Thief

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with Ultra settings for this combo?

A: The measured average frame rate at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 88 FPS. This is the lowest average among the four quality presets at this resolution, with Low delivering 159 FPS, Medium delivering 121 FPS, and High delivering 92 FPS.

Q: How does the GPU's benchmark score compare to its nearest rival?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 22435, which places it 1.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile (score 22729). It sits 0.5% below the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT (score 22549) and 1.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5700 (score 22170).

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested configurations for Thief?

A: This specific combination of AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile ranks 2438 out of 3720 tested combos for Thief. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the tested field.

Q: What is the CPU's multi-threaded performance relative to its closest competitor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX has an average benchmark score of 76212, which is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX (score 76155). It trails the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D by 0.6% (score 75779 is lower, so the 8945HX is actually ahead by that margin).

Q: Does the measured FPS data include minimum frame rates for all settings?

A: No. Minimum and maximum FPS values are only provided for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 103 FPS and maximum is 139 FPS; at 1440p Medium, the range is 71 to 95 FPS; at 4K Medium, the range is 41 to 56 FPS. Other presets only list average FPS.

Q: What is the GPU's memory bandwidth and how does it relate to 4K performance?

A: The RTX 5060 Mobile has 8 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the combo achieves only 35 FPS average, suggesting the memory subsystem and GPU compute are heavily taxed at this resolution.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB206 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The GPU contains 3328 shading units, 104 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs, along with 26 RT cores and 104 tensor cores. Its base clock is 952 MHz with a boost clock of 1455 MHz, and the memory runs at 1500 MHz with 24 Gbps effective speed. The 8 GB GDDR7 frame buffer is connected via a 128-bit bus, producing 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth — a figure that becomes a limiting factor when pushing high resolutions in Thief.

Benchmark results indicate the GPU's overall capability is modest relative to the broader market. Its PassMark G3D score is 18852, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 3013.5. The GPU's percentile ranking against all GPUs is 67, meaning it outperforms roughly two-thirds of the tested GPU pool but remains behind the top tier. Its average benchmark score of 22435 places it within 1.3% of the RTX 4060 Mobile, indicating generational parity rather than a leap forward in raw compute.

In Thief, the GPU's role is decisive at higher resolutions. The data shows that at 4K, even the Medium preset drops to 49 FPS average, with a minimum of 41 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K falls to 35 FPS average, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay on many displays. At 1440p, the GPU handles Ultra at 60 FPS average, but High at 63 FPS and Medium at 83 FPS show that the GPU still has headroom when settings are reduced. At 1080p, the GPU is clearly the dominant factor: Low preset reaches 159 FPS, while Ultra drops to 88 FPS — a 71 FPS spread that is purely attributable to GPU workload scaling.

The FP32 compute rating of 9.684 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 69.84 GPixel/s provide context for why the GPU struggles at 4K Ultra. Thief's rendering demands at that resolution exceed what this mobile GPU can sustain at playable frame rates. The texture rate of 151.3 GTexel/s is adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but the 384 GB/s bandwidth appears insufficient for 4K Ultra, where the 35 FPS average indicates memory bandwidth saturation.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance for the optimal experience with this combo. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 121 FPS average with a minimum of 103 FPS, which is the best balance of visual quality and frame rate stability. The High preset at 92 FPS is also playable, but the 29 FPS gap between Medium and High suggests diminishing returns on visual fidelity for that performance cost. The Ultra preset at 88 FPS is only 4 FPS below High, so if visual quality is paramount, Ultra is nearly as fast as High, but Medium remains the sweet spot.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset achieves 83 FPS average with a minimum of 71 FPS, which is sufficient for most gaming monitors. The High preset at 63 FPS is borderline for fast-paced stealth action, while Ultra at 60 FPS is right at the edge of playability. Low preset at 109 FPS is smooth but sacrifices too much visual detail for a game that relies on atmospheric lighting and shadow work. The data indicates Medium is the recommended preset at 1440p, as it maintains a comfortable margin above 60 FPS while preserving moderate visual quality.

At 3840x2160, none of the presets deliver a fully smooth experience. Medium at 49 FPS average with a 41 FPS minimum is the only preset that approaches playability, but frame drops below 45 FPS will be noticeable. High at 37 FPS and Ultra at 35 FPS are not recommended for active gameplay. Low at 64 FPS is technically playable but strips away the visual identity of Thief. For 4K, the data suggests Medium is the only viable preset, and even then, users should expect occasional dips below 45 FPS.

Across all resolutions, the Medium preset consistently provides the best frame-time consistency, as evidenced by the reported minimum and maximum values. At 1080p Medium, the 103-139 FPS range indicates tight frame pacing; at 1440p Medium, the 71-95 FPS range is similarly stable; at 4K Medium, the 41-56 FPS range shows more variance but remains within a tolerable band. No other preset reports min/max values, so Medium is also the most transparently characterized setting in the data.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest performance. The Low preset reaches 159 FPS average, which is the highest measured value across all resolutions and settings. Medium drops to 121 FPS average, with a measured range of 103 to 139 FPS. High settles at 92 FPS average, and Ultra comes in at 88 FPS average. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 71 FPS reduction, with the largest single-step drop occurring from Low to Medium (38 FPS), followed by a 29 FPS drop from Medium to High, and only a 4 FPS drop from High to Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down predictably. Low preset yields 109 FPS average, which is 50 FPS below the 1080p Low result. Medium achieves 83 FPS average with a range of 71 to 95 FPS. High delivers 63 FPS average, and Ultra lands at 60 FPS average. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 49 FPS, with the largest drop again occurring from Low to Medium (26 FPS). The High-to-Ultra gap narrows to just 3 FPS, mirroring the pattern seen at 1080p.

At 3840x2160, performance drops significantly. Low preset produces 64 FPS average, which is 45 FPS below the 1440p Low result. Medium delivers 49 FPS average with a range of 41 to 56 FPS. High falls to 37 FPS average, and Ultra bottoms out at 35 FPS average. The total spread from Low to Ultra at 4K is 29 FPS, but the absolute values are all below the 60 FPS threshold except for Low. The Medium preset's minimum of 41 FPS is the lowest recorded minimum in the entire dataset.

Comparing the same preset across resolutions: Low at 1080p (159 FPS) versus Low at 4K (64 FPS) represents a 95 FPS reduction. Medium at 1080p (121 FPS) versus Medium at 4K (49 FPS) is a 72 FPS reduction. High at 1080p (92 FPS) versus High at 4K (37 FPS) is a 55 FPS reduction. Ultra at 1080p (88 FPS) versus Ultra at 4K (35 FPS) is a 53 FPS reduction. The diminishing absolute drops at higher presets indicate that the GPU is already near its limit even at 1080p Ultra.

Resolution Scaling

The data reveals how frame rates scale as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K. For the Low preset, 1080p yields 159 FPS, 1440p yields 109 FPS, and 4K yields 64 FPS. This represents a 31.4% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 41.3% drop from 1440p to 4K. The total reduction from 1080p to 4K is 59.7%, meaning the combo retains roughly 40% of its 1080p Low performance at 4K.

For the Medium preset, the scaling is: 121 FPS at 1080p, 83 FPS at 1440p, and 49 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 31.4%, and from 1440p to 4K is 41.0%. The total reduction is 59.5%, nearly identical to the Low preset's scaling. This consistency suggests the performance scaling is primarily resolution-driven rather than settings-driven.

For the High preset: 92 FPS at 1080p, 63 FPS at 1440p, and 37 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 31.5%, and from 1440p to 4K is 41.3%. Total reduction is 59.8%. For the Ultra preset: 88 FPS at 1080p, 60 FPS at 1440p, and 35 FPS at 4K. The drops are 31.8% and 41.7%, respectively, with a total reduction of 60.2%.

The striking consistency across all presets — each showing roughly a 31-32% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 41-42% drop from 1440p to 4K — indicates that the scaling is bandwidth-limited rather than compute-limited. A purely GPU-compute-bound scenario would show larger percentage drops at higher settings, where more shading work is required per pixel. Instead, the uniform scaling across settings points to the 384.0 GB/s memory bandwidth as the primary constraint at higher resolutions.

The pixel count increases by 2.25x from 1080p to 1440p, and by 2.25x from 1440p to 4K (4x total from 1080p to 4K). The observed FPS drops of roughly 31% and 41% are less than the pixel-count increases would predict if the system were perfectly pixel-bound, suggesting that at 1080p, the CPU or other system components are partially limiting performance, while at 4K, the GPU and memory become the sole bottlenecks.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Dragon Range, and built on TSMC's 5 nm process. Its base clock is 2.50 GHz with a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, and it carries a 55 W TDP. The CPU features 64 MB of L3 cache, with 1 MB L2 per core and 64 KB L1 per core. Memory support is dual-channel DDR5 with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, and the CPU connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes.

Benchmark data shows this CPU is a strong performer. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 42713, and its single-core score is 6030. The PassMark multithread score is 51405, with a single-thread score of 3907. The CPU's percentile ranking against all CPUs is 95, placing it in the top 5% of tested processors. Its average benchmark score of 76212 is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX (76155) and 0.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D (75779).

In Thief, the CPU's role is significant at lower resolutions and settings, where the GPU is not fully saturated. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 159 FPS, which is well above what the GPU alone could sustain if the CPU were slow. The fact that 1080p Low (159 FPS) is only 31% faster than 1440p Low (109 FPS), despite a 2.25x pixel count increase, suggests the CPU is helping to maintain high frame rates at 1080p. In contrast, 4K Low (64 FPS) is 41% slower than 1440p Low, indicating the GPU and memory are the limiting factors at that resolution.

The CPU's high single-thread performance (6030 in Cinebench R23 single-core) is relevant for Thief, a stealth game that likely has a primary game thread handling AI, physics, and game logic. The boost clock of 5.40 GHz provides strong single-threaded throughput, which helps maintain frame rates even when the GPU is under heavy load. The 32 threads also ensure that background tasks and secondary threads do not starve the main game thread.

The data indicates that at 1080p Ultra (88 FPS) versus 1080p High (92 FPS), the CPU is not the bottleneck, as the GPU is already near its limits. However, at 1080p Low (159 FPS), the CPU's capability is likely the factor that allows such a high frame rate. The 83.2 GB/s memory bandwidth of the CPU may also play a role in feeding the game data, though the GPU's 384.0 GB/s is substantially higher and likely dominates memory traffic.

How This Combo Ranks

This combo — AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX paired with NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile — ranks 2438 out of 3720 tested combinations for Thief. This places it in the 65th percentile of tested combos, meaning it outperforms roughly 65% of all configurations but is beaten by the top 35%. Given that the CPU ranks in the 95th percentile among all CPUs and the GPU ranks in the 67th percentile among all GPUs, the combo's overall rank is dragged down by the GPU's more modest standing.

The GPU's nearest rivals provide context for where this combo sits. The RTX 5060 Mobile's average benchmark score of 22435 is 1.3% below the RTX 4060 Mobile (22729), which means this combo would likely perform similarly to a system pairing the Ryzen 9 8945HX with an RTX 4060 Mobile. The 0.5% gap to the RX 7700 XT (22549) is negligible, suggesting that in Thief, the combo would trade blows with systems using that desktop GPU. The 1.2% lead over the RX 5700 (22170) shows that the RTX 5060 Mobile holds a slight edge over that older AMD GPU.

The combo's rank of 2438 out of 3720 corresponds to a position where many other combinations of high-end CPUs with mid-range GPUs would land. The CPU is clearly overqualified for the GPU in this pairing — the Ryzen 9 8945HX is a top-tier mobile processor, while the RTX 5060 Mobile is a mid-range part. This imbalance is reflected in the measured FPS data: at 1080p Low, the combo reaches 159 FPS, which is likely CPU-limited; at 4K Ultra, it drops to 35 FPS, which is purely GPU-limited.

In the context of Thief specifically, the combo's rank suggests that many other configurations — likely those with stronger GPUs and comparable or weaker CPUs — would deliver better frame rates at high resolutions. The measured data supports this: at 4K, no preset achieves 60 FPS average except Low, and at 1440p, only Low and Medium exceed 60 FPS. The combo's strengths are at 1080p, where it delivers smooth performance across all presets, and at 1440p Medium, where it maintains a stable 83 FPS average.

For users considering this combo, the data indicates it is best suited for 1080p gaming at high frame rates, with acceptable 1440p performance at Medium settings. The 4K experience is limited, and the combo's overall rank of 2438 out of 3720 reflects this mixed capability profile.