The Technomancer

# The Technomancer with Intel Core Ultra X7 368H + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050

This combo ranks 2247th out of 2825 tested combinations for The Technomancer, placing it in the lower-mid portion of the database. That ranking reflects a pairing where the GPU sits at the 66th percentile among all GPUs, while the CPU reaches the 87th percentile among all processors — a notable imbalance that shows up clearly in the measured frame rates. The data suggests this is a system where the graphics card, not the processor, dictates the playable experience.

How This Combo Ranks

At position 2247 out of 2825 combos, this pairing sits in the 21st percentile of tested systems for The Technomancer. That is not a flattering position for a modern mobile platform, but the context matters: the game launched in 2016, and this combo uses current-generation hardware. The ranking implies that The Technomancer's engine is demanding enough — or inefficient enough — that even a recent GPU like the RTX 5050 struggles to push high frame rates at higher settings.

The CPU's own benchmark profile is strong. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28221 and single-core score of 3984 both land well above typical mobile processors, and its overall average benchmark score of 40518 places it at the 87th percentile. Its nearest rivals — the Intel Core 7 253PE at 40557 (-0.1%), Intel Core 5 223PE at 40585 (-0.2%), AMD Ryzen 9 7940H at 40431 (+0.2%), and Intel Xeon 6507P at 40426 (+0.2%) — are all within a fraction of a percent. That means the CPU is not the bottleneck.

The GPU tells a different story. With an average benchmark score of 21035, the RTX 5050 sits at the 66th percentile and trails its nearest rivals: the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL at 21153 (-0.6%), AMD Radeon HD 8970M at 21237 (-1%), and NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile at 21379 (-1.6%). Only the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT at 20713 is slower, by 1.6%. In other words, the GPU is competitive with mid-range parts from several generations ago, which explains why the combo's rank in this game is so modest.

GPU Role

The RTX 5050 brings 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock runs at 2317 MHz with a boost up to 2572 MHz, and memory operates at 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective). The chip is built on TSMC's 5 nm process with 16,900 million transistors on a 149 mm² die. These are modern specifications, but the memory capacity and bus width are modest by current standards.

In The Technomancer, the GPU's role is decisive. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 124 FPS, but that drops to 81 FPS at 1080p High — a 35% reduction from just raising settings. At 4K, the same settings swing from 45 FPS on Low to 29 FPS on High. The pattern is consistent: the RTX 5050 has enough raw compute for low settings at high resolutions, but its 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit interface limit how much headroom remains when texture quality and shading complexity increase.

The GPU's PassMark scores reinforce this interpretation. Its G3D score of 17326 is respectable for a mobile part, but its DirectX 12 score of just 66 and DirectX 11 score of 150 suggest that newer API paths are not where this card excels. For a 2016 game like The Technomancer, which likely relies on older rendering paths, the GPU's compute throughput — 13.17 TFLOPS FP32 — is what matters, and that figure is adequate but not exceptional.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS progression from 1080p to 4K reveals a GPU-bound system. At High settings, average FPS falls from 81 at 1080p to 53 at 1440p (a 35% drop) and then to 29 at 4K (a further 45% drop). The total decline from 1080p to 4K is 64%. At Low settings, the numbers are 124, 81, and 45 FPS respectively — a 64% total drop as well, though the absolute values are higher.

This scaling behavior is classic for a GPU-limited scenario. If the CPU were the constraint, the FPS would stay relatively flat as resolution increases, because the processor's workload would not change. Instead, the data shows a steep decline, meaning the RTX 5050's pixel throughput — 82.30 GPixel/s — is being saturated. The texture rate of 205.8 GTexel/s also comes into play at higher resolutions, where more texels must be sampled per frame.

The Medium settings row provides the only min/max FPS data in the pack: at 1080p Medium, the average is 95 FPS with a minimum of 81 and maximum of 110. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 62 FPS with a minimum of 53 and maximum of 72. At 4K Medium, the average is 34 FPS with a minimum of 29 and maximum of 39. The min-to-max spread widens slightly at higher resolutions (from 29 FPS at 1080p to 10 FPS at 4K), suggesting that frame pacing becomes less consistent when the GPU is under heavier load.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers 124 FPS on Low, 95 FPS on Medium (min 81, max 110), 81 FPS on High, and 64 FPS on Ultra. The step from Low to Medium costs 29 FPS, from Medium to High another 14 FPS, and from High to Ultra a further 17 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 60 FPS — a 48% reduction. Every setting tier is playable at 1080p, with even Ultra staying above 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the numbers are 81 FPS on Low, 62 FPS on Medium (min 53, max 72), 53 FPS on High, and 42 FPS on Ultra. The Low-to-Ultra drop is 39 FPS, a 48% reduction matching the 1080p pattern. Ultra falls below the 60 FPS threshold, and High sits in the 50s, which is acceptable but not ideal for fast-paced action.

At 3840x2160, performance becomes marginal: 45 FPS on Low, 34 FPS on Medium (min 29, max 39), 29 FPS on High, and 23 FPS on Ultra. The Low-to-Ultra reduction is 22 FPS, again roughly 48%. No setting at 4K reaches 60 FPS, and even Low dips below the 48 FPS that many players consider a minimum for smooth gameplay. The 4K Medium minimum of 29 FPS indicates that frame drops can be severe when the scene complexity spikes.

Settings Recommendations

The data points to 1080p Medium as the sweet spot for this combo. It delivers 95 FPS average with a minimum of 81 FPS, which means the frame rate rarely dips below the refresh rate of a standard 60 Hz monitor. The jump from Medium to High costs 14 FPS, bringing the average to 81 FPS — still smooth, but with less headroom for demanding scenes. Ultra at 1080p, at 64 FPS, is playable but leaves little margin.

At 1440p, Medium is the highest playable preset, with a 62 FPS average and 53 FPS minimum. High at 1440p drops to 53 FPS average, which is borderline for a game with combat mechanics. Ultra at 1440p at 42 FPS is likely to feel sluggish, and the 4K results — all below 45 FPS — are only suitable for slower-paced exploration or screenshots.

For players who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity, 1080p Low at 124 FPS offers a high-refresh experience, but the jump to Medium adds only 29 FPS of cost while presumably improving visuals substantially. The Medium row's min/max data (81-110 FPS) shows that even at 1080p, the GPU can produce occasional dips, so Medium provides the best balance of smoothness and quality. At 1440p, Medium is the recommendation if a consistent 60 FPS is required; otherwise, Low at 81 FPS is the safer choice for competitive play.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor based on the Panther Lake architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process. It runs at a 2.00 GHz base clock with a 5.00 GHz boost, and its cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. Memory support is LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus with 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The CPU also integrates Arc B390 graphics, though the discrete RTX 5050 handles The Technomancer's rendering.

The CPU's benchmark results are strong across the board. Its Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 11852 and single-core score of 1673, along with R15 scores of 2844 and 401 respectively, indicate a processor that excels in both multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads. PassMark results show 32956 in multithread, 4005 in single-thread, and high scores in integer math (88083), floating-point math (105681), and data compression (312927). These figures suggest the CPU can easily feed the GPU in most gaming scenarios.

In The Technomancer, the CPU's role is to prepare frames for the GPU, and the resolution scaling data confirms it is not a limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain constant across resolutions; instead, it drops by 64% from 1080p to 4K. The CPU's 87th percentile ranking versus the GPU's 66th percentile underscores this imbalance. The system has more processing headroom than the graphics card can exploit, which is typical for a mobile pairing where the CPU is a high-end part and the GPU is a mid-range one.

FAQ

Q: Is this combo better suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming in The Technomancer?

A: The data shows 1080p Medium at 95 FPS average (min 81, max 110) is the strongest experience, while 1440p Medium at 62 FPS average (min 53, max 72) is also playable. At 4K, even Low only reaches 45 FPS average.

Q: How does the RTX 5050 compare to its closest rivals in raw benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 5050's average benchmark score of 21035 is 1.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20713), but 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21153) and 1% behind the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21237). It trails the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (21379) by 1.6%.

Q: What CPU benchmark scores indicate the processor is not the bottleneck?

A: The Core Ultra X7 368H scores 28221 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3984 in single-core. Its PassMark multithread score is 32956, and it sits at the 87th percentile among all CPUs, which is far above the GPU's 66th percentile.

Q: Why does the FPS drop so much from 1080p to 4K?

A: At High settings, FPS falls from 81 at 1080p to 53 at 1440p to 29 at 4K — a 64% total reduction. This steep decline indicates the GPU's pixel throughput and texture rate are saturated, not the CPU.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded at any setting?

A: The only min FPS values in the data are 81 at 1080p Medium, 53 at 1440p Medium, and 29 at 4K Medium. The 4K Medium minimum of 29 FPS is the lowest recorded frame rate in this dataset.

Q: Does this combo ever reach 60 FPS at 4K?

A: No. The highest 4K average is 45 FPS on Low, followed by 34 FPS on Medium, 29 FPS on High, and 23 FPS on Ultra. None of the 4K settings reach 60 FPS.