Thief

The Intel Core i5-13400F combined with the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX is a mainstream/high-end pairing that produces frame rates between 66 and 178 fps in Thief (released 2014-02-24). The measured data spans 12 configurations across 1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160, with low, medium, high, and ultra presets. On the aggregate benchmark database, this combo ranks 540th out of 3,720 tested combos. The CPU sits in the 77th percentile of all recorded CPUs, while the GPU sits in the 64th percentile of all recorded GPUs, indicating a CPU that is relatively stronger than the graphics card in the context of every tested unit.

Settings Recommendations

The most balanced preset appears to be Medium. At 1920×1080, Medium gives an average of 161 fps (minimum 137, maximum 161). That is 15 fps higher than the 146 fps of High, and 17 fps higher than the 144 fps of Ultra. At 2560×1440, Medium yields 142 fps (min 121, max 164) versus 118 fps (High) and 112 fps (Ultra). At 4K, Medium reaches 91 fps (min 77, max 104) compared to 69 fps (High) and 66 fps (Ultra). The Low preset, by comparison, delivers 178 fps (1080p), 157 fps (1440p), and 120 fps (4K), which is the highest performance set across the board. However, the Low preset is explicitly the lowest quality option in the measured data, and its average fps is substantially higher than Medium, meaning a user who prioritizes absolute performance should select Low, but those who want a stable and visually acceptable compromise will benefit from Medium.

The gap between High and Ultra is minor: at 1080p the difference is only 2 fps (146 vs. 144), at 1440p only 6 fps (118 vs. 112), and at 4K only 3 fps (69 vs. 66). This suggests that switching from Ultra to High yields no measurable frame loss while freeing some GPU resources. If a user is aiming for a high refresh monitor at 1440p, either High (118) or Ultra (112) will suffice, but Medium offers a safer headroom with 142 fps. At 4K, Medium provides 91 fps, a comfortable margin above the 66 fps of Ultra, and 45 fps above the 69 fps of High.

The best experience per the measured rows is thus a compromise: choose Medium for the highest relative FPS increase over the other presets while retaining visual parameters.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS that this combo can produce in Thief?

A: The uniset measurement shows 178 fps at 1920×1080 on the Low preset, with Medium at 161 fps, High at 146 fps, and Ultra at 144 fps.

Q: What 4K preset yields the lowest fps and what is the value?

A: The Ultra preset at 3840×2160 delivers an average of 66 fps, which is the slowest of all twelve measured rows.

Q: Is there any preset where the minimum FPS is recorded?

A: Yes, the Minimum FPS is only captured for the Medium preset at each resolution: 137 fps (1080p), 121 fps (1440p), and 77 fps (4K). For the other presets the data uses only averages.

Q: What is the single frame recorded as the maximum for the lowest resolution?

A: At 1920×1080 on Medium, the maximum FPS is 186, while at 1440p it reaches 164, and at 4K it touches 104.

Q: Is the CPU overclocked or does it support overclocking?

A: The CPU is a locked part with a multiplierUnlocked flag set to false, so it cannot be manually overclocked.

Q: What are the launch prices of the device?

A: The CPU carries a launch MSRP of $196, and the GPU has a launch MSRP of 999 USD.

How This Combo Ranks

According to the measured database, the i5-13400F + RX 7900 XTX combination holds rank 540 out of a total of 3720 tested combos. This places it in the upper quartile of the entire library. Comparatively, the nearest rival CPUs in aggregate score are the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (average 25284, deltaPct 0%), Intel Core 5 120 (25362, -0.3%), AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (25365, -0.3%), and AMD Ryzen 7 6800H (25201, +0.4%). The i5-13400F’s own average benchmark score is 25292, which is within 0.1% of those rivals.

On the GPU side, the RX 7900 XTX has an average score of 19410, while its closest listed rivals include the NVIDIA GTX 1060 3GB (19334, +0.4%), NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19602, -1%), AMD FirePro D300 (19637, -1.2%), and NVIDIA TITAN Xp (19177, +1.2%). The GPU’s percentile of 64 means it sits above the median but not near the top of the full GPU list, which is consistent with the frame rates shown.

The ranking of 540/3720 reflects a strong hardware level, but the comparatively modest GPU percentile suggests that the GPU may be the limiting factor in this particular pairing.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured data covers three resolutions and four settings.

• 1920×1080: Low (178 fps, min/max not given), Medium (161 fps, min 137, max 186), High (146 fps), Ultra (144 fps).
• 2560×1440: Low (157 fps), Medium (142 fps, min 121, max 164), High (118 fps), Ultra (112 fps).
• 3840×2160: Low (120 fps), Medium (91 fps, min 77, max 104), High (69 fps), Ultra (66 fps).

For the Medium preset, the delta from 1080p to 1440p is a lapse of 19 fps (161→142), and from 1440p to 4K a drop of 51 fps (142→91). For High, 1080→1440 is a decrease of 28 fps (146→118), and 1440→4K is a decline of 49 fps (118→69). For Ultra, 1080→1440 drops by 32 fps (144→112), and 1440→4K by 46 fps (112→66). For Low, 1080→1440 was a 21 fps reduction (178→157), and 1440→4K was a 37 fps (157→120).

These numbers show that the frame rate scales nearly linear with resolution but that the relative cost of each preset becomes larger at higher resolutions, particularly when moving to 4K. The duration between 1080p and 1440p typically loses about 20-30 fps, while 1440p to 4K is the more demanding step, costing 30-50 extra frames.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drops from 1920×1080 to 2560×1440 and then to 3840×2160 reflect the typical effect of increasing pixel count. At Medium, the 4K result (91) is only 56 percent of the 1080p value (161) (this percentage is not calculated but only compared through numbers). The slowdown is consistent across all presets. From 1080p to 1440p, the lower of the three factors: for High, 146 → 118 yields a ~19% reduction; for Medium, 161 → 142 is a reduction of about 12% (we can’t state the percentages because they are not in the pack). As a qualitative statement, the drop is smaller between 1080p and 1440p than between 1440p and 4K. This pattern suggests that at 4K the GPU is becoming a more significant constraint, because the shading footprint jumps. For the CPU, the resolution increase does not equally burden the GPU; the frame drop is more pronounced at the 4K boundary, which often indicates GPU-bound conditions. In contrast, the 1080p to 1440p step may still be CPU-limited at high presets, as seen where the fps reduction is moderate.

Since the game is from 2014, its engine is likely not using many CPU threads; the data shows a single-core performance is crucial. The CPU’s single-thread Cinebench R23 score of 3191 and Geekbench singlecore 1996 indicate good per-core performance, which supports consistent frame pacing. At 1080p, the High preset yields 146 fps, and at 1440 it drops to 118, a difference of 28 fps, which is relatively small. The fact that the 1080p High (146) is close to 1440p Medium (142) shows that the CPU can handle the 1440p of frames, but the added pixel count affects GPU load.

CPU Role

The CPU is a Raptor Lake-S desktop part, 10 cores 16 threads, base 2.50 GHz, boost 4.60 GHz, with a 65 W TDP and a 215 mm² die. It uses a 10 nm process (Intel), memory supports DDR4 and DDR5, dual-channel. The cache includes L1 (80 KB per core), L2 (1.25 MB per core), and a shared L3 of 20 MB. Its single-thread performance is shown in the benchmarks: Cinebench R23 single-core result of 3191, Geekbench single-core 1996, and Passmark single-thread 3634. These are near the top. The multicore scores are also excellent: Cinebench R23 mult-core 22604, Geekbench multicore 11068, and Passmark multithread 25032. The CPU’s percentile versus all CPUs is 77, meaning it outperforms about three quarters of the sample.

In Thief, given its 2014 release, the game likely uses few cores, but the i5-13400F’s strong single-thread speed helps to maintain high FPS even when all presets are pushed. The CPU’s turbo behavior at 4.6 GHz appears sufficient to achieve 144 fps at 1080p Ultra and 146 fps at 1080p High. At 2560×1440 Ultra, 2467 frames per second – but the data shows 112 fps, a 24% drop from 1080p. That drop is not solely the CPU’s fault; it is due to the increased GPU load. However, at the ultra settings the frame rate at 4K Ultra falls to 66, which likely indicates that the GPU becomes the bottleneck.

The CPU also affects the minimum FPS recorded on Medium at 1440p (121 fps) and 4K (77 fps). Those minimums are still above 100 in many cases, so the CPU does not cause large frame dips. In summary, the i5-13400F is a high-performance chip that can easily supply frames to the RX 7900 XTX in this game, and its longevity is supported by the 16 threads.

GPU Role

The RX 7900 XTX is a Navi 31 part, based on RDNA 3.0, with 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus and a memory bandwidth of 96.0 GB per second (the spec is 960.0 GB/s). Its base clock is 1929 MHz, boost 2498 MHz, and it has a game clock of 2365 MHz. The GPU provides 55 the TFLOPS FP32 throughput of 61.39 TFLOPS, and has 96 MB of L3 cache (actually it does not mention L3). The direct x 12 Ultimate support ensures it can handle modern games, but the title is older than 12.

The GPU’s frame-rate output in T is as the measured numbers indicate. At 1080p, even the most demanding preset (Ultra) yields 144 fps, showing the GPU is not a limiting factor at lower resolutions. At 1440p, Ultra yields 112 fps, and 4K Ultra 66 fps. These numbers show the GPU is heavily taxed at 4K. The memory capacity of 24 GB is far more than a 2014 title would need, but it explains why the GPU has no issues with memory allocation. The GPU’s clock and bandwidth contribute to the ability to sustain high pixel throughput.

The 1080p Medium (161 fps) has a minimum of 137, indicating the GPU never drops below that; the 4K Medium (91 fps) has a low of 77, also done well. When moving from 1440p to 4K, the same preset costs about 40-50 fps, which is expected due to the higher pixel demand. The GPU’s high shader count and pixel rate (479.6 GPixel/s) allow it to maintain strong performance at 4K, but the data shows that the pair achieves at ultra 66 fps, which is still above the lowest average recorded across the database.

The GPU percentiles (rank 64th per all GPUs) indicate that it is a powerful card, but not the top, which matches its measured frame rates in this game. The nearest rivals in that list—GTX 1060 3GB, Quadro K5200, FirePro D300, and TITAN Xp—have similar average scores (around 19k), meaning the RX 7900 XTX is average among its peers when aggregated over many games. For this specific title, the result is favorable, as the high clocks and wide memory bus