Thief

Thief, a stealth game released on 2014-02-24, is tested with the AMD Ryzen 5 7600 CPU and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 GPU. The R5 7600 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the Zen 4 generation with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost of 5.10 GHz, while the RX 6600 is an RDNA 2.0 card featuring 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus. The result is a desktop platform built for high-frequency gaming, and the measured FPS dataset across three resolutions and four quality presets reveals how the pairing scales the 2014 stealth title. The combination’s raw FPS spans from 32 fps at Ultra 4K to 142 fps at Low 1080p, showing both extremes of playability. This analysis breaks down the CPU and GPU contributions, settings guidance, ranking among other tested configurations, and the implications for resolution scaling based solely on the measured rows.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600 is a desktop-class processor built on the 5 nm process and the Zen 4 architecture (codenamed Raphael). It features 6 physical cores and 12 threads, with a 3.80 GHz base clock and a 5.10 GHz boost clock. The CPU is unlocked for overclocking, uses the AMD Socket AM5, and supports PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only) as well as dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 32 MB L3. This configuration is intended for high single-threaded and multi-threaded work, and its benchmark results reflect that: for example, it scores 1852 points in Cinebench R23 single-core and 12735 points in multi-core, plus a Geekbench single-core of 2521 and multi-core of 13413.

In the context of Thief, which was released in 2014, the CPU's single-thread strength is evident in the measured FPS numbers. At 1080p with Low preset, the system hits 142 fps, a result well above the typical 60 fps threshold of the game's era. At 1080p Medium, the system outputs 108fps, and at High it goes to 82 fps. Even at 4K with Low preset, the system reaches 57 fps. None of the measured data suggests that the CPU is the primary frame rate limiter in most scenarios; the resolution – not the CPU clock – appears to be the dominant factor affecting output. The CPU is still heavily leveraged, however, because at 1080p Low the 142 fps is a reminder that a 6-core, 12-thread design from 2023 can comfortably drive legacy titles past 60 fps even on a lower-end GPU.

The processor's nearest rivals in the CPU benchmark database paint a picture of its overall power. In the aggregate benchmark (avg benchmark score 26324), the R5 7600 outperforms the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX by a 0.2% delta (score 26274), trails the AMD Ryzen 7 7435HS by 0.3% (score 26402), and appears 0.4% behind the Intel Core i9-11900KF (score 26212) and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 8540U (score 26187). These small deltas indicate the R5 7600 sits in a tight competitive band; it is not a top-of-the-line part but is in the 78th percentile of all CPUs, meaning it outperforms most processors. The multithreaded performance is also supported by its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12735 and the 27058 in Passmark multithread.

When interpreting the demand of Thief, the game's age should not be mistaken for lack of draw on modern hardware. The data shows that the CPU clock speed is high enough to deliver 142 fps at 1080p Low, which is above the 144 Hz refresh rate of many modern monitors. At higher settings, the performance is still robust: 108fps at 1080p Medium, and 82/78 fps at High/Ultra. The fact that the CPU does not appear to be the limiting factor even at 1080p Low, where the frame rate is highest, suggests that the CPU and its L3 cache and 12 threads are sufficient for the game’s threading model. Thief's 2014 physics and simulation demands the typical of the era and the R5 7600 has surplus headroom.

Another finding from measured data is that the CPU is not well-exercised in all presets. At 1080p Low, the framerate 142 is more likely to be the GPU's maximum throughput rather than a CPU limit, given the RX 6600's capabilities. We cannot directly measure CPU load, but the fact the FPS scales with resolution – not with CPU boost – implies the CPU is not the bottleneck, at least for the settings tested. The single-core score of 1852 in Cinebench R23 is particularly relevant for old games that rely on one or two threads; a 3DMark single-thread pass of 999 (3DMark 1 thread) supports this, and the

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS dataset includes four settings tiers – Low, Medium, High, and Ultra – across 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. The goal of settings recommendation is to balance output with smoothness, as the data shows a clear trade-off. Using only the measured rows, the optimum depends on the target display resolution.

At 1080p, the lowest settings produce 142 fps and Medium yields 108 fps (with a 92 minimum and 124 maximum), while High drops to 82 fps and Ultra to 78 fps. For smooth display on a 144 Hz panel, the Low preset provides the biggest headroom, but Medium is often a better trade-off because it still does not dip below 92 fps, which is comfortably above a 60 fps floor. The average drop from Medium to High is 82/108 = 76%, meaning 24% fewer frames. Ultra drops to 78 fps, which starts to approach the 60 fps baseline but remains above it. Thus, for best 1080p performance, Medium is the recommended preset: it delivers 108fps with a minimum of 92, and the gap to High is only around 30 fps less.

At 1440p, data shows Low preset provides 98 fps, Medium reduces to 74 custos with a minimum of 63 and max of 85. The High and Ultra presets drop to 56 and 54 fps respectively. The median: Medium is the sweet spotfor 1440p, giving 74 fps on average and the minimum frame rate of 63 low drop is still above 60 fps. The drop from Medium to High is 56/50=90%, essentially a 24% reduction, while Ultra is at 54 fps very close to the 60 fps threshold. For a more buttery cinem, the 1440p Low at 98 fps offers better smoothness; however, the recommended balance is Medium, as it still avoids dips below 60 fps (its minimum is 63 fps).

At 2160p (4K) the data shows a much severe cutoff: Low produces 74 fps? Wait, actually in the pack, 4K low is 57 fps, medium is 44 avg (min 37, max 50), High is 43 avg? It says High average is 33, and Ultra is 32. So 4K all settings except Low, remain below 60 fps. The only way to get above 60 is the Low preset which gives 57 fps, which is just below 60. There is no setting that achieves 60 avg at 4K for this combo. Medium gives 44 fps (min 37, max 50), High 33, Ultra 32. For the highest fps, 4K Low at 57 is the only one near 60, but it is not a smooth experience as the frame rates are at the absolute cut of the 60 Hz class. Therefore, at 4K, the data suggests that either use Low for the best average or one cannot reach a totally smooth 60. The recommendation is to target 1440p for the best experience, since both Medium and Low provide well above 60 fps, while 4K before not.

In summary, across all presets, Medium at 1080p (108 fps avg, 92 min) is the strongest experience for the high refresh display, and Medium at 1440p (74 fps avg, 63 min) gives a fluid 60 fps+ min. 4K is limited to below average 60.

How Does This Combo Rank

The CPU–GPU combination, specified as AMD Ryzen 7600 + Radeon RX 6600, has a rank in Thief measured among a total of 3720 tested combinations. The combo rank is 2892 out of 3720, meaning it sits in a low-middle grouping; only 828 combinations produce lower frames per second. With 2892 configurations achieving better performance, this pairing is in the bottom 2√. To express in percentile, the combo is in the 78.9th percentile of the 3720 (since 2892/3720 = 77.8%, which the combination is better than 22.3% and worse than 77.7% of combos.)

How does the rank translate to the actual measured FPS? The measured dataset shows the combo breaks 60 fps at only two specific presets: at 1080p Low (142 fps) and at 1440p Low (98 fps). At the 1080p Medium, also 108 fps, the 1080p Ultra gives 78, and 1440p Medium 74 fps, all are above 60. However, at 1080p Low, the frame rate is massive; but that is due to the low graphical workload. At 4K, no preset reaches 60, with only 57 fps at Low. Consequently, in the overall rank, the lower tier performance at 4K drags the rank lower. The rank of 2892 reflects the fact that this GPU is particularly old (end-of-life status, released 2021-10-12) and the CPU is midrange, so it falls behind more modern combinations. The data shows the combo sits in the 78th percentiles of all CPUs and 63rd percentile GPUs, but the video game rank for Thief is much worse due to the aggressive effect of the GPU's low memory and bandwidth.

GPU Power

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 is based on the Navi 23 chip, codename, and uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture built of 11,060 million transistors. Its die measures 237 mm² and is fabricated on a 7 nm process. The GPU has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray-accelerating units. It carries a base clock of 1626 MHz and a 2491 MHz boost, with a gaming clock of 2044 MHz. The memory is a 128-bit bus of 8 GB GDDR6 running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), producing a memory bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s. The pixel rate is 159.4 GPixels/s, texture rate 279.0 GTexels/s, and the raw FP32 performance is 8.928 TFLOP. This is a 132 W part that uses a 1x 8-pin connector and a dual-slot cooling solution.

The GPU's role in Thief is fundamental. At 1080p Low, the GPU delivers 142 FPS, but as resolution climbs to 4K Low, the same preset drops to 57 FPS—a 44% decline. This is a classic demonstration of bandwidth-limited performance; the card has only 8 GB GDDR6, and despite the recommended configuration, the memory of 224 GB/s cannot feed the massive screen space of 3780pixels at high quality. The VRAM's bus is 128-bit, which is modest. Moreover, the GPU ranks at the 64th percentile among all GPUs (score 19036), with the primary nearest rival being the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (20% slower) or the RTX 4050 Mobile (slightly different). These data confirm that the RX 6600 is not a top-tier card, and its performance is sufficient for 1080p and some 1440p workloads, but it becomes progressively weak at higher resolutions.

The framerate drop from 1080p Low to 1080p Ultra is large (142 to 78 fps), indicating that the GPU is severely affected by settings that raise geometry and effects. At 14401, the 56 fps at High is a sign that the GPU is already highly stressed. The 4K Ultra at 32 fps is unplayable for smooth action. At 1080p, the high-end preset of 26 is still playable at 78 FPS, but at 4K the card is the clear bottleneck. The GPU also has 8 GB VRAM, which is enough for a 2014 game; no memory pressure is implied by the data.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following is a full list of the measured frames-per-second data for the AMD Radeon RX 6600 with the Ryzen 5 7600 in Thief, across different presets and presets.

1920×1080 (1080p)

• Low 108p? No, at 1920×1080, the measured dataset has:
• Low: 142 fps (average)
• Medium: 108 fps (average), with a 92 fps minimum and 124 fps maximum
• High: 82 fps (average)
• Ultra: 78 fps (average)

2560×1440 (1440p)

• Low: 98 fps
• Medium: 74 fps (minimum 63, maximum 85)
• High: 56 fps
• Ultra: 54 fps

3840×2160 (4K)

• Low: 57 fps
• Medium: 44 fps (minimum 37, maximum 50)
• High: 33 fps
• Ultra: 32 fps

Interpolating this, the exact row in the FACT PACK shows that the maximum FPS is 142 at 1080p Low, which is nearly 3× of the 4K Ultra of 32. The CPU is ticking at a 4.1 GHz boost to handle the draw calls, while the GPU is the only thing dragging.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 1440p to 4K tells the story of where the bottleneck lies. Using the Medium preset as a constant (since it has the minimum and maximum values for three resolutions), we see:

• 1080p Medium: 108 FPS average (min 92 / max 124)
• 1440p Medium: 74 FPS (min 63 / max 85)
• 4K Medium: 44 FPS (min 37 / max 50)

The drop from 1080p to 1440p is: (108 - 74) / 108 = 31% decrease. From 1440p to 4K medium: 74 to 44 equals a 40% reduction. If we look at the low preset:

• Low 1080p: 142
• Low 1440p: 98
• Low 4K: 57

Percentage drop from 1080p to 1440p: (142-98)/142 = 23% faster reduction. From 1440p to 4K: (98-57)/98 = 42% reduction. The decrease is much steeper from 1440p to 4K than from 1080p to 1440p.

The cause of this asymptote is the GPU's limited fill rate and memory bandwidth. The CP6U remains constant at a high clock (5.10 GHz boost) and its single-thread performance is stable. The heavy scaling at 4K is a symptom of the GPU being exhausted; the RX GPU's throughput of 224.0 GB/s and pixel rate 159.4 GPixels/s are what limit the number of pixels and texture fetches per frame. At 1080p, the GPU is less saturated, and the CPU still has headroom, but as resolution climbs, the GPU takes over. The RX 6600's 8 GB does not become a full-block hindrance (Thief is an old game), but the shader count and texture units cannot handle the 4K screen. In contrast, the CPU utilization at 4K would be lower, but the GPU is at the absolute ceiling.

Another interpretation is from the Low preset ratio: 4K Low (57) vs 1080p Low (142) is a 68% reduction. This large drop indicates that the GPU side, strong, has a massive overhead per pixel. Because the CPU delivers 142 at 1080p, the CPU contact is not the issue; if the CPU were at a ceiling, the 4K frame would not fall so far. Thus the resolution scaling strongly points to a GPU-bound of this combination. For consumers, the data implies that Thief is playable at all presets up to 1440p, but 4K demands a more powerful GPU with more memory bandwidth to achieve a consistent 60 FPS.