Thief

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-11400F compare to its closest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The i5-11400F posts an average benchmark score of 17,181, placing it nearly level with the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U (17,189, 0% delta). It is marginally ahead of the Intel Core i5-1240U (17,141, +0.2%), while the Intel Core i7-1260P and Intel Core Ultra 7 164U trail slightly at 17,212 and 17,215 respectively, both with a -0.2% delta relative to this chip.

Q: What is the combo's overall ranking among tested systems for Thief?

A: The Intel Core i5-11400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT ranks 1,161 out of 1,642 tested combos in Thief. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the database, indicating that while the hardware is competent, many other configurations deliver higher frame rates in this specific title.

Q: At which resolution and settings does this combo achieve its highest average FPS?

A: The highest measured average is 148.5 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. For more demanding visual quality, the Ultra preset at 1080p still delivers 87.7 FPS, while dropping to 1440p Ultra yields 59.7 FPS and 4K Ultra falls to 36.3 FPS.

Q: How does the GPU's benchmark standing compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Radeon RX 6600 XT has an average benchmark score of 27,985, which is 0.1% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (27,956) and 0.4% higher than the AMD Radeon R9 M395X (27,883). Meanwhile, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 scores 28,238 (a -0.9% delta) and the AMD FirePro S7150 scores 28,409 (-1.5% delta), both slightly ahead.

Q: What is the CPU's multithreaded performance like in Cinebench R23?

A: The i5-11400F scores 14,372 points in Cinebench R23 multicore and 2,029 in single-core. Its 6 cores and 12 threads with a boost clock of 4.40 GHz contribute to a 75th percentile ranking among all CPUs, suggesting solid mainstream performance.

Q: Does the GPU's 8 GB VRAM appear to be a limiting factor at higher resolutions?

A: The data shows a steep FPS decline from 1080p to 4K at the same settings. At High, the average drops from 89.3 FPS at 1080p to 61.9 at 1440p and 34.3 at 4K, which is a 61.6% reduction from 1080p to 4K. This pattern suggests the GPU, with its 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, becomes increasingly constrained as pixel count rises, though the game's age (released 2014-02-24) may also factor into scaling behavior.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on Rocket Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel's 14 nm process. Its base clock of 2.60 GHz can boost up to 4.40 GHz, and it shares 12 MB of L3 cache across all cores. For a stealth title like Thief, which launched in 2014, the CPU's single-thread performance is often more critical than raw core counts, and the data supports this: the i5-11400F achieves a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,029 and a 3DMark single-thread score of 868.

In synthetic multithreaded tests, the chip scores 14,372 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 6,036 in Cinebench R20 multicore, reflecting its 12 threads. Its PassMark multithread score of 16,908 and 3DMark max-thread score of 5,652 indicate balanced scaling when all cores are engaged. However, Thief's engine from the early 2010s likely relies more heavily on fewer threads, meaning the boost clock of 4.40 GHz and the 2-thread 3DMark score of 1,691 are probably more relevant to gameplay.

The CPU's 75th percentile ranking versus all CPUs suggests it sits comfortably in the upper quarter of processors, which is reasonable for a 2021 release. Its nearest rivals in average benchmark score — the Ryzen 7 5700U, Core i7-1260P, and Core Ultra 7 164U — are all within a 0.2% delta, indicating this chip is right at the edge of a performance tier. For Thief specifically, the measured FPS at 1080p Low (148.5) versus 4K Low (65.3) shows a 56% drop, which implies the CPU is not the primary bottleneck at lower resolutions since the frame rates remain high; the GPU takes over as the limiting factor as resolution climbs.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of Intel Core i5-11400F and AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT ranks 1,161 out of 1,642 tested configurations in Thief, placing it in the 29th percentile of all combos. This is a surprisingly low position given the hardware's individual standings — the CPU sits at the 75th percentile and the GPU at the 71st percentile. The mismatch suggests that Thief either favors different hardware combinations or that the game's engine does not fully utilize what this pairing offers.

Looking at the measured FPS, the combo's performance is highly settings-dependent. At 1080p Low, it hits 148.5 FPS, which would be competitive, but at 1080p Ultra it drops to 87.7 FPS — a 41% reduction from Low. This volatility across presets likely contributes to the middling combo rank, as the database may weight higher settings more heavily. The 4K Ultra result of 36.3 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, further pulling the rank down.

Compared to other combos in the database, the 1,161st position out of 1,642 means roughly 70% of tested systems outperform this pairing in Thief. Since the individual components rank in the 71-75th percentiles, the game appears to respond better to other architectures or combinations. The data implies that Thief may be more sensitive to certain GPU features or CPU memory latency than what this pairing provides, despite the hardware being generally capable in synthetic benchmarks.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce an average of 148.5 FPS, Medium drops to 118.8, High to 89.3, and Ultra to 87.7. The gap between High and Ultra is minimal (1.6 FPS), suggesting that Ultra's additional visual effects cost little at this resolution. The step from Medium to High is more significant, a 29.5 FPS reduction, indicating a notable increase in rendering load.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages fall to 110.1 FPS at Low, 81.8 at Medium, 61.9 at High, and 59.7 at Ultra. The High-to-Ultra delta shrinks to just 2.2 FPS, while Low-to-Medium drops 28.3 FPS. At this resolution, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth start to matter more, as the pixel count increases by 78% compared to 1080p.

At 3840x2160, the results show severe scaling. Low averages 65.3 FPS, Medium 50.5, High 34.3, and Ultra 36.3. Notably, Ultra (36.3) actually outperforms High (34.3) by 2 FPS, which is unusual and suggests possible driver or engine-level inconsistencies at extreme resolutions. The Low-to-Ultra range at 4K spans 29 FPS, showing that settings have a smaller absolute impact when the resolution itself is the dominant stressor.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is built on RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 23 chip, fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process. It packs 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with a boost clock of 2589 MHz and a game clock of 2359 MHz. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and the card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6.

In Thief, the GPU's role becomes evident when comparing FPS across resolutions. At 1080p, the card easily sustains high frame rates, with even Ultra hitting 87.7 FPS. But at 4K, the same Ultra preset drops to 36.3 FPS, a 58.6% reduction. This aligns with the GPU's benchmark profile: its PassMark G3D score of 16,461 and 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1,804 indicate mid-range performance, while its 71st percentile ranking shows it trails many newer or higher-tier cards.

The GPU's nearest rivals in average benchmark score are the GTX 980 Ti (27,956, +0.1% delta), R9 M395X (27,883, +0.4%), RTX 3070 (28,238, -0.9%), and FirePro S7150 (28,409, -1.5%). The RX 6600 XT's 10.60 TFLOPS FP32 performance is respectable, but Thief's 4K results suggest the 8 GB VRAM may be a limiting factor, as the game's textures and effects at Ultra likely consume significant memory at higher resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

The data indicates that the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance across all resolutions. At 1080p, Medium delivers 118.8 FPS, which is 30 FPS higher than High and 31.1 FPS higher than Ultra, while still providing enhanced visuals over Low. At 1440p, Medium maintains 81.8 FPS, comfortably above the 60 FPS target, whereas High drops to 61.9 and Ultra to 59.7. Even at 4K, Medium achieves 50.5 FPS, which is playable if not ideally smooth.

For users prioritizing frame rate, Low at 1080p yields 148.5 FPS, making it suitable for high-refresh-rate displays. However, Low at 1440p (110.1 FPS) and 4K (65.3 FPS) still provide excellent performance, suggesting that Low is a viable fallback for competitive play. The High preset is a poor choice at 4K (34.3 FPS) and only marginally better than Ultra at 1080p (89.3 vs 87.7), so it offers no clear advantage.

The best experience per the measured rows is Medium at 1440p: 81.8 FPS with settings that likely preserve most of the game's visual fidelity while avoiding the steep penalties of High and Ultra. At 1080p, Medium also shines at 118.8 FPS, making it the recommended preset for most users. Ultra should be reserved for 1080p or for players who accept sub-60 FPS at 1440p, since the 59.7 FPS result is borderline.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is stark across all settings. At Low, the average falls from 148.5 to 65.3 FPS, a 56% reduction. Medium drops from 118.8 to 50.5 FPS (57.5% reduction), High from 89.3 to 34.3 (61.6% reduction), and Ultra from 87.7 to 36.3 (58.6% reduction). The consistency of these percentage drops — all clustered between 56% and 62% — indicates that the scaling is primarily resolution-driven rather than settings-driven.

This pattern reveals that the limiting component shifts as resolution increases. At 1080p, the CPU's boost clock of 4.40 GHz and 12 threads can feed the GPU adequately, as evidenced by the high frame rates. But at 4K, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth become the bottleneck, as the pixel count quadruples from 1080p. The fact that Ultra at 4K (36.3 FPS) beats High (34.3 FPS) is anomalous and could point to driver-level optimizations or variable scene complexity in the benchmark runs.

The 1440p results sit between these extremes, with Low at 110.1 FPS and Ultra at 59.7 FPS. This suggests 1440p is the sweet spot for this combo, where the CPU still has headroom and the GPU is not yet overwhelmed. The data implies that for 4K gaming, users would need to accept Medium settings (50.5 FPS) or lower, while 1080p allows for maximum visual fidelity without sacrificing playability.