The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents an interesting test for the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070. The measured frame rates across resolutions and settings reveal a system that is well-balanced for high-refresh-rate 1080p gaming, but which begins to show its limits as pixel counts rise. The data indicates that this combination delivers a smooth experience at lower resolutions, while 4K gaming requires careful settings management to maintain playable frame rates.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At the High preset, the average frame rate drops from 111 FPS at 1080p to 72 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 40 FPS at 4K. This represents a substantial 64% reduction in average FPS from 1080p to 4K, which strongly indicates that the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions. The scaling between 1080p and 1440p is particularly telling: the 35% drop in FPS (from 111 to 72) is roughly proportional to the increase in pixel count, which is the classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario.

Examining the Low preset reinforces this interpretation. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 169 FPS, dropping to 110 FPS at 1440p and 61 FPS at 4K. The fact that even at the lowest settings the 4K frame rate falls below 60 FPS suggests that the RTX 4070's raw throughput is simply insufficient for 4K in this title, regardless of graphical complexity. The spread between Low and Ultra at 4K is also revealing: 61 FPS at Low versus 31 FPS at Ultra shows that the GPU is struggling to maintain performance even when the workload is significantly reduced.

The Medium preset provides the only complete min/max data in the measured results, and it offers additional insight. At 1080p Medium, the average is 130 FPS with a minimum of 110 FPS and a maximum of 149 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 85 FPS with a minimum of 72 FPS and a maximum of 97 FPS. At 4K Medium, the average is 47 FPS with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. The minimum FPS values at each resolution are notably close to the averages, indicating relatively stable frame pacing without severe stuttering. This stability suggests that the CPU is keeping up with the GPU's output, even at lower resolutions where CPU overhead typically becomes more pronounced.

The data points to a system where the RTX 4070 is the bottleneck at 1440p and 4K, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H provides ample headroom at 1080p. The 16-core processor's performance is sufficient to feed the GPU at high frame rates, as evidenced by the 169 FPS result at 1080p Low. However, the rapid falloff in FPS as resolution increases indicates that the GPU's 12 GB of GDDR6X memory and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth are the constraining factors in this pairing.

FAQ

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

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 offers the best balance of performance and visual fidelity. At High settings, the system achieves 111 FPS average, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. At 1440p High, the average drops to 72 FPS, which remains playable but leaves less headroom for demanding scenes. The 4K results, with 40 FPS at High settings, fall below the ideal range for smooth action gameplay.

Q: How does the RTX 4070 perform relative to its nearest rivals in this context?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 37648 places it 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (37628) and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37507). It trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile by 1.3% (38135 vs 37648). This indicates that the RTX 4070 sits in a competitive mid-range position, with performance that is close to several other cards in its class.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H a capable processor for this game?

A: Yes. The processor's benchmark results show strong multi-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 18911 and a Passmark multithread score of 36811. The 16 cores and 16 threads, combined with a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, provide more than enough processing power for The Technomancer, which is a 2016 title that does not heavily utilize many cores. The data shows no signs of CPU bottlenecking at any resolution.

Q: What is the difference between the Low and Ultra presets at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves an average of 110 FPS, while the Ultra preset delivers 56 FPS. This represents a 49% reduction in frame rate when moving from the lowest to the highest quality settings. The High preset sits between these extremes at 72 FPS, while Medium achieves 85 FPS.

Q: Does the system maintain consistent frame rates, or are there significant drops?

A: The available data suggests good frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the minimum FPS is 110, which is 84.6% of the average 130 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the minimum is 72 FPS, or 84.7% of the 85 FPS average. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 40 FPS, or 85.1% of the 47 FPS average. This consistent ratio across resolutions indicates stable performance without major hitches.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations?

A: The combo rank is 1497 out of 2825 tested combinations, placing it in the 47th percentile of all systems tested. This middle-of-the-pack ranking reflects the balanced but not exceptional performance of this pairing, which is neither a top-tier enthusiast setup nor a low-end configuration.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor based on the Panther Lake architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process node. Its base clock of 2.10 GHz and boost clock of 5.10 GHz provide substantial single-thread performance, as evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2200.5. The processor's multi-threaded capabilities are demonstrated by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18911, which places it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs tested. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D, has an average score of 44573, which is only 0.2% higher than the Core Ultra X9 388H's average of 44466.

In the context of The Technomancer, the CPU's role is primarily to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. The game, released in 2016, was designed for the hardware of that era, and modern processors like the Core Ultra X9 388H have far more headroom than the game can utilize. The measured FPS data confirms that the CPU is not a limiting factor: at 1080p Low, the system achieves 169 FPS, and at 1080p Ultra, it still manages 86 FPS. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar frame rates across all settings at a given resolution, as the CPU workload would cap performance. Instead, the FPS scales significantly with settings, which is the hallmark of a GPU-bound scenario.

The processor's 18 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 cache provide ample fast memory for game assets. The dual-channel LPDDR5X memory support with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth is also sufficient for this title, which does not require extreme memory throughput. The CPU's Passmark single-thread score of 4280 indicates strong per-core performance, which benefits games that rely on a few heavily loaded threads. The Core Ultra X9 388H's 88th percentile ranking among all CPUs suggests that it is a high-performing processor overall, and its 0.3% advantage over the Intel Core i9-13950HX (44342 vs 44466) in average benchmark score shows it competes well with other mobile flagship chips.

The data shows that this CPU is more than adequate for The Technomancer, and its capabilities are likely to be underutilized in this particular game. The bottleneck is clearly the GPU, especially at higher resolutions where the pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth of the RTX 4070 become the determining factors for performance.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 achieves a rank of 1497 out of 2825 tested combos in The Technomancer. This places the system in the bottom half of all configurations tested, which may seem surprising given the individual performance of the components. However, this rank reflects the fact that many other combos in the database feature more powerful GPUs, particularly desktop variants, which are better suited to this game's demanding graphics.

The CPU's individual performance is strong, with an 88th percentile ranking among all CPUs, but the GPU's 81st percentile ranking among all GPUs tempers the overall combo performance. The RTX 4070's average benchmark score of 37648 places it near the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (37628, 0.1% behind) and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37507, 0.4% behind). It is also notably close to the RTX 4080 Mobile (38135), which outperforms it by 1.3%. This grouping suggests that the RTX 4070 is a solid mid-range GPU, but it is not a top-tier performer that would push a combo into the upper echelons of the rankings.

The rank of 1497 out of 2825 means that approximately 53% of tested combos outperform this setup. This is consistent with the measured FPS data, which shows that the system struggles to maintain 60 FPS at 4K even on Low settings. Many other combos in the database likely feature more powerful GPUs that can handle 4K gaming more effectively. The data also suggests that the combo's performance is limited by the GPU, as the CPU is clearly capable of supporting higher frame rates, as evidenced by the 169 FPS result at 1080p Low.

For a laptop-oriented combo, this rank is reasonable. The Core Ultra X9 388H is a mobile processor with a TDP of 25 W, and the RTX 4070 is a mobile GPU with a 200 W TDP. These power constraints inherently limit performance compared to desktop counterparts. The combo's rank of 1497 reflects these limitations, but it also shows that the system is capable of delivering a playable experience at 1080p and 1440p, which is the target market for this type of hardware.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the user's resolution and performance priorities. At 1920x1080, the High preset offers the best balance, delivering 111 FPS average with no min/max data recorded. This is well above the 60 FPS threshold and provides a clear improvement in visual quality over Medium (130 FPS) and Low (169 FPS) without sacrificing the high refresh rate experience. The Ultra preset at 1080p achieves 86 FPS, which is still smooth, but the 22% reduction in frame rate compared to High (111 FPS down to 86 FPS) may not be worth the marginal visual gains for all users.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the recommended choice, as it delivers 85 FPS average with a minimum of 72 FPS and a maximum of 97 FPS. This provides a smooth experience that stays above 60 FPS even in demanding scenes. The High preset at 1440p achieves 72 FPS, which is playable but leaves less headroom, and the Ultra preset drops to 56 FPS, which falls below the ideal 60 FPS threshold. The Low preset at 1440p delivers 110 FPS, but the visual quality reduction is significant, and the Medium preset offers a better balance of performance and fidelity.

For 4K gaming at 3840x2160, the data suggests that users should be prepared to compromise. The Low preset achieves 61 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS line, but the visual quality is substantially reduced. The Medium preset delivers 47 FPS with a minimum of 40 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced action. The High preset drops to 40 FPS, and the Ultra preset falls to 31 FPS, both of which are below the threshold for smooth gameplay. For users who prioritize frame rate, the Low preset is the only viable option at 4K. For those who value visual quality, the Medium preset offers the highest settings that remain consistently above 40 FPS.

The data shows that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming at High or Ultra settings, with 1440p Medium providing a solid alternative for those with higher-resolution displays. 4K gaming is possible only with significant compromises in visual quality.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of how this combo performs across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system achieves its highest frame rates, with the Low preset producing an average of 169 FPS. The Medium preset follows at 130 FPS, with a recorded minimum of 110 FPS and a maximum of 149 FPS. The High preset achieves 111 FPS, and the Ultra preset delivers 86 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at this resolution shows a 49% reduction in average FPS (from 169 to 86), which is a common pattern for modern GPUs as graphical settings increase the load on the render pipeline.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates decrease across all settings. The Low preset achieves 110 FPS, which is a 35% drop from the 1080p Low result. The Medium preset delivers 85 FPS with a minimum of 72 FPS and a maximum of 97 FPS. The High preset achieves 72 FPS, and the Ultra preset delivers 56 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1440p shows a 49% reduction (from 110 to 56), which is consistent with the scaling observed at 1080p. This consistency indicates that the relative cost of each settings preset is stable across resolutions.

At 3840x2160, the system's performance drops significantly. The Low preset achieves 61 FPS, which is a 45% reduction from the 1440p Low result. The Medium preset delivers 47 FPS with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. The High preset achieves 40 FPS, and the Ultra preset delivers 31 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 4K shows a 49% reduction (from 61 to 31), which matches the pattern seen at lower resolutions. However, the absolute frame rates are much lower, highlighting the GPU's limitations at this resolution.

The Medium preset is the only setting that provides complete min/max data across all resolutions. At 1080p, the minimum of 110 FPS is 84.6% of the average. At 1440p, the minimum of 72 FPS is 84.7% of the average. At 4K, the minimum of 40 FPS is 85.1% of the average. This consistent ratio suggests that frame time variance is stable and that the system does not experience significant stuttering or frame drops. The max FPS values also scale consistently: 149 at 1080p, 97 at 1440p, and 53 at 4K, each being approximately 114% of the average.

The data reveals that the RTX 4070's performance in The Technomancer is characterized by predictable scaling with both resolution and settings. The GPU's 12 GB of VRAM is sufficient for all tested configurations, as no memory-related issues are evident in the data. The combo's overall performance is suitable for 1080p high-refresh-rate gaming and 1440p gaming at medium-to-high settings, while 4K gaming requires the use of lower settings presets to maintain playable frame rates. The measured results are consistent with the GPU's 81st percentile ranking and its position relative to its nearest rivals, confirming that this system performs as expected for its hardware class.