Thief

The Intel Core i3-12100F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER ranks 290th out of 1,642 tested combos in Thief, placing it in the top 18% of all system configurations. This is a strong result for a four-core CPU paired with a high-end GPU, and the data shows that the combo delivers smooth framerates across most resolution and settings combinations, though the CPU becomes a limiting factor at lower resolutions and the GPU takes over at 4K.

How This Combo Ranks

Out of 1,642 total tested combinations, this pairing sits at rank 290, which puts it comfortably in the upper tier of systems for Thief. The ranking reflects the balance between the Core i3-12100F’s modest core count and the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER’s substantial rendering power. While the GPU is capable of far more work than the CPU can feed at lower resolutions, the overall combination still outperforms the vast majority of tested configs. The CPU itself holds a 72nd percentile ranking among all processors, and its average benchmark score of 13,516 places it within 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX (13,534) and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i7-1250U (13,462). It also edges out the Intel Core i3-10105 (13,430) by 0.6% and the Intel Core i7-7700K (13,280) by 1.8%. On the GPU side, the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER ranks in the 86th percentile with an average score of 48,704, trailing the NVIDIA CMP 50HX (49,071) by 0.7% and the Intel Arc A550M (49,737) by 2.1%, while leading the NVIDIA RTX A2000 (47,915) by 1.6% and the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile (47,743) by 2.0%. These benchmark figures indicate that the GPU is the dominant component in raw compute, but in Thief specifically, the measured FPS shows the CPU can still hold the system back in certain scenarios.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i3-12100F has 4 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. This is an Alder Lake-S architecture chip built on Intel’s 10 nm process, with a die size of 163 mm². Cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. In Thief, a stealth game from 2014, the CPU’s single-thread performance matters more than its multi-core throughput, and the data reflects that. The 3DMark single-thread score is 893, while the 2-thread score is 1,659, the 4-thread score is 2,859, and the 8-thread score is 4,026. The max-thread score of 4,023 is nearly identical to the 8-thread result, which shows that the chip’s four physical cores with hyper-threading offer no additional scaling beyond 8 threads in this workload. Cinebench R23 scores of 1,681 single-core and 11,912 multi-core confirm that the CPU’s strength lies in its per-core efficiency rather than raw parallel throughput. PassMark single-thread results of 3,444 reinforce this, while the multi-thread score of 14,015 is modest. In Thief, the impact of this CPU is visible at 1080p: the difference between Low and Ultra settings is only 38 FPS (171.4 vs 133.4), which suggests that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck at that resolution, but it does cap the maximum achievable framerate. At 4K, however, the CPU’s role diminishes, and the GPU becomes the clear limiting factor.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with an AD103 chip on TSMC’s 5 nm process. It packs 84.48 shading units in this configuration (listed as 8,448), 264 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, along with 66 RT cores and 264 tensor cores. The base clock is 2,340 MHz, with a boost clock of 2,610 MHz, and memory runs at 1,313 MHz, translating to 21 Gbps effective. The 16 GB of GDDR6X memory sits on a 256-bit bus, providing 672.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s pixel rate is 250.6 GPixel/s, texture rate is 689.0 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 44.10 TFLOPS. In Thief, the GPU’s raw power is evident in the measured FPS at higher resolutions. At 4K Ultra, the combo still manages 65.5 FPS, which is playable, while 4K High hits 68.4 FPS. The GPU’s 86th percentile ranking among all GPUs and its PassMark G3D score of 31,811 indicate it is far more capable than the CPU in isolation. The data shows that at 1440p and 4K, the GPU is doing most of the heavy lifting, as framerates scale with settings changes in a way that reflects the GPU’s compute limits rather than CPU bottlenecks.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers an average of 171.4 FPS on Low settings, 150.7 FPS on Medium, 139.5 FPS on High, and 133.4 FPS on Ultra. The spread from Low to Ultra is 38 FPS, which is relatively narrow, indicating that even at the lowest settings, the CPU is holding the system back from reaching higher framerates. Moving to 2560x1440, the averages are 149.3 FPS on Low, 135.9 FPS on Medium, 119.6 FPS on High, and 115.9 FPS on Ultra. The Low-to-Ultra spread here is 33.4 FPS, showing that the GPU is starting to take on more of the workload. At 3840x2160, the results are 119.7 FPS on Low, 91.8 FPS on Medium, 68.4 FPS on High, and 65.5 FPS on Ultra. The spread from Low to Ultra at 4K is 54.2 FPS, which is the largest of all three resolutions, confirming that the GPU is the dominant factor at this resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The data shows a clear pattern in how FPS drops as resolution increases. From 1080p Low to 1440p Low, the framerate falls from 171.4 to 149.3, a drop of 22.1 FPS. From 1440p Low to 4K Low, it falls further to 119.7, another 29.6 FPS drop. The total reduction from 1080p Low to 4K Low is 51.7 FPS, which is a 30.2% decrease. On Ultra settings, the progression is 133.4 FPS at 1080p, 115.9 FPS at 1440p, and 65.5 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1440p Ultra to 4K Ultra is 50.4 FPS, which is a 43.5% reduction. This steeper decline at higher settings indicates that the GPU is being pushed harder as resolution and quality both increase. In contrast, the CPU’s influence is most visible at 1080p, where the framerate difference between Low and Ultra is only 38 FPS, suggesting that the CPU is limiting the system’s ability to fully utilize the GPU’s power at lower resolutions. At 4K, the GPU becomes the sole limiting factor, as evidenced by the much larger FPS gaps between settings presets. The fact that 4K Low (119.7 FPS) is still higher than 1080p Ultra (133.4 FPS) is notable, but the gap narrows considerably when comparing 4K High (68.4 FPS) to 1080p Ultra (133.4 FPS), a difference of 65 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

For players targeting 1440p, the High preset at 119.6 FPS offers an excellent balance of visual quality and performance, while Ultra at 115.9 FPS is nearly identical, with only a 3.7 FPS penalty. At 1080p, the High preset at 139.5 FPS is the best choice, as Ultra at 133.4 FPS provides diminishing returns for the extra load, and Medium at 150.7 FPS is only 11.2 FPS faster than High. For 4K gaming, the Medium preset at 91.8 FPS is the sweet spot, as it delivers a smooth experience while High at 68.4 FPS and Ultra at 65.5 FPS dip below 70 FPS, which may be less ideal for fast-paced stealth action. The Low preset at 4K (119.7 FPS) is only 27.9 FPS faster than Medium, so the visual trade-off is not worth it for most users. Overall, the data suggests that 1440p High or Ultra is the ideal experience for this combo, providing framerates well above 100 FPS while maintaining high visual fidelity. At 1080p, the CPU’s four cores and 8 threads limit the maximum framerate, so players with high-refresh monitors may want to stick with High settings rather than lowering to Medium or Low, as the gains are modest and the visual hit is significant. At 4K, Medium is the recommended preset, as it stays above 90 FPS while still offering decent quality, and the GPU’s 16 GB of VRAM ensures no memory-related stutters at this resolution.