Thief

The Intel Core i5-11400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT delivers a compelling 1080p experience in Thief, but the data reveals a clear performance ceiling that shifts depending on resolution and settings. From the measured rows, this combo is heavily GPU-bound at 4K, yet at 1080p, the CPU’s six cores begin to show their limits in the highest preset. The benchmark results indicate a system that excels at high-refresh 1440p but struggles to maintain playable frames at 4K Ultra, making it a versatile but not uncompromising pairing for this 2014 stealth classic.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and nonlinear, which points to the GPU becoming the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 143.7 FPS at 1920x1080 to 86.3 FPS at 3840x2160, a reduction of roughly 40% despite the pixel count quadrupling. This suggests the RX 7700 XT’s 12 GB of GDDR6 memory and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for the load, but the rendering pipeline itself—specifically the 96 ROPs and 35.17 TFLOPS of FP32 compute—is what limits throughput at 4K.

The scaling pattern becomes more telling when examining the Ultra preset. At 1080p Ultra, the combo achieves 119.2 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, it drops to 49.9 FPS, a 58% decline. This is a larger relative drop than the Low preset’s 40% decrease, indicating that higher settings amplify the GPU’s workload disproportionately. The Medium preset follows a similar trend: 131.9 FPS at 1080p versus 65.9 FPS at 4K, a 50% reduction. These numbers imply that Thief’s Ultra settings introduce effects that scale aggressively with resolution, likely taxing the 54 RT cores and texture units more heavily than the base geometry.

Interestingly, the gap between 1440p and 4K is wider than the gap between 1080p and 1440p across all settings. For High, the drop from 1440p (82.1 FPS) to 4K (52.4 FPS) is 36%, while the drop from 1080p (118.8 FPS) to 1440p is 31%. This suggests that the GPU hits a memory bandwidth or fill-rate wall near 4K, where the 192-bit bus and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth become limiting factors. The data shows that 1440p is the sweet spot for maintaining high frame rates, as the 4K results consistently fall below 60 FPS except at Low settings.

CPU Role

The Core i5-11400F contributes significantly at lower resolutions, where the GPU is not the sole constraint. With 6 cores and 12 threads, this Rocket Lake chip has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, providing enough single-thread performance for Thief’s engine. The benchmark scores support this: the 3dmark single-thread score of 868 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2029 indicate robust per-core throughput, which is critical for a game that often relies on a few heavily loaded threads.

At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 143.7 FPS, which is only 9% higher than the 4K Low result of 86.3 FPS when adjusted for resolution scaling. This modest gain suggests that the CPU is not the limiting factor even at 1080p Low—the GPU still has headroom. However, at 1080p Ultra, the frame rate barely improves over High (119.2 FPS vs 118.8 FPS), whereas at 4K, Ultra (49.9 FPS) is noticeably lower than High (52.4 FPS). This plateau at 1080p Ultra indicates that the CPU’s 12 MB of shared L3 cache and DDR4 memory bandwidth (51.2 GB/s) are being saturated by the game’s AI and physics systems when settings increase.

The Passmark multithread score of 16908 and Geekbench multicore score of 7579 show that the CPU is capable of handling multi-threaded workloads, but Thief’s 2014 engine may not fully utilize all 12 threads. The Cinebench R15 multicore score of 1448 versus the single-core score of 204 reveals a scaling efficiency of about 7x, which is typical for a 6-core/12-thread part. This means that in scenes with heavy NPC activity or complex lighting calculations, the CPU’s boost clock of 4.40 GHz becomes more important than raw thread count. The data suggests that the i5-11400F is adequate for this game, but it does prevent the RX 7700 XT from reaching its full potential at 1080p Ultra.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the Medium preset at 1440p offers the best balance of visual fidelity and performance. At 2560x1440 Medium, the combo averages 109.7 FPS, which is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. This is 34% faster than High at the same resolution (82.1 FPS) and only 16% slower than Low (131.1 FPS), making Medium the clear choice for players who want a responsive experience without sacrificing too much detail.

For 1080p users, the High preset is the recommended starting point. At 1920x1080 High, the average frame rate is 118.8 FPS, which is nearly identical to Ultra (119.2 FPS). This indicates that the jump from High to Ultra provides negligible performance gain while likely increasing visual quality only marginally. The Low preset at 1080p reaches 143.7 FPS, but the difference between Low and Medium (131.9 FPS) is only 8%, suggesting that Medium is worth the minor FPS cost for better textures and shadows.

At 4K, the situation is more constrained. The Ultra preset averages 49.9 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target and may cause noticeable stuttering on standard 60 Hz displays. The High preset at 52.4 FPS is only 5% better, while Medium (65.9 FPS) and Low (86.3 FPS) are the only viable options for maintaining playability. For 4K users, Medium is the recommended preset, as it provides a 25% improvement over High while keeping the frame rate above 60 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 732 out of 1642 tested combinations in Thief, placing it in the upper-middle tier of all systems evaluated. This percentile position (roughly the 55th percentile) is consistent with the component benchmarks: the CPU ranks in the 75th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 73rd percentile among all GPUs. The combo’s rank is lower than either component’s individual percentile, which suggests that the pairing is not perfectly balanced for this specific game.

The GPU’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 with a deltaPct of 0, meaning the RX 7700 XT performs nearly identically in average benchmark scores. However, in Thief specifically, the RX 7700 XT’s 4K performance is limited by its 12 GB memory configuration, which is adequate but not excessive for this game’s texture-heavy environments. The CPU’s nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U and Intel Core i7-1260P, have nearly identical average scores (17189 and 17212, respectively), but the i5-11400F’s desktop-class power delivery and 65 W TDP give it an advantage in sustained loads. The combo rank of 732 reflects that while each component is solid, the combination does not break into the top tier, likely due to the CPU’s 6-core/12-thread configuration limiting frame rates at lower resolutions.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 7700 XT is the dominant component in this pairing, and its specifications directly explain the measured FPS patterns. With 3456 shading units, 216 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, the GPU is well-equipped for rasterization-heavy titles like Thief. The boost clock of 2544 MHz and game clock of 2171 MHz provide high compute throughput, as evidenced by the 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3316 and Passmark G3D score of 22547.

The 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus delivers 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p but becomes a limiting factor at 4K. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra (49.9 FPS) suggests that the GPU’s fill rate is the bottleneck, as the pixel rate of 244.2 GPixel/s is strained by the 8.3 million pixels of 3840x2160. The texture rate of 549.5 GTexel/s is also taxed by Ultra settings, which likely include high-resolution textures that consume memory bandwidth.

Interestingly, the GPU’s performance in Thief does not align perfectly with its synthetic benchmarks. The Passmark DirectX 11 score of 232 and DirectX 12 score of 79 show strong API support, but the game’s 2014 engine may not fully utilize the RDNA 3.0 architecture’s features. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 127549 and Vulkan score of 132758 indicate that compute workloads are handled efficiently, but Thief’s rendering pipeline appears to be more dependent on raw rasterization speed than on compute shaders. This explains why the 4K results show a steep decline despite the GPU’s high theoretical throughput.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 2560x1440 with Medium settings achieves 109.7 FPS, making it the best balance of performance and visual quality. At 1080p, High settings reach 118.8 FPS, while 4K is limited to Medium (65.9 FPS) for playable frame rates.

Q: Why does the frame rate drop so much at 4K Ultra?

A: The 4K Ultra preset averages 49.9 FPS, which is 58% lower than 1080p Ultra (119.2 FPS). The GPU’s 192-bit memory bus and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for the pixel workload at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, even with 12 GB of VRAM.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 143.7 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra, it only achieves 119.2 FPS. This plateau suggests the CPU’s 6 cores and 12 threads limit performance when settings increase, as the GPU still has headroom to render more frames.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested systems?

A: It ranks 732 out of 1642 tested combos, which is in the upper-middle tier. The GPU ranks in the 73rd percentile and the CPU in the 75th percentile, but the combination does not reach the top tier due to the CPU’s thread limitations.

Q: What settings should I use for a 60 FPS target at 4K?

A: The Medium preset at 3840x2160 averages 65.9 FPS, which is above 60 FPS. The High preset (52.4 FPS) and Ultra preset (49.9 FPS) both fall below the target, so Medium is the recommended setting for 4K.

Q: Does the GPU’s 12 GB VRAM cause any issues in Thief?

A: The 12 GB GDDR6 memory is sufficient for all tested settings, as the game does not appear to exceed this capacity. However, the 432.0 GB/s bandwidth is the limiting factor at 4K, not the memory size.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers strong performance across all settings. Low averages 143.7 FPS, Medium reaches 131.9 FPS, High hits 118.8 FPS, and Ultra achieves 119.2 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra is negligible (0.4 FPS), indicating that Ultra adds minimal performance cost at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain solid but show more differentiation. Low averages 131.1 FPS, Medium drops to 109.7 FPS, High falls to 82.1 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 78.1 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra narrows to 4 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High grows to 27.6 FPS, suggesting that High settings introduce a significant rendering burden.

At 3840x2160, the performance drops substantially. Low averages 86.3 FPS, Medium reaches 65.9 FPS, High hits 52.4 FPS, and Ultra falls to 49.9 FPS. The drop from Medium to High is 13.5 FPS, while the drop from High to Ultra is only 2.5 FPS. This indicates that Ultra is not worth the performance cost at 4K, as it provides only a marginal visual improvement over High. The 4K results show that Low is the only preset that maintains a high frame rate, while Medium is the minimum for 60 FPS gameplay.