Thief

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile presents a fascinating case study in Thief, a title that is now over a decade old. The data reveals a system that is profoundly powerful, yet the performance scaling across resolutions suggests a complex interplay between the processor's immense capabilities and the GPU's workload. This analysis will dissect the measured frames per second (FPS) to understand where the bottleneck lies and what this means for gamers seeking the optimal experience.

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

The most telling data in this set is the performance drop as resolution increases. At 1080p with High settings, the combo delivers a very high 135 FPS average. Moving to 1440p, that number falls to 93 FPS, a substantial 31% reduction. The jump to 2160p (4K) further reduces the average to 54 FPS, which is a 42% drop from the 1440p figure and a 60% drop from the 1080p baseline. This steep curve is the classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario.

When we look at the Low settings, the pattern intensifies. At 1080p Low, the system outputs 204 FPS, but this plummets to 160 FPS at 1440p and then to 94 FPS at 4K. The scaling here is not perfectly linear, but the absolute drop of 110 FPS from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is stark. This suggests that while the CPU is more than capable of feeding the GPU at lower resolutions, the GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile's rendering workload becomes the primary constraint as pixel count increases.

The data implies a clear division of labor. At 1080p, the system is likely CPU-limited or at least balanced, given how high the frame rates are. The Ryzen AI Max+ 395, with its 16 cores and 32 threads, is able to push frame generation far beyond what most displays can handle. However, the GPU's 12 GB of memory and 192-bit bus width become the deciding factors at 4K, where the sheer volume of pixel work causes the frame rate to halve from the 1080p result. The 4K High setting's 54 FPS average is playable, but it demonstrates that even a top-tier mobile GPU is not immune to the demands of 4K rendering in this game.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm process. Its specs are high-end for a mobile part, with 7424 shading units and a boost clock of 1665 MHz. The memory configuration is crucial here: 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s. In a game like Thief, which is not particularly VRAM-hungry by modern standards, the 12 GB capacity is more than sufficient. The bottleneck is more likely the memory bandwidth and raw compute throughput.

The benchmark results for this GPU are interesting. Its Passmark G3D score is 24926, placing it in the 81st percentile of all GPUs. However, its nearest rivals in the database are not other high-end mobile parts; they include the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 and the RTX 5080 Mobile. The deltaPct values are remarkably small, with the RTX 4080 Mobile being just 0.4% slower than the MX570 and 0.6% slower than the RTX 5080 Mobile in average benchmark score. This is a statistical quirk, as these scores are likely aggregated across many different test conditions, but it highlights that the 4080 Mobile's performance is not always a clear step above its peers in synthetic tests.

In the context of Thief, the GPU's role becomes clear when comparing the Low and Ultra settings. At 1080p, the difference between Low (204 FPS) and Ultra (128 FPS) is 76 FPS, a 37% performance hit for maximum fidelity. This gap widens to 42 FPS at 4K (94 FPS vs 52 FPS). The fact that the Ultra preset at 4K still manages 52 FPS indicates the GPU is being utilized fully, but the frame rate is moderated by the high graphical load. The FP32 performance of 24.72 TFLOPS is being leveraged, but the game's engine seems to respond more to core count or clock speed than to the GPU's advanced features like ray tracing cores, which are not likely utilized in this title.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The database places this specific combination at rank 929 out of 3720 tested combos for Thief. This puts it in the top 25% of all systems tested, which is a strong showing but not the absolute pinnacle. The percentileVsAllCpus for the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is 95, meaning it scores higher than 95% of all CPUs in the database. The GPU's percentileVsAllGpus is 81. The fact that the combo ranks at 929 suggests that while the CPU is exceptional, the GPU, while strong, is not the absolute top-tier when paired with this specific processor.

This ranking implies that there are many other combinations that achieve higher frame rates in this game. The data suggests that the CPU is not the limiting factor; a less powerful CPU paired with a more powerful GPU might rank higher. The combo's rank is a function of the entire system, not just the sum of its parts. For instance, the RTX 4080 Mobile's nearest rivals list includes the RTX 5080 Mobile, which is only 0.6% faster in average score, but if a system paired the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 with an even faster GPU, the combo rank would likely be higher. The data shows that this combo is a very capable 1440p machine, achieving 93 FPS on High, but it falls short of the 4K 60 FPS target on Ultra settings, which might be a threshold that higher-ranked combos achieve.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

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

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 204 at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Does the system maintain 60 FPS at 4K resolution with any settings?

A: Yes, at 4K with Medium settings, the combo achieves an average of 71 FPS, with a minimum of 61 FPS. On High settings, it drops to 54 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How much of a performance difference is there between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the average FPS on Low is 160, while on Ultra it is 88. This represents a 72 FPS difference, or a 45% reduction in performance when switching to the highest preset.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for any setting in the data?

A: The only minimum FPS values provided are for Medium settings. At 3840x2160, the minimum is 61 FPS, and at 2560x1440, the minimum is 103 FPS.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has an average benchmark score of 77740. Its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX, has an average score of 76513, which is 1.6% lower.

Q: Is the GPU's performance consistent with its synthetic benchmark ranking?

A: The GPU's Passmark G3D score of 24926 places it in the 81st percentile. However, its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile, has a higher average score, but the RTX 4080 Mobile is only 0.6% slower, suggesting that in-game performance can vary from synthetic results.

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

The full dataset provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets.

At 1920x1080, the combo is extremely fast.

• Low: 204 FPS average.
• Medium: 177 FPS average, with a minimum of 151 FPS and a maximum of 204 FPS.
• High: 135 FPS average.
• Ultra: 128 FPS average.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but show a clear decline.

• Low: 160 FPS average.
• Medium: 122 FPS average, with a minimum of 103 FPS and a maximum of 140 FPS.
• High: 93 FPS average.
• Ultra: 88 FPS average.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is heavily taxed.

• Low: 94 FPS average.
• Medium: 71 FPS average, with a minimum of 61 FPS and a maximum of 82 FPS.
• High: 54 FPS average.
• Ultra: 52 FPS average.

The data shows a consistent hierarchy: Low is always the fastest, followed by Medium, then High, with Ultra being the slowest. The only anomaly is the 1080p Medium max FPS of 204, which matches the Low average, indicating that the Medium preset can sometimes spike to the same high frame rates, likely in less demanding scenes.

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

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is a monster of a mobile processor. It features 16 cores and 32 threads based on the Zen 5 architecture. Its base clock is 3.00 GHz, which can boost up to 5.10 GHz. This is a 55 W TDP part, which is substantial for a laptop chip, allowing it to maintain high clocks under load. Its benchmark scores are extraordinary; for example, it scores 35314 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 20992 in Geekbench multi-core. It sits in the 95th percentile of all CPUs.

In Thief, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. Given the high frame rates at 1080p, it is clear that the CPU is not a bottleneck. The 204 FPS at Low settings reflects its single-thread performance, which is critical for older games like Thief that may not scale perfectly across many cores. The passmark single-thread score of 4147 is strong, and the game seems to benefit from the high boost clock.

However, the CPU's role diminishes as resolution increases. The data shows that the FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is consistent across all settings, which indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The CPU is likely operating well below its maximum capacity at 4K, while the GPU is saturated. This is not a flaw; it shows a balanced system where the CPU has headroom to spare. The 32 threads are more than enough for a 2014 game, and the large 64 MB shared L3 cache likely helps with any data-heavy scenes.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and refresh rate.

For 1080p, the Ultra preset is the clear choice. It delivers an average of 128 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS standard and sufficient for a 120Hz or 144Hz display. The High preset at 135 FPS is only 7 FPS faster, so the visual fidelity of Ultra is worth the minimal performance cost. Even at 1080p Ultra, the system is so powerful that it is likely still CPU-bound in some scenes, but the average is excellent.

For 1440p, the Medium preset is the sweet spot. It achieves 122 FPS average, which is smooth and responsive. The High preset at 93 FPS is also acceptable, but the 29 FPS drop from Medium to High is significant. The Medium preset offers a high frame rate that will maximize the potential of a 1440p 144Hz monitor. The Ultra preset at 88 FPS is still playable but sacrifices 34 FPS compared to Medium for diminishing visual returns.

For 4K, the choice is more difficult. The Medium preset is the only one that guarantees a 60 FPS experience, with an average of 71 FPS and a minimum of 61 FPS. This is the recommended preset for 4K gaming. The High preset at 54 FPS is borderline, and it will be noticeable on a 60Hz display. The Low preset at 94 FPS is very fast but will look significantly worse than Medium. Therefore, for a balanced 4K experience, Medium is the best option. The Ultra preset at 52 FPS is not recommended for competitive play but may be acceptable for a cinematic, slower-paced experience, though the data shows it is the least performant.

In summary, the system is best utilized at 1080p Ultra or 1440p Medium/High, offering a high-refresh-rate experience. For 4K, Medium is the only preset that consistently hits the 60 FPS target, making it the definitive recommendation for users with 4K displays.