The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents an interesting test for modern hardware combinations, and the pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 produces a dataset that clearly separates CPU-bound and GPU-bound scenarios. The measured FPS across three resolutions and four quality presets reveals a system that is overwhelmingly capable at mainstream 1080p and 1440p, while 4K Ultra demands more than this GPU can consistently deliver. This analysis breaks down the contribution of each component, the optimal settings for playability, and how this specific combo ranks among the thousands of configurations tested on this benchmark database.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread desktop processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with a TDP of 125 W. The cache hierarchy is substantial: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR5 over a dual-channel interface, providing 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The processor also integrates Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, though this game’s testing would rely on the discrete GeForce RTX 4070 for rendering.

The CPU’s benchmark profile is excellent. In Cinebench R23, it scores 51,731 points in multi-core and 7,303 points in single-core. PassMark multi-thread performance is 60,860, with single-thread at 4,823. The average benchmark score for this CPU is 84,003, placing it in the 96th percentile among all CPUs tested. Its nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (average score 83,807, a 0.2% difference), the AMD EPYC 4584PX (83,090, 1.1% higher), and the AMD EPYC 9135 (82,980, 1.2% higher). The only rival that beats it is the AMD EPYC 7F72 with an average score of 85,072, which is 1.3% ahead. These margins are tiny, meaning the 290K Plus sits at the very top of the CPU performance hierarchy.

For The Technomancer, a game that is not particularly demanding on modern processors, the 24 cores and high boost clock provide massive headroom. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 233 FPS average, which suggests the CPU is not a limiting factor at that resolution. Even at 1080p Ultra, the average FPS is 119, still far above the 60 FPS threshold. The game’s engine, released in 2016, likely cannot utilize all 24 threads effectively, but the high single-thread performance of 7,303 in Cinebench R23 ensures that any legacy single-threaded bottlenecks are minimized. The data shows that as resolution increases, the FPS drops, which indicates the CPU is doing its job by feeding the GPU enough frames at lower resolutions. The CPU’s role here is to provide a stable platform with zero bottlenecking, allowing the GPU to be the primary determinant of performance at higher settings.

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

Looking at the measured FPS rows, the most balanced experience across all resolutions is the Medium preset. At 1920x1080, Medium yields an average of 179 FPS, with a minimum of 152 FPS and a maximum of 206 FPS. This is a huge margin above the 60 FPS standard, and even the minimum is over 150 FPS. At 2560x1440, Medium drops to 117 FPS average, with a minimum of 99 FPS and a maximum of 134 FPS. The minimum of 99 FPS is still comfortably above 60, and the average is nearly double. At 3840x2160, Medium provides 64 FPS average, with a minimum of 55 FPS and a maximum of 74 FPS. The minimum dips below 60, but the average is above, making it the only preset at 4K that achieves an average above 60 FPS.

The High preset is also viable but shows a clear step down. At 1080p, High averages 153 FPS; at 1440p, it averages 100 FPS; and at 4K, it averages just 55 FPS. The 4K High result is below the 60 FPS threshold, which means it is not ideal for a smooth experience on a 60 Hz display. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, with 119 FPS at 1080p, 78 FPS at 1440p, and only 43 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is unplayable for most users, as it falls far below the 60 FPS target. The Low preset is the only one that delivers consistently high frame rates at 4K, averaging 84 FPS, but it sacrifices visual quality.

Given these numbers, the best experience for the majority of users is the Medium preset. It provides the highest average FPS that remains above 60 at 4K, and it offers massive frame rates at 1080p and 1440p. The minimum FPS values for Medium are also reported (152 at 1080p, 99 at 1440p, 55 at 4K), which shows that even the worst-case frame times are acceptable at lower resolutions. For users with high-refresh-rate monitors at 1080p or 1440p, the High preset is also a strong choice, as it maintains averages above 100 FPS at both resolutions. However, for 4K displays, Medium is the clear recommendation, as High and Ultra both dip below the playable threshold. The data suggests that the Medium preset is the sweet spot for this combo, balancing visual fidelity with performance.

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

The measured FPS data shows a clear and consistent drop as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, which is a classic sign of GPU-bound performance. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 233 at 1080p, to 152 at 1440p, to 84 at 4K. That is a 65% drop from 1080p to 4K. At Medium settings, the averages are 179 at 1080p, 117 at 1440p, and 64 at 4K, a 64% drop. At High settings, the averages are 153 at 1080p, 100 at 1440p, and 55 at 4K, a 64% drop. At Ultra settings, the averages are 119 at 1080p, 78 at 1440p, and 43 at 4K, a 64% drop.

The consistency of the percentage drop across all settings is striking. This indicates that the limiting component is the GPU, not the CPU. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is so powerful that it can deliver the same frame rate to the GPU at all resolutions, and the GPU is the one that struggles to keep up as pixel count increases. The fact that the FPS scales almost linearly with the number of pixels (1080p has about 2 million pixels, 4K has about 8.3 million, so a 4x increase should drop FPS by roughly 75% if purely GPU-bound) is close to what we see: the FPS drops to about 35-36% of the 1080p value at 4K for most settings. For example, at High, 153 FPS at 1080p drops to 55 FPS at 4K, which is 36% of the original. This is slightly better than the theoretical 25% because the GPU may have some headroom at lower resolutions, but it strongly confirms that the RTX 4070 is the bottleneck.

The CPU’s role in this scaling is to be essentially invisible. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would see the FPS at 1080p and 4K converge, as the GPU would be underutilized at lower resolutions. Instead, the FPS drops by roughly the same percentage regardless of quality setting, which means the CPU is always supplying enough frames. The 24-core processor with a 5.80 GHz boost clock is far beyond what The Technomancer requires, so the scaling is purely a function of the GPU’s pixel throughput. This is a textbook example of GPU-bound scaling, where the CPU’s performance is irrelevant to the frame rate at higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the benchmark database, this specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 ranks 614th out of 2,825 tested combos for The Technomancer. This puts it in the top 22% of all configurations tested. The rank is based on the measured FPS across all resolutions and settings, and it shows that this combo is strong but not at the very top. The top combos likely feature higher-end GPUs like the RTX 4090 or RTX 4080, which would push 4K Ultra above 60 FPS, whereas this combo cannot.

The rank of 614 out of 2,825 is respectable, but it is important to contextualize it. The CPU is one of the best available, sitting in the 96th percentile, but the GPU is in the 81st percentile among all GPUs. The GPU is the weaker link, and that drags the combo down in the rankings. Combos with the same CPU but a faster GPU would rank much higher. Combos with a slower CPU but the same GPU would likely rank similarly, since the game is GPU-bound. The data shows that the combo’s rank is primarily determined by the GPU’s performance, not the CPU’s. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 37,648, which is close to its nearest rivals: the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (37,628, 0.1% slower), the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37,507, 0.4% slower), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (38,135, 1.3% faster). The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 is 1.3% slower at 37,157. These tiny deltas suggest that the RTX 4070 is a mid-range GPU, and its rank in the 81st percentile reflects that.

For a game like The Technomancer, which is not graphically intensive by modern standards, a mid-range GPU can still provide good frame rates at 1080p and 1440p. The rank of 614 out of 2,825 indicates that many combos with slower CPUs but faster GPUs will outperform this one at 4K, where the GPU matters most. However, at 1080p and 1440p, this combo is likely near the top, as the CPU’s high single-thread performance ensures no bottleneck. The overall rank is a weighted average across all settings, so the 4K results pull it down. Still, being in the top 22% of all tested combos is a solid result, and it shows that this pairing is well-balanced for most gaming scenarios.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 is an Ada Lovelace architecture GPU, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It features 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, with a memory bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s. The core clock is 1920 MHz base and 2475 MHz boost, with memory running at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). The GPU has 5,888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. It also has 46 ray tracing cores and 184 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 158.4 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 455.4 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 29.15 TFLOPS. The GPU’s TDP is 200 W, and it uses a dual-slot design with a 16-pin power connector, requiring a 550 W power supply.

For The Technomancer, the GPU’s role is the primary determinant of frame rate, as evidenced by the resolution scaling analysis. The 12 GB of VRAM is more than enough for a 2016 game, even at 4K Ultra, as the game’s textures are not memory-hungry by modern standards. The memory bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s is also sufficient for the game’s requirements. The GPU’s benchmark scores are solid: PassMark G3D score is 26,927, and Geekbench OpenCL is 154,858. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 3,854. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 37,648, placing it in the 81st percentile.

The GPU’s performance in this game is directly tied to its fill rate and shader throughput. At 1080p Low, the GPU can push 233 FPS, which is near the peak of what the CPU can feed. At 4K Ultra, it drops to 43 FPS, which is a clear indication that the GPU is overwhelmed by the pixel count. The 29.15 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is not enough to maintain 60 FPS at 4K Ultra in this game, especially with the game’s engine overhead. The 64 ROPs and 158.4 GPixel/s pixel rate also limit performance at high resolutions. The data shows that the RTX 4070 is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it delivers excellent frame rates, but it struggles at 4K with high presets.

The GPU’s nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (0.1% faster), AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (0.4% faster), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (1.3% faster). The fact that a mobile GPU (RTX 4080 Mobile) is faster than the desktop RTX 4070 is notable, but the delta is small. The GPU’s role in this combo is to provide the frame rate, and it does so admirably at lower resolutions. The 12 GB VRAM is a future-proofing feature, but for this game, it is not a limiting factor. The GPU’s clock speeds and architecture are more than adequate for The Technomancer’s needs, and the bottleneck is purely the pixel fill rate at 4K.

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

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across all three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 233 FPS, which is the highest recorded in the dataset. The Medium preset at 1080p averages 179 FPS, with a minimum of 152 FPS and a maximum of 206 FPS. The High preset averages 153 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 119 FPS. All 1080p results are far above the 60 FPS threshold, and even the lowest average (119 FPS at Ultra) is nearly double the standard. The minimum FPS at 1080p Medium is 152, which means that even in the most demanding scenes, the frame rate never drops below 152 FPS. This makes 1080p an excellent resolution for high-refresh-rate monitors, with the Ultra preset still providing over 100 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 152 FPS. The Medium preset averages 117 FPS, with a minimum of 99 FPS and a maximum of 134 FPS. The High preset averages 100 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 78 FPS. The 1440p results are also strong, with all presets above 60 FPS. The Ultra preset at 78 FPS is still smooth, and the Medium preset’s minimum of 99 FPS ensures no noticeable stutters. The Low preset at 152 FPS is ideal for 144 Hz monitors, and the High preset at 100 FPS is perfect for 100 Hz displays. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 74 FPS, which shows the visual quality impact of the preset, but even the worst case (Ultra) is above 75 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 84 FPS. The Medium preset averages 64 FPS, with a minimum of 55 FPS and a maximum of 74 FPS. The High preset averages 55 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 43 FPS. The 4K results are the only ones where the combo struggles. The Low preset is the only one that provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS, with 84 FPS. The Medium preset’s average of 64 FPS is just above 60, but the minimum of 55 FPS means that some scenes will dip below the threshold. The High preset at 55 FPS is borderline, and the Ultra preset at 43 FPS is not playable for most users. The data shows that 4K requires either Low or Medium settings for a smooth experience, and even then, the minimum FPS at Medium (55) is not ideal for a 60 Hz display.

The full breakdown shows a clear pattern: the combo is excellent at 1080p and 1440p across all settings, and it is only at 4K that the GPU becomes a limiting factor. The Medium preset is the most balanced choice for 4K, as it is the only preset that maintains an average above 60 FPS. The High and Ultra presets at 4K are not recommended, as they fall below 60 FPS. The Low preset at 4K is the best for pure performance, but it sacrifices visual quality. The measured FPS values also show that the game’s engine scales well with resolution, with consistent drops from 1080p to 1440p to 4K, confirming the GPU-bound nature of the workload.