Thief

The Intel Core i5-12400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT delivers a measurable performance envelope for 2014's Thief that far exceeds the game's demands at most resolutions. A 6-core, 12-thread CPU with a user-visible 4.40 GHz boost and a 4096-shader GPU with 16 GB GDDR6 combine to produce between 56 FPS (4K Ultra) and 171 FPS (1080p Low), with the most notable difference appearing only when resolution climbs to 3840×2160. While the card’s 55th percentile standing among all GPUs and the CPU’s 73rd percentile among CPUs suggest moderate positioning in a general benchmark sense, the measured in-game results consistently hit triple digits at 1080p and remain above 60 FPS for most settings at 2560×1440. The data used here are all measured FPS numbers from the specified combination, with per-resolution and per-preset averages, but no minimum or maximum values except for the Medium preset at each resolution.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS values let us separate the presets into three categories per resolution. At 1920×1080, the Medium preset yields 155 FPS average, with a narrow 132-to-178 FPS range; Low outputs 171 FPS, while High and Ultra produce 140 and 138 FPS respectively. Since the 1080p Ultra average still stays at 138 FPS, there is nothing one would call “sluggish” here, but the real sweet spot is Medium: it keeps the minimum frame rate at 132, which is already far beyond the usually targeted 60 FPS, and it still tops 155 FPS on average. High is very close to Ultra, but Ultra carries a slightly higher load and gives barely 2 FPS less. Therefore, for a 1080p monitor, switching to Medium or Ultra is safe—both are over 137 FPS.

For 2560×1440, the Medium preset is again the winner. It averages 132 FPS with a min of 112 and max of 152. Low gives 151, and High drops to 101 while Ultra sits at 96. High and Ultra are all above 96 FPS, which still provides plenty of headroom above 60. However, the Medium preset has the characteristic of filling both the positive and negative extremes of the range—112 is enough for competition, 152 is pleasant—and 132 average is a fantastic balance that doesn't miss the highs of Low (105 FPS) or the generosity of the higher presets.

At 3840×2160, the scene changes significantly. Low lands on 102 FPS, Medium at 78 FPS (with a 66 minimum and a 89 maximum), while High and Ultra sit at 59 and 56 FPS, respectively. If you want a 60-class average at 4K, Medium is the only choice among the measured presets—High and Ultra both fall below the 60 FPS boundary. The data strongly underline that the optimal preset for this combo is Medium in all three resolutions, but if you possess a 144 Hz display at 1080p or 1440p, you may still choose Low for the absolute highest 171 or 151 FPS, and Ultra still gives a lot of playable performance (138 or 96) to those who value image quality over raw speed.

GPU explanatory Model

The RX 9070 XT is a substantial piece of hardware: it packs 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256‑bit bus, with 644.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth, a base clock of 1600 MHz, and a claimed boost of 2970 MHz. The card also shows a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 7260, a PassMark G3D score of 26,795, and an OpenCL Score of 17,428. These figures give a sense of the GPU’s capacity, but the most informative number in this page is the game’s measured frame rates.

In Thief, the GPU does not seem to be starved for memory: even at 4K Ultra, the stored settings need 16 GB of VRAM? The card has 16 GB, and the game runs at 56 FPS means the frame rate is not limited by bandwidth at that scenario. The biggest resolution jump (from 1440p to 4K) produces a loss in FPS that is roughly multiplicative rather than additive (see the next section). This pattern indicates that pixel throughput and geometry, not memory capacity, are the controlling factors. The GPU’s pixel rate—380.2 GPixel/s—is very high for the game’s age, so that explains why the Low preset at 1080px reaches 171. The card’s boost behavior isn't visible in the measurement, but the fact that the 9070 XT sustains a 155– 171 FPS on effortless gameplay supports the idea that the shopping leverages the card’s high core clock and sufficient TMUs/ROPs.

Worth noting is that the game even at Ultra 1080 hits only 138 FPS, which is still well above what any display with a from‑time pickup. For a 2014 title, the board is almost overloaded until you go 4K. The 64 red cell type is solid; if you are planning to play new titles, the same 9070 XT can handle them, but here the data shows raw compute headroom that is only relevant if you plan to run multiple post‑effects.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS across three resolutions reveal a smooth and predictable performance curve. At 1920×1080 with Low preset the average is 171 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low reduces that to 151 (roughly a 20% drop, or 20 FPS). The jump to 2160×60 Low produces only 102 FPS, cutting the 1440p value by another 49 FPS. The largest resolution jump, from 1080p to 4K, yields a drop from 171 to 102, or −69 FPS, meaning you lose about two‑thirds of the 1080p performance. That is a sign that the pixel workload dominates the scaling.

For Medium settings, the numbers are 155 (1080p), 132 (1440p), and 78 (4K). The same step changes to 132 ( − 23) and 78 ( − 54), representing − 15% and − 41% respectively. That is a larger 1080‑to‑4K decline (77 = − 155 − 78, i.e., roughly 50% missing). If we look at High, the sequence 140 → 101 → 59 shows 1080p to 1440p is − 39 (− 28%), 1440p to 4Kp is − 42 (− 42%), and the overall is 140 → 59 (− 58%). The 1080p to 1440p drop is 39 FPS, while the 1440p to 4K drop is 42, meaning the pixel count pressure increases at the highest resolution. For Ultra, 138 → 96 → 56: the 1080→1440 decline is 42 (− 30%), the 1440→4K decline is 40 (− − 42%), and the total is − 82 (− 59%). The Ultra line has the steepest slope because it uses the full shading rates, but even then, the 4K Ultra remains just at the 56 FPS boundary.

This behavior paints a clear picture: as you move toward the 4K and higher, the physics becomes the floodgate. The engine’s rendering and pixel fill always catch up. The GPU definitely has enough raw power to keep 60+ FPS at 4K only when we accept medium (78) or low (102). The fact that between 1440p and 4K we see a more than 40% FPS reduction across settings points to an algorithm that is almost linearly sensitive to total pixel count, although not perfectly due to the game’s variable delay. None of those settings show an actual bottleneck at the CPU; the data are all GPU‑driven, with the CPU not changing at all across the range.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this CPU‑GPU pair achieves a comboRankInGame of 925 out of the 3,720 combos. That positions it in the 75.1st percentile of tested pairings (since 3,720 − 925 = 2,795, i.e. better than 75% of the combinations running the same game). The CPU itself sits in the 73rd percentile relative to all CPUs, and the GPU in the 55th percentile, meaning that the pairing’s in‑game rank is better than what the sum of the parts would suggest. The FPS figures show why: at 1080p and 1440p the CPU breaks the game above 140 FPS for most presets, allowing the GPU to fill the screen while the CPU keep up. The pairing sits near the top quarter of all systems. For such a 2014 title, that ranking is high, but you have to note the data comes from the high GPU that drives this game’s FPS. It underlines that for stealth games – which often rely on CPU‑driven physics and AI – the modern i5‑12400F gives enough throughput to avoid being the limiting part in a system where the GPU can push beyond 160 FPS; the combo is therefore a safe benchmark‑oriented pick.

FAQ

Q: Does the measurement include a 4K Ultra type result?

A: Yes, the real measured 4K Ultra average is 56 FPS. That is the lowest averaged FPS in this page; all other resolutions and presets are higher.

Q: What is the best‑performing setting at 2560×1440?

A: The Low preset gives 151 FPS, the Medium gives 132 FPS, and the High gives 101 FPS. While Low is the fastest, Medium delivers a nearly balanced 112-152 FPS range, so it is the sweet spot.

Q: Are the FPS numbers from a real run or from a snippet?

A: The data is marked as ‘dataIsMeasured: true’, so all measured FPS average and min/max numbers are a true run.

Q: Which setting produces the lowest minimum frame of all measured rows?

A: The 4K Medium row shows a 66 FPS minimum. That is the lowest of the min‑FPS values listed, but the minimum still stays above the 60 FPS floor.

Q: How many combinations does this system beat?

A: Its combo rank is 925 out of 3720, meaning it beat 2,795 other combos (roughly 75.1 % of the tested configurations).

Q: In absolute terms, what FPS appears at 1080p with the Ultra preset?

A: The measured average of the 1080p Ultra is 158 FPS, with a maximum of 138? Actually the 1080p Ultra is 138 FPS average (no min/max given), and 1080p High is 140 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

| Resolution | Settings | Average FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |

| 1920×1080 | Low | 171 | – | – |

| 1920×1080 | Medium | 155 | 132 | 178 |

| 1920×1080 | High | 140 | – | – |

| 1920×1080 | Ultra | 138 | – | – |

| 2560×1440 | Low | 151 | – | – |

| 2560×1440 | Medium | 132 | 112 | 152 |

| 2560×1440 | High | 101 | – | – |

| 2560×1440 | Ultra | 96 | – | – |

| 3840×2160 | Low | 102 | – | – |

| 3840×2160 | Medium | 78 | 66 | 89 |

| 3840×2160 | High | 59 | – | – |

| 3840×2160 | Ultra | 56 | – | – |

The medium preset avoids the extreme high frame counts of Low but still produces a smooth curve across all three resolutions. For those that need an almost guarantee of 60, 51, 132 and 78 FPS are the safe paths. When you want to see current-generation rendering, the game lets itself at 138 and 96 with Ultra at 1080p and 1440p; at 4K the 60 FPS is only reachable by selecting Low or Medium. The data from this measurement shows a card capable of strong performance in Thief, with a sweet spot in resolution scaling between 1080p and 1440p Medium; the 4K ceiling is about 78 FPS (Medium) or 102 (Low) unless you prefer to cap the 60 assignment. For anyone chasing triple‑digit frame rates, the 1080p and 1440p Medium rows are the ones to remember, and the 4K69 row falls only at the High settings. The CPU has room to help those 12 threads to push beyond the 2014 frames per second, leaving the Radeon free to deliver what is one of the fastest sheet‑record today on this classic game.