The Technomancer

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for The Technomancer with the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile shows a clear progression as resolution increases. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo delivers 109 FPS average. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same settings drops performance to 71 FPS, a reduction of 38 FPS or roughly 35%. The jump to 3840x2160 is even more demanding, with the average falling to 39 FPS. That is a 70 FPS gap between 1080p and 4K at High settings, which translates to a 64% loss in frame rate.

The pattern across all settings presets is consistent. At Low settings, the combo produces 166 FPS at 1080p, 109 FPS at 1440p, and 60 FPS at 4K. Medium settings show 128 FPS, 83 FPS, and 46 FPS respectively. Ultra settings are the most punishing: 85 FPS at 1080p, 56 FPS at 1440p, and only 31 FPS at 4K. The scaling from 1440p to 4K is particularly steep — at Medium settings, the drop from 83 FPS to 46 FPS represents a 45% reduction. This indicates that the RTX 5070 Mobile is the primary limiting component at higher resolutions.

The GPU's specifications support this interpretation. The RTX 5070 Mobile has 8 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The pixel rate is 68.40 GPixel/s and texture rate is 205.2 GTexel/s. At 4K resolution, the sheer number of pixels being pushed overwhelms these resources. The data shows that 4K Ultra is effectively unplayable at 31 FPS, while 4K Low just barely hits 60 FPS. The 1080p results, by contrast, show headroom — even Ultra settings maintain 85 FPS, and Low settings reach 166 FPS.

The min FPS data available for Medium settings reinforces the pattern. At 4K Medium, the minimum frame rate is 39 FPS with a maximum of 53 FPS, showing significant variance. At 1440p Medium, the range is 71 to 96 FPS. At 1080p Medium, the range is 108 to 147 FPS. The spread between min and max grows larger at lower resolutions, which suggests that CPU-side frame pacing becomes more relevant when the GPU is less saturated. The Core Ultra X7 368H, with 16 cores and 16 threads, has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz and an L3 cache of 18 MB shared, which appears sufficient to feed the GPU at 1080p but becomes less consequential as resolution climbs.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile ranks 2040 out of 3696 tested combos in The Technomancer. That places it in the 45th percentile of all tested system pairings, meaning roughly 55% of combinations deliver better performance in this specific game. This is a mid-pack result, and the data suggests the ranking is dragged down by the GPU's limitations at higher resolutions rather than the CPU's capabilities.

The CPU itself sits in the 87th percentile against all processors in general benchmark scores. Its average benchmark score is 40518, which places it very close to several rivals. The Intel Core 7 253PE scores 40557, a delta of -0.1%. The Intel Core 5 223PE scores 40585, a delta of -0.2%. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940H scores 40431, a delta of 0.2%. The Intel Xeon 6507P scores 40426, a delta of 0.2%. These differences are negligible — the Core Ultra X7 368H is effectively tied with all four nearest rivals in raw CPU performance. In multi-threaded workloads like Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 28221, and in single-threaded it scores 3984.

The GPU, however, is a different story. The RTX 5070 Mobile sits in the 75th percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29928. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti at 29945 (delta -0.1%), the RTX 2080 Ti at 29783 (delta 0.5%), the AMD Radeon RX 6800 at 30095 (delta -0.6%), and the AMD Radeon RX 6700 at 30433 (delta -1.7%). The RTX 5070 Mobile is essentially performance-equivalent to these older high-end cards, which explains why the combo ranks where it does. The CPU is strong enough to compete with top-tier mobile processors, but the GPU holds the overall pairing back in a game like The Technomancer that stresses the graphics pipeline heavily at 1440p and 4K.

Looking at the measured FPS data, the combo's rank of 2040 out of 3696 makes sense when you consider that many competing setups likely pair similar-class CPUs with faster GPUs. At 1080p, the combo is competitive — 109 FPS at High settings is respectable. But at 4K, the 39 FPS at High settings puts it in territory where many other combos would pull ahead. The rank reflects the full range of tested resolutions, and the 4K results are a significant drag on the overall position.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run The Technomancer at 4K smoothly?

A: Only at Low settings, where the average FPS is exactly 60. At Medium settings, the average drops to 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 FPS. High settings produce 39 FPS average, and Ultra settings fall to 31 FPS. For a smooth 4K experience, Low settings are required; anything higher will result in noticeable stutter.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in The Technomancer?

A: The 2560x1440 resolution offers the best balance of visual quality and performance. At High settings, the combo delivers 71 FPS average. At Medium settings, it produces 83 FPS with a minimum of 71 FPS. This is a significant improvement over 4K while still offering higher pixel density than 1080p.

Q: How does the RTX 5070 Mobile compare to the RTX 3070 Ti in this context?

A: The two GPUs are effectively tied. The RTX 5070 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 29928, while the RTX 3070 Ti scores 29945, a delta of -0.1%. In practical terms for The Technomancer, the performance would be indistinguishable between the two.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 1080p?

A: At 1080p, the GPU is still the primary limiter, but the CPU's role grows. The Core Ultra X7 368H has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz and scores 4005 in PassMark single-thread tests. The FPS range at 1080p Medium (108 to 147 FPS) shows more variance than at 1440p, suggesting the CPU is feeding frames quickly enough to expose GPU frame-time inconsistencies.

Q: What is the highest FPS achievable with this combo?

A: The maximum recorded FPS in the measured data is 166 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. At Medium settings, the max is 147 FPS. At 1440p Low, the average is 109 FPS, and at 4K Low, the average is 60 FPS.

Q: How does the Core Ultra X7 368H's CPU performance affect game results?

A: The CPU ranks in the 87th percentile overall and scores 28221 in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Its 16 cores and 16 threads handle the game's CPU demands without issue. The data shows that the GPU's 75th percentile ranking is the limiting factor, as the CPU's nearest rivals are all within 0.2% of its average benchmark score.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four settings presets, providing a full picture of the combo's performance envelope.

At 1920x1080, the results are as follows. Low settings produce an average of 166 FPS. Medium settings produce an average of 128 FPS, with a minimum of 108 FPS and a maximum of 147 FPS. High settings produce an average of 109 FPS. Ultra settings produce an average of 85 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 81 FPS, which indicates that the settings preset has a massive impact on frame rate at this resolution. The 1080p Low result of 166 FPS is the highest average recorded across all tested configurations.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops noticeably. Low settings produce an average of 109 FPS. Medium settings produce an average of 83 FPS, with a minimum of 71 FPS and a maximum of 96 FPS. High settings produce an average of 71 FPS. Ultra settings produce an average of 56 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 53 FPS. Notably, 1440p Low matches 1080p High exactly at 109 FPS — this suggests that the resolution increase from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly the same performance as moving from High to Low settings at the same resolution.

At 3840x2160, the combo struggles to maintain playable frame rates. Low settings produce an average of 60 FPS, which is exactly at the threshold of smooth gameplay. Medium settings produce an average of 46 FPS, with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. High settings produce an average of 39 FPS. Ultra settings produce an average of 31 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 29 FPS, which is the smallest absolute difference across all resolutions. This indicates that the GPU is so heavily saturated at 4K that even reducing settings has diminishing returns — the pixel throughput bottleneck dominates.

The Medium settings rows are the only ones that include min and max FPS data. Across all three resolutions, the min FPS values are 108 at 1080p, 71 at 1440p, and 39 at 4K. The max FPS values are 147, 96, and 53 respectively. The ratio of max to min FPS is roughly 1.36 at 1080p, 1.35 at 1440p, and 1.36 at 4K. This consistent variance ratio suggests that the game's frame pacing is stable relative to the average, but the absolute dips at 4K are severe enough to cause visible stutter.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal settings preset depends heavily on the target resolution and the desired frame rate floor.

For 1920x1080, the data shows that High settings at 109 FPS is the sweet spot. It provides a significant visual improvement over Medium (128 FPS) while still maintaining well above 100 FPS. Ultra settings drop to 85 FPS, which is still playable but represents a 22% reduction from High for what is typically a marginal visual gain in a game from 2016. Low settings at 166 FPS are unnecessary unless chasing maximum refresh rates on a high-Hz display. The 1080p Medium min FPS of 108 FPS indicates that even the worst-case frame times are smooth.

For 2560x1440, the choice is between High and Medium. High settings produce 71 FPS average, which is above the 60 FPS threshold but not by a huge margin. Medium settings produce 83 FPS with a minimum of 71 FPS, which provides more headroom. Given that the min FPS at Medium is 71, this preset ensures that frame rates never dip below the smoothness threshold. High settings at 1440p have no min FPS data in the measurements, but the average of 71 FPS suggests that dips below 60 are possible in demanding scenes. Medium is the safer recommendation for a consistent experience at 1440p.

For 3840x2160, the data presents a difficult tradeoff. Low settings at 60 FPS is the only preset that achieves a playable average. Medium settings drop to 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 FPS, which will be noticeably choppy. High and Ultra at 39 and 31 FPS respectively are not recommended for any kind of smooth gameplay. If 4K is the target resolution, Low settings are the only viable option. The visual downgrade at Low is significant, but the alternative is a frame rate that falls below 30 FPS at Ultra.

The overall recommendation is to prioritize 1440p with Medium or High settings. The combo delivers 83 FPS at Medium with a solid min of 71 FPS, and 71 FPS at High. This provides the best balance of visual fidelity and performance. At 1080p, High settings are the clear choice. At 4K, the user must accept Low settings or consider a different resolution entirely. The data does not support 4K Medium or higher as a playable configuration for this game.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 3, built on Intel's 3 nm process with the Panther Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports LPDDR5X memory on a dual-channel bus with 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth.

In the context of The Technomancer, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic updates. The benchmark data shows that the CPU is more than adequate for this task. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28221 and single-core score of 3984 place it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs. The PassMark single-thread score of 4005 further confirms strong per-core performance, which is important for games that rely on a few heavily threaded tasks.

The CPU's nearest rivals in overall benchmark score are all within 0.2% of its 40518 average. This tight cluster includes the Intel Core 7 253PE at 40557, the Intel Core 5 223PE at 40585, the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H at 40431, and the Intel Xeon 6507P at 40426. The fact that the Core Ultra X7 368H is statistically tied with these processors means that any performance differences in The Technomancer are attributable to the GPU, not the CPU.

The measured FPS data supports this interpretation. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 166 FPS, which is a frame rate that many CPUs would struggle to feed. The fact that the Core Ultra X7 368H sustains this average suggests that its 5.00 GHz boost clock and 18 MB L3 cache provide sufficient single-threaded and cache performance for the game's engine. The 16 cores and 16 threads are more than adequate for a title from 2016, which was designed for far less capable hardware.

The CPU's memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s and dual-channel LPDDR5X support also play a role. At higher resolutions, the GPU becomes the bottleneck, but at 1080p, the CPU must deliver data quickly enough to keep the RTX 5070 Mobile busy. The data shows that the CPU does not become a limiting factor at any tested resolution — the FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K follows a GPU-bound pattern, with performance dropping as pixel count increases. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see diminishing FPS differences between resolutions, which is not the case here. The CPU holds up its end of the pairing; the GPU is what determines the combo's overall rank of 2040 out of 3696.