K Plus is 1.3% ahead of that chip. This puts the CPU in elite company, yet the combo's in-game ranking is poor because the GPU drags the overall performance down.

The GPU, by contrast, holds a 59th percentile ranking among all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 16361. Its nearest rivals are remarkably close: the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M at 0.1% delta, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell at -0.3%, and the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 at -0.3%. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 sits at -0.9%, meaning the RX 5700 XT is 0.9% ahead of that card in synthetic benchmarks. This clustering suggests that the RX 5700 XT is a mid-tier GPU that performs similarly to several professional and workstation cards.

The disconnect between the CPU's top-tier ranking and the combo's bottom-quartile in-game ranking is stark. This suggests that The Technomancer is heavily GPU-bound, and the RX 5700 XT simply cannot deliver the frame rates that the CPU is capable of feeding. The data implies that pairing this CPU with a stronger GPU would dramatically improve the combo's ranking, as the processor has ample headroom for higher frame rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full settings range was measured. Low settings produce an average of 139 FPS, which is the highest number in the entire dataset. Medium settings yield 107 FPS average, with a minimum of 91 and a maximum of 123. High settings deliver 91 FPS average, and Ultra settings produce 71 FPS average. The progression from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a steady decline: 139 to 107 to 91 to 71. This represents a 49% drop from Low to Ultra, indicating that the Ultra preset roughly halves the frame rate compared to the minimum settings.

At 2560x1440, the measured values are 91 FPS at Low, 70 FPS at Medium (with minimum 59 and maximum 80), 60 FPS at High, and 47 FPS at Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra at 1440p is from 91 to 47, a 48% reduction. Interestingly, the 1440p High figure of 60 FPS exactly matches the traditional 60 Hz refresh rate, making this the baseline for smooth gameplay at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the results are 50 FPS at Low, 38 FPS at Medium (with minimum 33 and maximum 44), 33 FPS at High, and 26 FPS at Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra at 4K is from 50 to 26, a 48% reduction. The consistency of this ~48% reduction across all three resolutions is striking — it suggests that the relative cost of Ultra settings over Low is resolution-independent, which is characteristic of a GPU that scales linearly with workload.

Comparing the same settings across resolutions reveals the resolution scaling costs. At Low settings, 1080p gives 139 FPS, 1440p gives 91 FPS, and 4K gives 50 FPS. The jump from 1080p to 1440p costs 48 FPS, while the jump from 1440p to 4K costs 41 FPS. At High settings, 1080p gives 91 FPS, 1440p gives 60 FPS, and 4K gives 33 FPS. The 1080p-to-1440p cost is 31 FPS, and the 1440p-to-4K cost is 27 FPS. At Ultra settings, 1080p gives 71 FPS, 1440p gives 47 FPS, and 4K gives 26 FPS, with costs of 24 FPS and 21 FPS respectively.

The Medium settings rows include minimum and maximum FPS values that offer frame time analysis. At 1080p Medium, the range is 91 to 123 around a 107 average. At 1440p Medium, the range is 59 to 80 around a 70 average. At 4K Medium, the range is 33 to 44 around a 38 average. The min-to-max spread is 32 FPS at 1080p, 21 FPS at 1440p, and 11 FPS at 4K. The narrowing spread at higher resolutions suggests that frame times become more consistent as the GPU becomes the bottleneck, with less variance in rendering time per frame.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, built on a 3 nm process from TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with a TDP of 125 W. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. Its memory bandwidth is rated at 115.2 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5 interface.

The CPU's benchmark scores are impressive: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 and a single-core score of 7303. In Passmark, it achieves 60860 for multithread, 4823 for single-thread, and 214760 for floating-point math. These numbers place the CPU in the 96th percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 84003. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, scores 83807, a delta of 0.2%, meaning the 290K Plus is essentially tied with that chip in synthetic workloads.

In The Technomancer, the CPU's role appears to be secondary given the GPU-bound nature of the workload. The fact that frame rates drop by roughly 48% from Low to Ultra settings at every resolution suggests that the CPU is not struggling to provide draw calls or physics calculations — if it were, the Low settings would show higher frame rates relative to Ultra, since lower settings reduce CPU-side work like draw calls and object counts. Instead, the consistent scaling implies that the CPU has ample headroom.

The 24-core configuration is likely overkill for this 2016 title. The Technomancer's engine would have been designed for the 4-core and 8-thread processors common at its release date. With a boost clock of 5.80 GHz on a single core, the CPU can handle the game's single-threaded legacy code efficiently. The 36 MB of L3 cache provides fast access to frequently used game data, and the 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth ensures that the GPU receives data without stalling. However, none of these CPU advantages can compensate for the GPU's limitations in this title.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the user's resolution and performance targets. At 1920x1080, all settings presets deliver playable frame rates, but the best balance of visual quality and performance appears to be High settings at 91 FPS average. This provides a solid margin above 60 FPS while offering better visuals than Medium (107 FPS) or Low (139 FPS). Ultra at 71 FPS is also acceptable for players who prioritize visual fidelity, but the 20 FPS penalty over High may not be worth the incremental graphical improvements.

At 2560x1440, the data shows that High settings produce exactly 60 FPS average, which is the minimum for smooth gameplay on standard 60 Hz displays. Medium settings at 70 FPS provide more headroom and are recommended for users who want to avoid frame rate dips. Ultra at 47 FPS falls below the 60 FPS threshold and is not recommended for competitive or fast-paced gameplay. Low settings at 91 FPS are viable for players who prioritize frame rate over visuals, but the visual quality reduction may be noticeable.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more constrained. Low settings at 50 FPS average is the only preset that exceeds 30 FPS by a comfortable margin. Medium at 38 FPS is playable but close to the edge, with a minimum of 33 FPS. High at 33 FPS average is borderline, and Ultra at 26 FPS average is below the 30 FPS threshold that most players consider minimally playable. For 4K gaming, the data suggests using Low settings to maintain responsiveness, or Medium if the player can tolerate occasional frame drops near 33 FPS.

The best overall experience, considering all resolutions, appears to be 1080p High at 91 FPS or 1440p Medium at 70 FPS. The 1080p High setting provides a high frame rate with good visuals, while 1440p Medium offers a higher resolution with a still-smooth frame rate. For users with 4K displays, the recommendation is to accept Low settings at 50 FPS, as this is the only configuration that provides a consistently smooth experience at that resolution.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is built on the RDNA 1.0 architecture with the Navi 10 chip, manufactured on a 7 nm process from TSMC. It has 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operations pipelines. The GPU's base clock is 1605 MHz, with a game clock of 1755 MHz and a boost clock of 1905 MHz. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The pixel rate is 121.9 GPixel/s, the texture rate is 304.8 GTexel/s, and the FP32 performance is 9.754 TFLOPS.

The GPU's benchmark results show a Passmark G3D score of 16277 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2134. It achieves 68310 in Geekbench Vulkan and 9524 in Geekbench OpenCL, with a Metal score of 74647. The GPU holds a 59th percentile ranking among all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 16361. Its nearest rivals are all within 0.9% of its score, including the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M at 0.1% delta and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell at -0.3%.

In The Technomancer, the GPU is clearly the limiting component. The evidence is threefold: first, the consistent ~48% performance penalty from Low to Ultra settings at every resolution; second, the dramatic frame rate drops as resolution increases, with 4K delivering roughly 36% of the 1080p frame rate at High settings; third, the combo's low ranking of 2100 out of 2825 despite the CPU's high-end status. All of these observations point to the RX 5700 XT being unable to keep up with the game's graphics demands.

The 8 GB of VRAM may also be a factor at 4K resolution. While the benchmark data does not directly measure VRAM usage, the significant performance degradation at 3840x2160 — where the average FPS at High settings is 33, barely above the playability threshold — is consistent with the GPU approaching its memory capacity limits. The 448.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, while respectable for the GPU's era, may also struggle to feed the rendering pipeline at 4K with high-resolution textures.

The GPU's 1905 MHz boost clock and 9.754 TFLOPS of FP32 performance are modest by current standards, and the data shows that this translates to sub-60 FPS at 1440p Ultra and sub-30 FPS at 4K Ultra. For players seeking higher frame rates in The Technomancer, the data suggests that a more powerful GPU would be necessary, as the CPU has demonstrated through its benchmark scores that it is more than capable of supporting higher performance levels.