The Technomancer

The Technomancer, an Action RPG released in 2016, remains a demanding title for modern hardware, and the combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti produces a varied performance profile across resolutions and settings. This analysis examines the measured FPS data for this specific pairing, interpreting the results in the context of the CPU’s and GPU’s architectural capabilities and their benchmark scores. The data shows that this configuration is capable of high frame rates at 1080p, but its performance scales predictably with resolution, revealing the GPU as the primary bottleneck at higher graphical loads. All figures cited below are drawn directly from the measured FPS dataset and the component specification tables.

FAQ

Q: What is the average frame rate at 1920x1080 with Low settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings is 231 frames per second. This is the highest average FPS recorded across all tested configurations in the dataset.

Q: How does the CPU's multi-core performance compare to its closest rival?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84003, which is 0.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K’s score of 83807. The data indicates a near-identical level of overall performance between these two processors.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded for this system?

A: The lowest average FPS recorded is 43, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings. This represents the most demanding configuration tested.

Q: What is the GPU's memory bandwidth and size?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti features 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 912.4 GB/s. This is a critical factor for high-resolution texture loading.

Q: At which resolution and settings does the system achieve an average FPS between 100 and 120?

A: The system achieves an average FPS of 116 at 2560x1440 with Medium settings and 119 at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings. These are the two data points that fall within that specific range.

Q: How does the GPU's compute performance compare to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070?

A: The RTX 3080 Ti has an average benchmark score of 41187, which is 2% higher than the RTX 5070’s score of 40377. The data shows the older card maintains a slight edge in this aggregate metric.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. Its base clock is 3.70 GHz, with a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, and it carries a TDP of 125 W. The CPU’s cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 36 MB of L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, this processor achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 and a single-core score of 7303, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84003. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, scores 83807, a delta of just 0.2%, indicating that the 290K Plus offers essentially identical aggregate processing power.

In the context of The Technomancer, the CPU’s role is most apparent at lower resolutions where the GPU is not fully saturated. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system reaches 231 FPS, a figure that is unlikely to be limited by the graphics card. The high single-thread performance, evidenced by the 7303-point R23 single-core score, ensures that the game’s primary game logic and draw-call processing can be handled efficiently. The 24 cores and 24 threads provide substantial multi-threaded headroom, but an Action RPG from 2016 is unlikely to leverage all of them effectively. The PassMark multi-thread score of 60860 and the data encryption score of 52563 demonstrate the CPU’s raw throughput capabilities, yet the game’s frame rate at 1080p Low suggests that the CPU is delivering frames faster than the GPU can render them, making the processor the component that sets the upper bound in this specific scenario.

However, the CPU’s influence wanes as resolution increases. The measured FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings drops to 43, a figure that is far below the CPU’s capability ceiling. The benchmark results indicate that the 290K Plus is a top-tier processor, but the data from this game shows that its performance advantage over rivals like the AMD EPYC 4584PX (which scores 83090, 1.1% lower) does not translate into a proportional FPS difference in The Technomancer. The game’s engine appears to be more dependent on the graphics subsystem for high-resolution rendering. The CPU’s 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth and DDR5 support provide a solid foundation for feeding data to the GPU, but the measured frame rates demonstrate that the processor is rarely the limiting factor except at the lowest graphical presets and resolutions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti is built on the Ampere architecture with the GA102 chip, fabricated on Samsung’s 8 nm process. It features 10240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, along with 80 RT cores and 320 Tensor cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1365 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz, with memory running at 19 Gbps effective on a 384-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 912.4 GB/s and a total of 12 GB of GDDR6X VRAM. Its FP32 performance is rated at 34.10 TFLOPS, and the texture rate is 532.8 GTexel/s. In the PassMark G3D benchmark, it scores 26896, and its overall average benchmark score is 41187, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs. Compared to its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070, the 3080 Ti scores 2% higher, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 trails by 0.8%.

The GPU’s role in The Technomancer is defined by the measured FPS scaling across resolutions. At 3840x2160, the highest resolution tested, the average FPS ranges from 83 at Low settings to 43 at Ultra settings. The 12 GB of VRAM is sufficient for 4K textures, but the bandwidth and compute power determine the render times. The 912.4 GB/s memory bandwidth is a key asset, as The Technomancer’s environments can be texture-heavy. The data shows a clear progression: at 4K Low, the GPU is able to produce 83 FPS, but enabling Ultra settings cuts that number nearly in half to 43 FPS. This indicates that the GPU is the dominant component at this resolution, with the CPU providing enough headroom to avoid becoming a bottleneck. The GPU’s DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility are relevant for modern rendering paths, though the game’s 2016 release date suggests it may primarily use older APIs.

At 2560x1440, the GPU’s performance improves significantly, with average FPS ranging from 151 at Low to 77 at Ultra. The step from High (99 FPS) to Ultra (77 FPS) represents a 22% drop, showing the cost of the highest preset. At 1920x1080, the GPU is capable of 231 FPS at Low, but that number falls to 119 at Ultra. The data suggests that at 1080p, the GPU is no longer the sole limiting factor; the CPU’s ability to feed the frame queue becomes relevant, as evidenced by the fact that the 1080p Ultra score of 119 FPS is higher than the 1440p High score of 99 FPS, indicating that resolution scaling is not linear and that the GPU has more headroom at lower pixel counts. The RTX 3080 Ti’s 34.10 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 532.8 GTexel/s texture rate are the raw resources that drive these results, and the data confirms that the GPU is the primary performance driver at resolutions above 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS dataset provides a complete picture of how this CPU-GPU combination performs across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system delivers an average FPS of 231 with Low settings, 178 with Medium, 152 with High, and 119 with Ultra. The Medium preset at 1080p has a recorded minimum FPS of 151 and maximum of 204, indicating some variance but generally smooth performance. The spread between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 112 FPS, showing that the settings preset has a substantial impact on frame rate. At 2560x1440, the average FPS values are 151 for Low, 116 for Medium, 99 for High, and 77 for Ultra. The Medium preset at 1440p shows a minimum of 99 FPS and a maximum of 134 FPS, which is a tighter range than the 1080p Medium results, suggesting that the GPU is under more consistent load. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 74 FPS, a smaller absolute drop than at 1080p but a larger percentage reduction.

At 3840x2160, the performance degrades considerably. The average FPS is 83 at Low, 64 at Medium, 54 at High, and 43 at Ultra. The Medium preset at 4K has a minimum of 54 FPS and a maximum of 73 FPS, which is a notable variance of 19 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 40 FPS, meaning that Ultra settings deliver only 52% of the frame rate of Low settings. This is the most significant relative drop across all resolutions, confirming that the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K. The data shows that the system is capable of producing playable frame rates at 4K with Medium settings (64 FPS), but for a smoother experience, High settings at 1440p (99 FPS) or 1080p (152 FPS) are more appropriate. The lowest average FPS in the entire dataset is 43 at 4K Ultra, which would be considered a challenging experience for a fast-paced action game.

Resolution Scaling

Examining how FPS scales from 1080p to 4K reveals the balance between CPU and GPU load. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 231 at 1080p to 151 at 1440p, a 34.6% reduction, and then to 83 at 4K, a further 45% reduction from the 1440p figure. This steep decline indicates that even at the lowest settings, the GPU is struggling to keep up with the increasing pixel count. The CPU’s high single-thread performance, evidenced by its 4823 PassMark single-thread score, is sufficient to maintain frame rates at 1080p, but the data shows that the GPU’s rendering throughput is the limiting factor as resolution increases. At Ultra settings, the FPS drops from 119 at 1080p to 77 at 1440p (a 35.3% decrease) and then to 43 at 4K (a 44.2% decrease from 1440p). The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings suggests that the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth are the dominant factors in determining performance at higher resolutions.

The data indicates that the CPU is not the primary constraint at 1440p and 4K. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to remain relatively flat as resolution increases, since the CPU’s workload (game logic, physics, draw calls) does not scale with pixel count. Instead, the measured FPS drops dramatically with each resolution step, confirming that the RTX 3080 Ti is the limiting component. At 1080p, however, the CPU’s role becomes more prominent. The fact that the system achieves 231 FPS at Low settings, but only 119 FPS at Ultra settings, while the CPU’s performance remains constant, shows that at 1080p the GPU is still the primary bottleneck, but the CPU is capable of feeding frames faster than the GPU can render them at lower settings. The transition point appears to be around 1440p, where the GPU’s workload begins to dominate, and the CPU’s advantage becomes less relevant. The data supports a clear conclusion: resolution scaling is almost entirely GPU-bound for this configuration.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For a 4K display, the only viable options are Low (83 FPS) or Medium (64 FPS). The Medium preset at 4K provides a more balanced visual experience while maintaining an average FPS above 60, which is a common target for action games. High settings at 4K drop to 54 FPS, which may be acceptable for some players but risks dips below 60, and Ultra is not recommended due to the 43 FPS average. For 2560x1440, the High preset (99 FPS) offers the best compromise between visual fidelity and performance, as it stays comfortably above 60 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1440p (77 FPS) is also playable, but the 22 FPS drop from High suggests that the extra graphical features come at a significant cost. The Medium preset at 1440p (116 FPS) is an option for players who prioritize high frame rates, but the jump to High is only 17 FPS lower and likely provides a noticeably better image.

At 1920x1080, all presets deliver average FPS above 119, making the Ultra setting (119 FPS) the clear recommendation for players with 1080p monitors. The High preset (152 FPS) is also excellent, and the difference between High and Ultra is 33 FPS, which is a larger margin than at other resolutions, suggesting that the Ultra preset at 1080p is particularly demanding on the GPU. For players with high-refresh-rate 1080p displays (144Hz or higher), the Medium preset (178 FPS) or Low preset (231 FPS) would be necessary to fully utilize the monitor’s capabilities. The data shows that the best overall experience for most users would be High settings at 1440p, which provides a high frame rate (99 FPS) with a significant resolution increase over 1080p. Alternatively, Ultra settings at 1080p (119 FPS) offer the highest visual quality within the dataset while still maintaining a triple-digit frame rate. The measured results indicate that this configuration is best suited for 1440p gaming or 1080p gaming at maximum settings, with 4K reserved for Medium settings or lower for those who prioritize frame rate over resolution.