The Technomancer

The Technomancer, a 2016 Action RPG, presents a demanding workload that stresses both modern CPU and GPU architectures. The combination of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 delivers a distinctive performance profile across resolutions and settings. This analysis examines the measured FPS data to understand the role each component plays, how this pairing ranks against other tested systems, and what settings provide the optimal experience.

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

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a 16-core, 16-thread mobile processor built on Intel's 3 nm Panther Lake architecture. It operates with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and can boost up to 5.10 GHz, featuring a substantial 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU's benchmark scores indicate strong single-threaded and multi-threaded capability, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2200.5 and a multi-core score of 18911. The PassMark single-thread score of 4280 and multithread score of 36811 further confirm its high throughput.

In the context of The Technomancer, the CPU's single-thread performance is likely a primary driver of frame pacing. The game's engine, despite its age, can exhibit sensitivity to per-core performance. The 5.10 GHz boost clock provides a significant advantage in scenarios where the game's logic is serialized. The 16 cores and 16 threads, while not fully utilized by a game from 2016, ensure that background tasks and the game's own thread management do not create bottlenecks. The processor's average benchmark score of 44466 places it at the 88th percentile among all CPUs, indicating it is a high-end part capable of feeding even a powerful GPU.

The data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor in most measured scenarios. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 214 FPS, which is a considerable frame rate. However, the scaling between settings at the same resolution suggests that the CPU can still influence results. The delta between Low and Medium at 1080p is a drop from 214 FPS to 164 FPS, a 50 FPS decline that is more attributable to the GPU handling increased graphical load. The CPU's role is to maintain a high enough frame ceiling to allow the GPU to render as many frames as possible. With a PassMark data compression score of 361763 and integer math score of 90882, the CPU demonstrates robust processing power that should prevent stutter in open-world environments.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific configuration, the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, ranks 883rd out of 2825 tested combinations in The Technomancer. This places the combo in the 68th percentile of all tested systems, which is a strong result, though not at the very top. The ranking indicates that while this is a high-performance pairing, there are many other combinations that achieve higher average frame rates in this specific title.

The CPU's nearest rivals based on average benchmark scores help contextualize its performance. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D has an average score of 44573, which is 0.2% higher than the Ultra X9 388H's 44466. The Intel Core i9-13950HX scores 44342, or 0.3% lower. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 and Intel Core i5-13600 are also within 0.5% of this processor's score. This shows that the Ultra X9 388H is positioned in a highly competitive performance band, where differences of less than one percent separate it from its closest rivals.

The combo rank of 883 is influenced by both CPU and GPU. The RTX 4080's nearest rivals show a similar clustering. The RTX 4080 SUPER has an average score of 54209, just 0.1% higher than the RTX 4080's 54247. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X is 1.1% faster, while the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB is 2.6% slower. This suggests that the GPU is also performing at a level where small deltas in score translate to significant changes in rank. The 883rd rank out of 2825 combos means that roughly 68% of tested systems perform worse, which is a reassuring position for a high-end mobile CPU and desktop-class GPU pairing.

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

The measured FPS data across resolutions reveals a clear trend: the system becomes increasingly GPU-bound as resolution increases. At 1080p High settings, the average frame rate is 140 FPS. Moving to 1440p High settings, the average drops to 92 FPS, a 34% reduction. At 4K High settings, the average falls to 50 FPS, a 64% reduction from 1080p. This steep decline is a classic indicator of GPU limitation, as the number of pixels rendered increases significantly.

The scaling from 1080p to 1440p shows a reduction of 48 FPS, while the jump from 1440p to 4K shows a reduction of 42 FPS. This is a non-linear relationship. The first jump, from 1080p to 1440p, increases the pixel count by 78%, while the second jump, from 1440p to 4K, increases it by 125%. The FPS drop is less severe proportionally for the larger jump, which suggests that while the GPU is the primary constraint, the CPU is still contributing to the frame rate at lower resolutions.

At 1080p Low, the system hits 214 FPS. This high frame rate indicates that the CPU can push the GPU to its limits. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate would plateau at a lower value regardless of settings. Since the frame rate increases from 109 FPS at Ultra to 214 FPS at Low, it is clear that the GPU workload is the limiting factor. The RTX 4080, with its 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and 716.8 GB/s bandwidth, has the capacity to render these frames, but the processing load scales with resolution and settings.

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

The dataset provides average FPS figures for four resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system demonstrates its highest performance ceiling. The Low preset averages 214 FPS. The Medium preset averages 164 FPS, with a minimum of 139 FPS and a maximum of 189 FPS. The High preset averages 140 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 109 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p is a 105 FPS drop, showing a significant performance cost for the highest graphical fidelity.

At 2560x1440, the performance remains very playable. The Low preset averages 140 FPS. The Medium preset averages 107 FPS, with a minimum of 91 FPS and a maximum of 123 FPS. The High preset averages 92 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 72 FPS. This resolution is a sweet spot for this combination, offering high frame rates on High settings while maintaining a smooth experience on Ultra.

At 3840x2160, the system starts to show its limits. The Low preset averages 77 FPS. The Medium preset averages 59 FPS, with a minimum of 50 FPS and a maximum of 68 FPS. The High preset averages 50 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 39 FPS. The 4K Ultra preset is the only configuration that dips below the 60 FPS threshold for a smooth experience. The minimum FPS of 50 at 4K Medium indicates potential for frame drops in demanding scenes. The data shows that the RTX 4080 is a capable 4K card, but the most demanding presets will require compromises.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is a high-end desktop GPU based on the Ada Lovelace architecture, with a chip designated AD103. It features 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s. The GPU has a base clock of 2205 MHz and a boost clock of 2505 MHz. Its memory operates at an effective speed of 22.4 Gbps. The GPU's PassMark G3D score is 34457, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 6567, placing it in the 86th percentile of all GPUs.

The RTX 4080's role in The Technomancer is clearly dominant. The massive frame rate differences between settings, particularly at lower resolutions, are a direct result of the GPU's shading units (9728) and texture mapping units (304). The GPU's 48.74 TFLOPS of FP32 performance allows it to process the game's visual effects quickly. The 16 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for this title, even at 4K Ultra, preventing any memory-related stutters or texture pop-in.

The GPU's performance is consistent with its benchmark scores. The 0.1% delta in average score compared to the RTX 4080 SUPER suggests that there is very little performance headroom between the two cards. In this game, the RTX 4080 is able to maintain an average of 50 FPS at 4K High, which is a demanding workload. The 76 RT cores and 304 Tensor cores are not specifically tested by this game's engine, but they contribute to the overall feature set. The GPU's power draw of 320 W and suggested 700 W PSU are noted, but the performance data shows it is a high-throughput part.

FAQ

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

A: Based on the measured data, 2560x1440 offers the best balance. At High settings, it averages 92 FPS, and even at Ultra it maintains 72 FPS. This is a significant improvement over the 4K results, which drop to 50 FPS on High and 39 FPS on Ultra.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions. The frame rate drops substantially from 1080p to 4K (e.g., 140 FPS to 50 FPS on High settings), which is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck. The CPU is strong enough to deliver 214 FPS at 1080p Low, showing it is not holding the system back.

Q: How does this combo compare to other tested systems?

A: This configuration ranks 883rd out of 2825 tested combinations, placing it in the top 68% of all systems tested in The Technomancer. This is a strong result, though not the absolute top-tier performance.

Q: Can this system run the game at 4K with playable frame rates?

A: Yes, but with caveats. At 4K Medium, it averages 59 FPS, and at 4K High, it averages 50 FPS. The 4K Low preset achieves 77 FPS. For a locked 60 FPS experience, users would need to use the Medium preset or lower.

Q: Is 16 GB of VRAM enough for this game?

A: Yes, the 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on the RTX 4080 is more than adequate for The Technomancer. The measured results do not indicate any VRAM-related performance loss, even at 4K Ultra settings.

Q: What is the performance difference between the High and Ultra settings?

A: The cost of Ultra over High is significant. At 1080p, it drops from 140 FPS to 109 FPS. At 1440p, it drops from 92 FPS to 72 FPS. At 4K, it drops from 50 FPS to 39 FPS. The visual fidelity gain may not justify the performance hit in this title.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear path for the optimal experience. For users with a 1080p or 1440p display, the High preset is the recommended choice. At 1080p, it delivers 140 FPS, which is well above the refresh rate of most monitors. At 1440p, it averages 92 FPS, ensuring a smooth and responsive gameplay experience without the significant performance penalty of the Ultra preset. The Ultra preset's visual improvements are not worth the 22% to 31% frame rate reduction observed across resolutions.

For 4K gaming, the Medium preset is the only viable option for a consistently playable experience. The 4K Medium preset averages 59 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS target but remains smooth. The 4K High preset, averaging 50 FPS, is playable but may feel less fluid. The 4K Ultra preset, at 39 FPS, is not recommended for action-oriented gameplay. The Low preset is only necessary for users seeking the absolute highest frame rates, such as 214 FPS at 1080p or 140 FPS at 1440p, but it comes with a substantial visual quality reduction. The data suggests that the High preset at 1440p provides the best combination of visual fidelity and performance, offering a 92 FPS average, which is a strong showing for this demanding title.