Thief

The Intel Core i3-12100F paired with the Intel Arc B370 in Thief is a combination that struggles significantly at higher resolutions, but shows a playable side at 1080p with lower settings. The data reveals a system heavily constrained by the graphics solution, especially as pixel count increases. The measured FPS drops are steep and consistent, making the resolution scaling the most critical factor in determining whether this combo is usable for a smooth experience.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 is punishing for this hardware pairing. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 45 FPS at 1080p to 31 FPS at 1440p, and then plummets to 18 FPS at 4K. That represents a 31% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 60% drop from 1080p to 4K. The pattern is identical across the other settings presets. At Low settings, the average drops from 78 FPS at 1080p to 53 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 31 FPS at 4K. Even at the lowest quality preset, the 4K result is halved compared to the 1080p result.

This scaling behavior points directly to the Intel Arc B370 as the limiting component. The GPU’s performance is being saturated long before the CPU’s capabilities are exhausted. The i3-12100F, with its 4 cores and 8 threads, is not the bottleneck here; the data shows that the frame rate is highly sensitive to resolution changes, which is the classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario. The Arc B370’s modest specifications—1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs—are simply not sufficient to feed the massive pixel throughput required at 4K. The measured FPS at 4K High (18 FPS) and 4K Ultra (17 FPS) are nearly identical, suggesting the GPU has hit a hard performance ceiling, regardless of the quality preset.

The implication is clear: 4K gaming is not a realistic target for this combination. The 1440p results are borderline, hovering in the 29-53 FPS range depending on settings. Only at 1920x1080 does the combo achieve consistently playable frame rates, and even then, only with settings adjustments. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p shows a smaller relative drop (around 31-32%) than the drop from 1440p to 4K (around 42-43%), indicating that the GPU’s performance curve flattens out as it becomes increasingly overwhelmed. For users targeting high refresh rates, even 1080p will require compromises. The data suggests that this is a 1080p-oriented pairing, and attempting to push beyond that will result in a subpar experience.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Thief at 60 FPS on average?

A: Yes, but only at 1920x1080 with Low settings, where the average FPS is 78. At Medium settings, the average drops to 59 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS threshold. No other resolution or settings combination in the measured data reaches 60 FPS.

Q: What is the best resolution for this hardware in Thief?

A: The data indicates that 1920x1080 is the only viable resolution for a smooth experience. All 1440p and 4K results fall below 60 FPS, with 4K results being largely unplayable. At 1080p, you have a range of options from 78 FPS at Low to 43 FPS at Ultra.

Q: How does the i3-12100F perform in synthetic benchmarks relative to its rivals?

A: The i3-12100F’s average benchmark score is 13494. This is essentially tied with the Intel Core 3 N355, which has an average score of 13492 (0% delta). It is 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i5-9500 (13452) and 1.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-1250U (13351). It is 0.7% behind the Intel Core 5 120UL (13594).

Q: Is the Intel Arc B370 a strong performer in synthetic tests?

A: No. The Arc B370 scores 1184 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are older cards like the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, -0.2% delta) and the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, -0.5% delta). This is a low-end result.

Q: What is the difference in average FPS between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: The difference is 35 FPS. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 78 FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves an average of 43 FPS. This shows a significant performance cost for the highest quality settings.

Q: Does the combo rank well among all tested combinations for Thief?

A: No. The combination ranks 2634 out of 2851 tested combos for Thief. This places it in the bottom portion of all configurations, indicating that most other hardware pairings perform better in this specific game.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i3-12100F is a 4-core, 8-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, fabricated on Intel’s 10 nm process. Its base clock is 3.30 GHz and it boosts up to 4.30 GHz. With a 12 MB shared L3 cache, this CPU provides decent single-thread performance, which is often relevant for older games like Thief. However, the benchmark data suggests that the CPU is not the primary factor limiting performance in this specific pairing.

The synthetic benchmarks for the i3-12100F show a strong showing for a quad-core part. It scores 1674 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 11860 in multi-core. Its geekbench single-core score is 1932. These numbers place it in the 68th percentile of all CPUs, which is a respectable mid-range position. The CPU’s nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score are the Intel Core 3 N355 and the Intel Core i5-9500, with the i3-12100F being effectively tied with them. This indicates that the CPU has enough processing power to feed a more capable GPU than the Arc B370.

In the context of Thief, the CPU’s role is to handle game logic, AI, and draw calls. Given that the FPS scales heavily with resolution, we can infer that the CPU is not being maxed out. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar frame rates across different resolutions, as the CPU’s workload remains constant. Instead, we see a sharp decline in FPS as resolution increases, which is the definitive sign of a GPU bottleneck. The 4-core, 8-thread configuration is sufficient for this 2014 title, and the data supports the conclusion that the Arc B370 is holding back the entire system. The CPU has headroom left, but the GPU cannot translate that headroom into higher frame rates at higher resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of which settings presets are viable. The primary goal is to maintain a playable frame rate, and the data shows that the only way to achieve that is by using the 1920x1080 resolution. At that resolution, the Low preset delivers an average of 78 FPS, which is smooth and offers significant headroom for demanding scenes. The Medium preset delivers 59 FPS, which is nearly at the 60 FPS target but includes min FPS data points of 50 FPS, suggesting occasional dips that could be noticeable.

For the best experience, the Low preset at 1920x1080 is the most sensible choice. It provides the highest average frame rate and ensures a consistent, fluid experience. The Medium preset is a viable alternative if you prefer slightly better visuals and can tolerate the frame rate hovering around 59 FPS, but the data shows it is not a locked 60 FPS experience. The High and Ultra presets at 1080p yield 45 FPS and 43 FPS respectively. These are on the edge of playability for a stealth game, but the lower frame rates could impact the smoothness of camera movement and character animation.

Stepping up to 2560x1440 is not recommended. The best result at that resolution is 53 FPS on the Low preset, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset drops to 41 FPS, and High and Ultra fall to 31 FPS and 29 FPS respectively. These are not ideal for a game that requires precise timing and stealth mechanics. At 3840x2160, all presets are effectively unplayable, with the highest average being 31 FPS on Low and the lowest being 17 FPS on Ultra. The data strongly suggests that users should stick to 1080p and prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity.

Given the hardware constraints, the optimal configuration is to set the resolution to 1920x1080 and the settings to Low. This yields the best performance headroom. If you must have better visuals, the Medium preset is the ceiling for a stable experience, but be prepared for the average to dip below 60 FPS. Pushing beyond Medium settings at this resolution results in a significant FPS penalty that is not worth the minor visual improvement, based on the measured data.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i3-12100F and Intel Arc B370 combination ranks 2634 out of 2851 tested combos in Thief. This places it in the bottom 8% of all tested configurations. This is a very poor ranking, indicating that the vast majority of other hardware pairings deliver better performance in this game. The rank is a holistic measure that considers the overall FPS across various settings and resolutions, and the data shows that this combo falls far behind the curve.

The low ranking is almost entirely attributable to the GPU. The Arc B370’s 5th percentile ranking among all GPUs is a strong indicator of its low performance ceiling. While the CPU is a decent mid-range part, it cannot compensate for the GPU’s lack of raw power. The combo’s performance is likely dragged down by its inability to handle higher resolutions, which are often used in benchmarking suites. The fact that the combo is ranked so low suggests that even older or less expensive GPUs might offer better performance in Thief.

This ranking serves as a warning for potential users. While the combo might be adequate for very light gaming at 1080p, it is not a competitive option for Thief when compared to other systems in the database. The data indicates that the GPU is the weak link, and any upgrade path would involve replacing the Arc B370 to see a meaningful improvement in this game. The i3-12100F is not the limiting factor; it has the processing power to support a significantly faster graphics card.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following is a complete breakdown of the measured FPS data for Thief with the Intel Core i3-12100F and Intel Arc B370.

At 1920x1080, the results are as follows:

• Low: Average FPS of 78. No min or max data provided.
• Medium: Average FPS of 59, with a min FPS of 50 and a max FPS of 68.
• High: Average FPS of 45. No min or max data provided.
• Ultra: Average FPS of 43. No min or max data provided.

At 2560x1440, the results are as follows:

• Low: Average FPS of 53. No min or max data provided.
• Medium: Average FPS of 41, with a min FPS of 35 and a max FPS of 47.
• High: Average FPS of 31. No min or max data provided.
• Ultra: Average FPS of 29. No min or max data provided.

At 3840x2160, the results are as follows:

• Low: Average FPS of 31. No min or max data provided.
• Medium: Average FPS of 24, with a min FPS of 20 and a max FPS of 27.
• High: Average FPS of 18. No min or max data provided.
• Ultra: Average FPS of 17. No min or max data provided.

The data shows a clear and consistent trend: the average FPS decreases as resolution increases, and it also decreases as settings quality increases. The only configuration that achieves an average FPS above 60 is 1080p Low. The 1080p Medium preset is the only other configuration to come close, with an average of 59 FPS. All other configurations fall below the 60 FPS threshold, with the 4K results being entirely unplayable. This data quantifies the GPU bottleneck and confirms that this combo is only suitable for 1080p gaming with reduced settings.