Thief

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER delivers a measured performance profile in Thief that places this combination at rank 1575 out of 2851 tested combos. This mid-pack positioning reflects a system where the GPU’s age and 8 GB VRAM buffer interact with a 2014 stealth title in ways that reward lower settings and favor 1080p and 1440p play, while 4K remains a stretch for smoother frame rates. The following analysis breaks down the benchmark results, component roles, and practical settings guidance using only the measured data.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 1575 out of 2851 tested combinations places this system slightly above the median of all tested CPU-GPU pairings for Thief. That rank is not a top-tier result, but it is also far from the bottom. With 2851 total combos, being at position 1575 means roughly 55% of tested systems outperform this pairing, while about 45% fall below it. This positioning is consistent with a GPU that sits at the 65th percentile among all GPUs in the database, paired with a CPU that reaches the 92nd percentile among all CPUs. The CPU is clearly the stronger component in this duo, but Thief’s measured frame rates show that the GPU becomes the limiting factor as resolution and settings increase.

The gap between component strength and game rank highlights a key pattern. The Ryzen 7 9850X3D’s average benchmark score of 58386 places it within 0.2% of the Intel Xeon w5-2545 and 0.1% of the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M, with a 0.5% edge over the Intel Core i9-14900 and a 0.7% lead over the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470. That CPU power, however, does not translate into a high game rank because Thief’s engine does not appear to be heavily CPU-bound at the tested settings. Instead, the RTX 2070 SUPER, with its average benchmark score of 20282, sits 1% below the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, 1.2% below the RTX 3070 Mobile, 1.3% below the Intel Arc B570, and 1.5% below the Intel Arc A750. This GPU performance tier, combined with its 8 GB VRAM, shapes the combo’s mid-pack standing.

Benchmark results indicate that the combo’s rank is more indicative of GPU limitations than CPU potential. At 1080p Ultra, the system produces 94 FPS, but at 4K Ultra it falls to 38 FPS. That drop of 56 FPS across resolution scaling is substantial and points directly at the GPU as the bottleneck. The CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads are never the apparent constraint here, as even the lowest measured frame rate of 38 FPS at 4K Ultra is well above playable thresholds for many users, though not ideal for all. The rank of 1575 reflects a system that can handle Thief at most resolutions and settings, but not with the headroom that higher-tier GPU pairings would provide.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER is the primary driver of Thief’s performance in this pairing. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is sufficient for the game’s 2014-era textures and geometry. The GPU’s base clock of 1605 MHz and boost clock of 1770 MHz run on the Turing architecture, using a 12 nm process from TSMC. With 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units, the RTX 2070 SUPER delivers a pixel rate of 113.3 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 283.2 GTexel/s. These specifications translate into measured performance that ranges from 171 FPS at 1080p Low down to 38 FPS at 4K Ultra.

The GPU’s 65th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it in the middle of the pack, which aligns with its measured behavior in Thief. At 1080p, the GPU is not the limiting factor at Low settings, where it reaches 171 FPS, but it becomes more constrained as settings rise. At 1080p Ultra, the average drops to 94 FPS, indicating that the GPU’s shading and texture resources are being taxed by the game’s higher detail levels. The 8 GB VRAM capacity does not appear to be a hard wall at 1080p, but at 4K, the combination of higher resolution and Ultra settings pushes the average down to 38 FPS, suggesting that both memory bandwidth and compute throughput are nearing their limits.

The RTX 2070 SUPER’s memory clock of 1750 MHz, listed as 14 Gbps effective, pairs with the 256-bit bus to produce that 448.0 GB/s bandwidth figure. For a game like Thief, which relies on stealth mechanics and detailed environments, this bandwidth is adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K results show a clear drop-off. At 4K Medium, the average FPS is 52 with a minimum of 45 and maximum of 60, while at 4K High it drops to 40 FPS. These numbers indicate that the GPU’s compute resources, not just memory capacity, are the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The GPU’s FP32 performance of 9.062 TFLOPS and FP16 of 18.12 TFLOPS (2:1) provide the raw math throughput, but Thief’s rendering demands at 4K simply exceed what this GPU can deliver smoothly.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Thief?

A: The highest average FPS is 171, measured at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the peak performance point across all tested resolution and settings combinations.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K with Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 38, which is the lowest average recorded in the dataset. This represents a significant reduction from 1080p performance.

Q: What is the CPU’s benchmark percentile compared to the GPU’s?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D ranks in the 92nd percentile among all CPUs, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER ranks in the 65th percentile among all GPUs. This shows a clear disparity in component strength.

Q: Does the combo maintain playable frame rates at 1440p High settings?

A: Yes, at 2560x1440 with High settings, the average FPS is 68. This is above the 60 FPS threshold commonly considered smooth for action games, though not by a wide margin.

Q: What is the closest rival to the RTX 2070 SUPER in GPU benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M is the closest rival, with an average benchmark score of 20480 compared to the RTX 2070 SUPER’s 20282, representing a 1% difference.

Q: How many tested combos does this system rank above?

A: With a rank of 1575 out of 2851 combos, this system ranks above 1276 tested combinations, placing it in the upper half of the database.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of how this combo performs across three resolutions and four settings levels. At 1920x1080, the system delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce an average of 171 FPS, Medium yields 130 FPS with a minimum of 111 and maximum of 150, High reaches 99 FPS, and Ultra drops to 94 FPS. These numbers show that at 1080p, the combo can handle even Ultra settings with frame rates above 90, making this the most comfortable resolution for this pairing.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance scales down as expected. Low settings average 118 FPS, Medium averages 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 and maximum of 103, High averages 68 FPS, and Ultra averages 65 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings is 53 FPS, from 171 to 118, which represents a 31% reduction. At Ultra settings, the drop is 29 FPS, from 94 to 65, a 31% reduction as well. This consistent scaling suggests that the GPU is handling both resolutions similarly, with the increased pixel count being the primary factor.

At 3840x2160, the performance becomes more constrained. Low settings average 69 FPS, Medium averages 52 FPS with a minimum of 45 and maximum of 60, High averages 40 FPS, and Ultra averages 38 FPS. The transition from 1440p to 4K at Low settings sees a drop from 118 to 69 FPS, a 42% reduction. At Ultra settings, the drop is from 65 to 38 FPS, a 42% reduction as well. This larger percentage drop compared to the 1080p to 1440p transition indicates that the GPU is hitting harder limits at 4K, likely due to both memory bandwidth and compute throughput constraints.

The minimum and maximum FPS data points appear only for Medium settings across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the range is 111 to 150 FPS, at 1440p Medium it is 76 to 103 FPS, and at 4K Medium it is 45 to 60 FPS. These ranges show that Medium settings provide the most stable frame pacing, with the 4K Medium range being the tightest at 15 FPS between minimum and maximum. This consistency suggests that Medium settings are the most balanced for this GPU, offering a reasonable average without the extreme dips that might occur at higher settings.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, Ultra settings are viable with an average of 94 FPS. This is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, and the lack of minimum FPS data for Ultra suggests that the system maintains this performance without significant dips. For users with 1080p displays, Ultra is the recommended choice, as it provides the best visual quality while still delivering high frame rates.

At 2560x1440, Ultra settings average 65 FPS, which is still playable but closer to the edge of smoothness. High settings at 1440p average 68 FPS, only 3 FPS higher than Ultra, so the performance difference is minimal. However, Medium settings at 1440p average 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 FPS, which offers a more comfortable margin for frame rate consistency. For 1440p users, Medium is the recommended setting, as it provides a 37% higher average FPS compared to Ultra, while the visual difference between Medium and Ultra in a stealth game like Thief may be less noticeable during fast movement.

At 3840x2160, the situation changes significantly. Ultra settings average only 38 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target for many players. High settings are not much better at 40 FPS. Medium settings average 52 FPS with a minimum of 45 and maximum of 60, which approaches playable levels but still falls short of a consistent 60 FPS. Low settings at 4K average 69 FPS, which is the only 4K configuration that delivers smooth performance. For 4K users, Low settings are the recommended choice, as they provide a 33% higher average FPS compared to Medium and an 82% higher average compared to Ultra.

The data shows a clear pattern: as resolution increases, the settings must decrease to maintain playable frame rates. At 1080p, Ultra is viable; at 1440p, Medium is the sweet spot; and at 4K, Low is necessary for smooth gameplay. This scaling reflects the GPU’s limitations at higher pixel counts, where the 8 GB VRAM and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for the combination of high resolution and high detail settings. Users prioritizing frame rate over visual fidelity should follow this settings ladder, while those with lower refresh rate displays might accept the lower averages at higher settings.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D plays a secondary role in Thief’s performance, but its specifications provide context for why it is not the bottleneck. With 8 cores and 16 threads, the CPU operates at a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. This is a Zen 5 architecture part on the Granite Ridge codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The CPU’s L3 cache is 96 MB shared, which is substantial and likely aids in game loading and asset streaming. The 92nd percentile ranking among all CPUs confirms that this is a high-end processor, but Thief’s measured frame rates do not show any CPU-related limitations.

The CPU’s benchmark results reinforce its strength. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 22807, and in single-core it scores 2228. PassMark multi-thread score is 41318, and single-thread score is 4704. These numbers place it well above average, but in Thief, the frame rates at all resolutions and settings are more indicative of GPU load than CPU load. For example, at 1080p Low, the system produces 171 FPS, which is a high frame rate that could theoretically stress a CPU, but the consistent scaling across resolutions suggests that the CPU is not limiting even at this level.

The CPU’s memory support for DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth provides ample data throughput for the game. The 8 cores and 16 threads are more than sufficient for a 2014 title like Thief, which was designed for older hardware. The fact that the combo rank of 1575 is below the CPU’s individual percentile of 92 indicates that the GPU is the limiting component. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the rank would likely be higher, as the GPU’s 65th percentile would be the ceiling. Instead, the measured FPS data shows that the GPU’s performance tier is what determines the combo’s position.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in benchmarks include the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M with a delta of 0.1% and the Intel Core i9-14900 with a delta of 0.5%. These close scores indicate that the Ryzen 7 9850X3D is firmly in the top tier of CPUs, but that raw CPU power does not translate to a top-tier game rank when paired with a mid-range GPU. For users considering upgrades, the data suggests that swapping the GPU for a higher-tier model would yield more significant FPS gains in Thief than any CPU change, as the current CPU has headroom that the GPU cannot fully utilize.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data across 1080p, 1440p, and 4K reveals how the GPU becomes the limiting factor as resolution increases. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 171 at 1080p to 118 at 1440p and then to 69 at 4K. This represents a 31% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 42% drop from 1440p to 4K. The larger percentage drop at the higher resolution step indicates that the GPU is running out of resources, likely memory bandwidth or shading throughput, as the pixel count increases.

At Medium settings, the same pattern emerges. The average FPS at 1080p is 130, dropping to 89 at 1440p and 52 at 4K. The percentage drops are 32% from 1080p to 1440p and 42% from 1440p to 4K. At High settings, the averages are 99 FPS at 1080p, 68 FPS at 1440p, and 40 FPS at 4K, with drops of 31% and 41% respectively. At Ultra settings, the averages are 94 FPS at 1080p, 65 FPS at 1440p, and 38 FPS at 4K, with drops of 31% and 42% respectively.

This consistent pattern across all settings levels shows that the resolution scaling is uniform, with the GPU handling 1080p and 1440p with relative ease but struggling at 4K. The 42% drop from 1440p to 4K is the key indicator of the limiting component. A CPU-bound system would show smaller percentage drops at higher resolutions, as the GPU would have more time to complete its work while waiting for the CPU. Instead, the GPU is clearly the constraint, as the 4K results show a disproportionate performance penalty.

The data also shows that the gap between settings levels narrows at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 77 FPS (171 to 94). At 1440p, the difference is 53 FPS (118 to 65). At 4K, the difference is 31 FPS (69 to 38). This narrowing indicates that at 4K, the GPU is so saturated that even reducing settings from Ultra to Low only recovers 31 FPS, whereas at 1080p, the same settings reduction recovers 77 FPS. For users who want to play at 4K, the only viable option according to the data is Low settings, which still delivers only 69 FPS average. This makes 4K a challenging proposition for this combo, and the resolution scaling analysis confirms that the RTX 2070 SUPER is the component that determines the system’s overall performance ceiling.