Thief

# FAQ

Q: What is the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395's position among all tested CPUs?

A: The CPU sits at the 95th percentile among all CPUs in the benchmark database, with an average benchmark score of 77,740. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i9-14900K, scores 79,097, which is 1.7% higher, while the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX trails by 2.0%.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 880M's integrated GPU compare to dedicated mobile graphics?

A: The Radeon 880M ranks in the 43rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8,436. Its closest competitors are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8,427, 0.1% lower) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8,458, 0.3% higher), indicating it performs in the range of older entry-level discrete GPUs.

Q: What is the CPU's core and thread configuration?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 features 16 cores and 32 threads, based on the Zen 5 architecture (Strix Halo codename), with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. It includes 64 MB of shared L3 cache and supports quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the GPU's clock speed and shading unit count?

A: The AMD Radeon 880M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, with 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. It delivers 4.454 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and includes 12 ray tracing cores.

Q: What frame rates does the combo achieve at 1080p Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the system averages 40 FPS. This is the lowest average among the 1080p settings tested, with Low settings reaching 73 FPS, Medium at 55 FPS, and High at 42 FPS.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested combinations for Thief?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 paired with the AMD Radeon 880M ranks 2,787th out of 2,851 tested combos for this game, placing it in the bottom 3% of all configurations evaluated.

# How This Combo Ranks

The data reveals a stark reality: this combination of AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and AMD Radeon 880M ranks 2,787th out of 2,851 tested combos in Thief, placing it in the bottom percentile of all tested systems. This is a remarkably low position for a CPU that otherwise sits at the 95th percentile of all processors. The disconnect between the CPU's stellar benchmark performance and the combo's abysmal in-game ranking points squarely at the integrated GPU as the bottleneck.

The CPU itself outperforms the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX by 1.6% and the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P by 1.6% in average benchmark score, while the Intel Core i9-14900K leads by 1.7%. Yet none of this processing power translates into competitive frame rates in Thief. The data suggests that the Radeon 880M, despite being a modern RDNA 3.5 architecture with 12 ray tracing cores, simply cannot keep pace with the demands of this 2014 stealth title when paired with such a powerful processor.

The GPU's 43rd percentile ranking among all GPUs further underscores the mismatch. With an average benchmark score of 8,436, the 880M sits in the same performance class as the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8,427) and the AMD Radeon R9 M375X (8,325). These are mobile graphics solutions from years past, and their performance levels are reflected in the low combo ranking observed here. The data implies that for Thief specifically, the GPU is the limiting factor, and no amount of CPU headroom can compensate for the graphics bottleneck.

# GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 880M serves as the sole graphics processor in this configuration, operating as an integrated solution with system-shared memory. Its memory configuration is entirely dependent on the system's LPDDR5X RAM, with no dedicated VRAM of its own. The GPU's 768 shading units and 16 ROPs are modest by modern standards, and its 4.454 TFLOPS FP32 throughput reflects an entry-level graphics solution.

Clocking in with a 400 MHz base and 2900 MHz boost, the 880M pushes pixels at a theoretical 46.40 GPixel/s and textures at 139.2 GTexel/s. These figures, while respectable for an integrated GPU, translate to measured frame rates in Thief that tell a clear story. At 4K Ultra settings, the combo manages just 16 FPS average, while 4K High only reaches 17 FPS. Even dropping to 4K Low yields just 29 FPS, indicating the GPU is overwhelmed at this resolution regardless of settings.

The GPU's benchmark scores align with its in-game performance. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 535 and PassMark G3D score of 7,615 place it in the 43rd percentile, directly between the GTX 675MX and the MX330. The Radeon 880M's predecessor, the Navi II IGP, was its direct predecessor, and this Navi III IGP represents a modest generational step. However, the data shows that for Thief, this GPU is simply not equipped to deliver smooth gameplay at higher resolutions, with only 1080p Low providing a comfortable 73 FPS average.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates across resolutions and settings reveal a consistent pattern of GPU-bound performance. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers 73 FPS on Low settings, which drops to 55 FPS on Medium (with a minimum of 47 and maximum of 63 FPS), 42 FPS on High, and 40 FPS on Ultra. The 1080p results show a clear progression where each settings tier costs roughly 10-15 FPS, with the jump from Low to Medium being the most significant at 18 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates scale down predictably. Low settings produce 50 FPS, Medium averages 38 FPS (minimum 32, maximum 43), High drops to 29 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 27 FPS. The 1440p results demonstrate that even at Low settings, the system is approaching the edge of playability, and anything above Medium falls below 30 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the situation becomes dire. Low settings yield just 29 FPS, Medium averages 22 FPS (minimum 19, maximum 26), High manages 17 FPS, and Ultra falls to 16 FPS. These 4K numbers are uniformly below playable thresholds, with even the lowest settings failing to reach 30 FPS. The data indicates that 4K is simply not a viable resolution for this combination in Thief, regardless of quality settings.

The measured FPS data also shows a consistent pattern of diminishing returns when lowering settings at higher resolutions. At 1080p, going from Ultra to Low improves performance by 33 FPS (from 40 to 73), while at 4K, the same settings change only yields 13 FPS (from 16 to 29). This suggests that at 4K, the GPU is so saturated that even significant reductions in graphical load cannot overcome the resolution demands.

# CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 brings substantial processing power to this combination, with 16 cores and 32 threads running on the Zen 5 architecture at clocks up to 5.10 GHz. Its benchmark results are impressive: Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35,314, single-core of 2,044, and Geekbench multi-core of 20,992. The CPU's 95th percentile ranking among all processors confirms its high-end positioning.

In Thief, however, the CPU's role appears secondary to the GPU's limitations. The game's measured frame rates show characteristics typical of GPU-bound scenarios, where resolution and settings changes produce proportionally larger impacts than would be expected if the CPU were the constraint. The CPU's 64 MB of L3 cache and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth provide ample headroom for game logic and asset streaming, but these resources go underutilized when the GPU cannot render frames fast enough.

The CPU's nearest rivals in benchmark performance include the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX (1.6% lower score) and the Intel Core i9-14900K (1.7% higher), yet none of these comparisons matter for Thief's actual frame rates. The data implies that upgrading or downgrading the CPU would have minimal impact on this game's performance, as the Radeon 880M's 4.454 TFLOPS throughput is the definitive limiting factor. The CPU's PassMark multi-thread score of 54,934 and single-thread score of 4,147 are more than sufficient for the game's computational demands, which are modest given its 2014 release.

# Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo in Thief depend heavily on the target resolution and acceptable frame rates. At 1920x1080, Low settings deliver 73 FPS, which provides the smoothest experience, but Medium at 55 FPS offers a reasonable balance between visual quality and performance. The minimum FPS of 47 at Medium suggests occasional dips, but the average remains comfortably above playable thresholds.

For 2560x1440, Low settings at 50 FPS represent the only reliably smooth option. Medium drops to 38 FPS average with a 32 FPS minimum, which may be acceptable for slower-paced stealth gameplay, but High and Ultra at 29 and 27 FPS respectively fall below the 30 FPS threshold that many consider the minimum for playable performance.

At 3840x2160, the data strongly suggests avoiding this resolution entirely. Even Low settings only achieve 29 FPS, and Medium's 22 FPS average with a 19 FPS minimum will likely result in a jarring experience. The 16-17 FPS results at High and Ultra are effectively unplayable for a stealth game that requires precise timing and awareness.

The recommendation is clear: for the best experience, play at 1080p with Medium settings, which provides 55 FPS average and maintains a minimum of 47 FPS. This configuration offers a significant visual improvement over Low settings while staying well above the 30 FPS playability floor. If visual fidelity is paramount, High settings at 1080p with 42 FPS is acceptable, but Ultra's 40 FPS provides minimal benefit over High while taxing the GPU further.

# Resolution Scaling

The FPS progression from 1080p to 4K reveals a steep performance cliff that clearly identifies the GPU as the bottleneck. At Low settings, the combo delivers 73 FPS at 1080p, 50 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K. This represents a 31.5% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 60.3% drop from 1080p to 4K. The scaling is roughly linear with pixel count, suggesting the GPU is operating at its computational limits across all resolutions.

At Medium settings, the pattern continues: 55 FPS at 1080p, 38 FPS at 1440p, and 22 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 30.9%, and from 1080p to 4K it's 60.0%. These nearly identical percentages across Low and Medium settings indicate that the GPU's fill rate and shader throughput are being saturated in a resolution-dependent manner, with settings having a relatively minor effect on the scaling curve.

High settings show 42 FPS at 1080p, 29 FPS at 1440p, and 17 FPS at 4K, representing drops of 31.0% and 59.5% respectively. Ultra settings follow the same trend: 40 FPS, 27 FPS, and 16 FPS, with drops of 32.5% and 60.0%. The consistency of these percentages across all settings tiers strongly suggests that the Radeon 880M's pixel throughput is the sole determinant of performance, and that the CPU's role in frame generation is negligible.

The resolution scaling data implies that the system's performance is almost entirely GPU-limited. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see smaller FPS differences between resolutions, as the CPU's workload would remain relatively constant while the GPU's load increased. Instead, the near-perfect linear scaling with pixel count confirms that the Radeon 880M's 46.40 GPixel/s pixel rate is the hard ceiling for this combination in Thief, and that even the most powerful CPU pairing cannot overcome this fundamental hardware limitation.