The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents an interesting case study in system scaling. When paired with the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 9060, the measured frame rates reveal a configuration that is heavily influenced by the graphics card, especially at higher resolutions. The data shows a clear hierarchy of performance that shifts depending on both resolution and quality preset, making it a useful example for understanding the balance between a high-end CPU and a mid-range GPU in an older title.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a dramatic and predictable decline as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 157 FPS. This number drops to 102 FPS at 1440p and further down to 56 FPS at 4K. This represents a 64% reduction in frame rate from 1080p to 4K at the Low preset. The pattern is consistent across all settings, but the percentage drop is steepest at the highest quality levels.

For instance, moving from 1080p to 1440p on the Ultra preset sees the average FPS fall from 80 to 52, a 35% decrease. The same resolution jump on High settings results in a 35% drop from 103 FPS to 67 FPS. However, the most punishing scaling occurs between 1440p and 4K. At Ultra settings, the average FPS plummets from 52 to 29, a 44% reduction. This steep decline at 4K strongly suggests that the AMD Radeon RX 9060 is the primary limiting component, as the pixel count increase places an enormous load on the GPU's rendering pipeline.

The data implies that the graphics card's 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus are being saturated at 4K, particularly on higher presets. The gap between Low and Medium at 4K is only 13 FPS (56 vs 43), but the gap between Medium and High is 6 FPS (43 vs 37), and High to Ultra is another 8 FPS (37 vs 29). This non-linear scaling indicates that the GPU is running out of memory bandwidth or raw compute power as the settings increase, making the 4K resolution a significant challenge for this combination. The CPU, with its 24 cores and high boost clock, appears to have ample headroom at 4K, as the frame rate is likely constrained by the GPU's ability to fill pixels, not the CPU's ability to issue draw calls.

How This Combo Ranks

In the context of all tested hardware combinations for The Technomancer, this pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 9060 ranks at 1632 out of 2825 combos. This places it in the 58th percentile, meaning it performs better than a majority of tested systems but is far from the top tier. This ranking is a direct consequence of the GPU's performance class; the RX 9060's average benchmark score of 16014 places it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, which aligns closely with the combo's overall position.

The CPU, in contrast, is a top-tier performer. Its average benchmark score of 84003 places it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, and it sits just 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K. This massive disparity in CPU and GPU percentile rankings is a strong indicator of a bottleneck. The data suggests that the Ultra 9 290K Plus is capable of driving much higher frame rates, but the RX 9060 is holding the system back, particularly at lower resolutions where the CPU's influence is more pronounced.

At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 157 FPS, which is a high frame rate but likely not the maximum the CPU could deliver in a less GPU-bound scenario. The combination's rank of 1632 suggests that many other systems, likely with more powerful GPUs, achieve significantly better performance. This is not a reflection of a weak CPU, but rather proof of how a mid-range GPU can cap the potential of a flagship processor in a game like The Technomancer.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience for this hardware combination depends heavily on the user's target resolution and refresh rate. For 1080p gaming, the High preset at 103 FPS offers an excellent balance of visual fidelity and smoothness, easily clearing the 60 FPS threshold and providing a responsive experience. The Ultra preset at 80 FPS is also viable for users who prioritize maximum image quality, as it remains comfortably above 60 FPS.

At 1440p, the Medium preset at 79 FPS is the recommended starting point, as it provides a solid frame rate that is well-suited for most displays. The High preset at 67 FPS is also a strong choice, offering better visuals while still maintaining a playable frame rate. The Ultra preset at 52 FPS is playable but may feel less smooth in fast-paced combat sequences. For 4K, the data suggests that the Low preset at 56 FPS is the only setting that provides a consistently playable experience, as Medium drops to 43 FPS and High falls to 37 FPS.

The data indicates that the Low preset at 1080p, with 157 FPS, is the only configuration that can fully utilize a 144Hz or 165Hz monitor. For users with standard 60Hz displays, the High preset at 1080p or Medium at 1440p will provide the best visual-to-performance ratio. The Ultra preset is generally not recommended at 4K, as the 29 FPS average is below the threshold for smooth gameplay. The measured minimum FPS values for Medium settings (37 FPS at 4K, 67 FPS at 1440p, 102 FPS at 1080p) also suggest that this preset can experience noticeable frame drops, making the High or Low presets more stable choices in demanding scenes.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The full set of measured frame rates provides a detailed look at the system's performance envelope. At 1920x1080, the average FPS scales from 157 on Low, to 120 on Medium, 103 on High, and 80 on Ultra. The Medium preset shows a minimum FPS of 102 and a maximum of 138, indicating a variance of 36 FPS. This suggests that while the average is high, there are moments of significant frame pacing variation.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average FPS drops to 102 on Low, 79 on Medium, 67 on High, and 52 on Ultra. The Medium preset’s minimum FPS is 67, which is a 15 FPS drop from its average, showing that the GPU is under more strain at this resolution. At 3840x2160, the averages fall further to 56 on Low, 43 on Medium, 37 on High, and 29 on Ultra. The Medium preset at 4K has a minimum FPS of 37, which is barely above the High preset's average, highlighting the severe performance penalty of 4K rendering.

These numbers reveal a consistent pattern: the gap in average FPS between Low and Ultra widens as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference is 77 FPS (157 vs 80). At 1440p, it is 50 FPS (102 vs 52). At 4K, it narrows to 27 FPS (56 vs 29). This narrowing gap is a clear sign of a GPU bottleneck. At 1080p, the CPU can still feed the GPU enough data to make settings matter significantly. At 4K, the GPU is so overwhelmed by the pixel workload that the relative cost of different settings is smaller, and the overall frame rate is primarily determined by the GPU's raw fill rate.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play The Technomancer with this hardware for a 60Hz display?

A: The data shows that 1440p on High settings (67 FPS) or 1080p on Ultra settings (80 FPS) are the highest quality options that consistently stay above 60 FPS. 4K is not recommended for 60Hz, as the Low preset only manages 56 FPS.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus the reason for the lower frame rates at 4K?

A: No. The CPU's benchmark scores are in the 96th percentile, but the GPU is in the 59th percentile. The steep FPS drop at 4K, where the average falls to 37 on High, indicates the AMD Radeon RX 9060 is the limiting component due to the massive pixel workload.

Q: How does this system compare to other tested combinations?

A: This combo ranks 1632 out of 2825, placing it in the top 58% of tested systems. This is a mid-tier result, driven primarily by the GPU's performance class rather than the high-end CPU.

Q: How much of a performance difference is there between the Low and Ultra presets at 1080p?

A: The measured average FPS is 157 for Low and 80 for Ultra, a difference of 77 FPS. This shows that the Low preset nearly doubles the frame rate compared to Ultra at 1080p.

Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this combination?

A: The maximum measured average FPS is 157, achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low settings preset. This is the only configuration that exceeds 144 FPS.

Q: Is the Ultra preset ever playable at 4K?

A: The data shows an average FPS of 29 at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings. This is below the 30 FPS threshold often considered the minimum for playability, indicating it is not a smooth experience.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a formidable processor with 24 cores and 24 threads, a base clock of 3.70 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. Its benchmark results are exceptional, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 51731 and a single-core score of 7303. These results place it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, and its average benchmark score is 84003, which is 0.2% higher than its closest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K.

In the context of The Technomancer, this CPU provides a massive amount of headroom. The game's performance data, particularly the sharp FPS drops at higher resolutions, suggests that the CPU is rarely the bottleneck. At 1080p with Low settings, the 157 FPS result shows the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with a high volume of frames, but the GPU's limitations become apparent as resolution increases. The CPU's high single-thread performance is beneficial for game logic and draw calls, but the data indicates that the GPU's pixel throughput is the deciding factor in this configuration.

The 36 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support provide ample bandwidth for the CPU to operate without stalling. The Cinebench R20 multicore score of 21727 and Passmark multithread score of 60860 further solidify its position as a top-tier processor. However, its role in this specific game is to remain underutilized, waiting on the GPU to complete its rendering tasks. The data implies that the CPU's performance is more than sufficient for this title, and any frame rate limitations are directly attributable to the graphics card.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is the clear performance limiter in this pairing. With 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth, it is a mid-range card by modern standards. Its boost clock of 2990 MHz and game clock of 2400 MHz are high, but the 1792 shading units and 64 ROPs are the physical constraints that govern its fill rate. The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 59th percentile, with an average score of 16014, putting it just 0.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti.

The measured FPS data directly reflects these specifications. At 1080p, the GPU can maintain high frame rates, but the 128-bit memory bus becomes a bottleneck at higher resolutions and settings. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for 1080p but is likely a limiting factor at 4K with High or Ultra textures, which can consume more than 8 GB. The Passmark G3D score of 17631 and 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 3322 are indicative of its mid-range performance tier.

The GPU's pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 334.9 GTexel/s are the theoretical maximums, but real-world performance is lower, as shown in the game's benchmarks. The RDNA 4.0 architecture and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate are modern features, but they cannot overcome the physical limitations of the memory bus and VRAM size. In The Technomancer, the RX 9060 is the component that dictates the playable settings, struggling to maintain 60 FPS at 1440p on Ultra and falling below 40 FPS at 4K on High. This GPU is the reason the combo ranks at 1632, as its performance is in line with its 59th percentile standing among all GPUs.