Thief

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the Intel Arc B370 presents a peculiar combination for Thief, a 2014 stealth title that remains demanding at higher resolutions. The data indicates a system that is heavily constrained by its graphics solution, with frame rates that fall below playable thresholds at 4K but recover to respectable levels at 1080p. This analysis breaks down the measured performance across resolutions and settings, examines the roles of the CPU and GPU, and contextualizes the combo’s standing among 2,851 tested configurations.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for this combo reveals a steep performance cliff as resolution increases, a classic sign of a GPU-bound workload. At 1080p with Low settings, the system delivers 78 FPS average. Moving to 1440p at the same Low preset drops the average to 53 FPS, a reduction of 25 FPS or roughly 32%. At 4K Low, the average falls further to 31 FPS, which is 47 FPS below the 1080p Low result — a 60% decrease. This scaling pattern is consistent with a GPU that has limited pixel throughput, as the Arc B370’s pixel rate is listed at 48.00 GPixel/s.

The High settings preset shows a similar trajectory. At 1080p High, the average is 45 FPS. At 1440p High, it drops to 31 FPS, and at 4K High, it bottoms out at 18 FPS. The gap between 1080p and 1440p High is 14 FPS (31%), while the gap between 1440p and 4K High is 13 FPS (42%). This indicates that the scaling penalty is not linear — the transition to 4K imposes a disproportionately heavy load, likely due to the sheer number of pixels requiring shading and texturing.

Medium settings show a similar pattern. At 1080p Medium, the average is 59 FPS with a minimum of 50 and a maximum of 68. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 41 FPS (min 35, max 47), and at 4K Medium, it falls to 24 FPS (min 20, max 27). The 4K Medium result is particularly telling: the minimum FPS of 20 suggests occasional stutters, and the average of 24 is below the 30 FPS threshold often considered the floor for playable action. The gap between 1080p and 1440p Medium is 18 FPS (31%), and between 1440p and 4K Medium is 17 FPS (41%).

Ultra settings are the most demanding. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 43 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, it drops to 29 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it reaches just 17 FPS. The difference between 1080p and 1440p Ultra is 14 FPS (33%), and between 1440p and 4K Ultra is 12 FPS (41%). Notably, the Ultra preset at 4K produces the lowest measured average of any configuration, at 17 FPS, which is effectively unplayable for a stealth game requiring precise timing and reaction.

The resolution scaling data strongly suggests that the limiting component is the GPU. The CPU, an Intel Core i5-13400F with 10 cores and 16 threads, has ample compute headroom for a game from 2014. The consistent ~30-40% drop in FPS when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and another ~40% drop from 1440p to 4K, aligns with the GPU’s fixed pixel and texture rates. The Arc B370’s texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s, and its FP32 throughput is 6.144 TFLOPS — figures that are modest by modern standards. As resolution increases, the GPU must process more fragments, and the data shows it simply runs out of bandwidth and shading capacity.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process. Its base clock is 300 MHz, with a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The GPU has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 render output units. It also includes 10 ray tracing cores. Memory is system shared, meaning the GPU uses the host system’s RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. The memory bus width is also system shared, and bandwidth is system dependent. This is a critical detail for Thief, which can be memory-sensitive at higher resolutions.

The GPU’s benchmark results are modest. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 1184, which places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in that benchmark include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (score 1186, delta -0.2%), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (score 1190, delta -0.5%), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (score 1192, delta -0.7%). These are all legacy or low-power parts, indicating that the Arc B370’s raw 3D performance is comparable to hardware from over a decade ago. The only rival it beats is the AMD FirePro M2000 (score 1168, delta 1.4%).

In Thief, the GPU’s limitations manifest clearly. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 78 FPS, which is playable but not high-refresh territory. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 59 FPS, and at 1080p High, it falls to 45 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1080p yields 43 FPS. These numbers suggest that the GPU can handle 1080p at low-to-medium settings, but struggles with higher presets. The lack of dedicated VRAM means that texture-heavy scenes may cause the system to page memory, though the measured FPS data does not include frame time variance beyond the min/max values for Medium settings.

The boost clock of 2400 MHz is relatively high for an integrated part, but the low base clock of 300 MHz implies aggressive power management. The TDP is just 25 W, and the slot width is listed as IGP, meaning it is designed for portable or low-power devices. This explains why the 4K results are so poor — the GPU simply does not have the throughput to drive 8.3 million pixels. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s translates to a theoretical maximum fill rate that is insufficient for 4K at high settings. The FP32 performance of 6.144 TFLOPS is similarly limited.

The GPU’s percentile rank of 5th among all GPUs underscores its position. In a game like Thief, which relies on lighting and shadow effects, the lack of dedicated memory and low ROP count (20) becomes a bottleneck. The ROPs are responsible for pixel output, and 20 is a low number compared to discrete GPUs. This directly affects high-resolution performance, as each ROP must handle more pixels.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-13400F and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2634 out of 2851 tested combos in Thief. This places it in the bottom 8% of all configurations. The rank reflects the overall average FPS across all measured settings and resolutions, weighted by the data provided. Given the GPU’s 5th percentile standing and the CPU’s 77th percentile, the combo’s ranking is dragged down almost entirely by the graphics component.

To contextualize, the CPU alone is a solid mid-range part. Its average benchmark score is 25292, with a percentile of 77 among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (avg score 25284, delta 0%), the Intel Core 5 120 (avg score 25362, delta -0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (avg score 25365, delta -0.3%). The Intel Core i5-13400F is essentially tied with these parts, showing that it is a capable processor for gaming. However, the GPU’s average benchmark score is just 1184, with a percentile of 5. The nearest rivals to the GPU are all ancient or low-end parts, as noted earlier.

In Thief specifically, the combo’s rank of 2634 out of 2851 means that 217 other combos performed worse. That is a small number, and it suggests that most systems — even those with integrated graphics from previous generations — would outperform this pairing. The data does not provide scores for other combos, but the rank alone indicates that the Arc B370 is a severe bottleneck. The CPU could drive much higher frame rates if paired with a stronger GPU, but the measured results are what they are.

The combo’s ranking also implies that the experience is inconsistent across resolutions. At 1080p Low, the system is competitive with older discrete GPUs, but at 4K Ultra, it falls to 17 FPS, which would be among the worst results in the database. The rank of 2634 is an average, but the spread between best-case (1080p Low at 78 FPS) and worst-case (4K Ultra at 17 FPS) is vast. This is a hallmark of a GPU that is overmatched by the game’s higher-resolution demands.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best results. With Low settings, the average FPS is 78, with no recorded minimum or maximum. This is the only preset at any resolution that exceeds 70 FPS. Moving to Medium, the average drops to 59 FPS, with a minimum of 50 and a maximum of 68. The 50 FPS minimum is still playable, but the 9 FPS gap between average and minimum suggests some frame dips during intense scenes. At High settings, the average is 45 FPS, with no min or max recorded. At Ultra, the average is 43 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at 1080p is just 2 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset’s extra effects (likely shadows and ambient occlusion) have a minimal impact at this resolution, likely due to the CPU’s ability to keep up.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops significantly. Low settings yield an average of 53 FPS. Medium settings produce 41 FPS average, with a minimum of 35 and a maximum of 47. The 35 FPS minimum is borderline for a stealth game, as quick movements may feel less responsive. High settings average 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 29 FPS. The 1440p Ultra result of 29 FPS is below 30, which is a common threshold for playability. The data shows that 1440p is only viable at Low or Medium settings, and even then, the minimum FPS at Medium (35) is close to the edge.

At 3840x2160, the results are poor across the board. Low settings average 31 FPS, which is technically playable but not smooth. Medium settings average 24 FPS, with a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 27. The 20 FPS minimum would cause noticeable stutter. High settings average 18 FPS, and Ultra averages 17 FPS. These numbers are all below the 30 FPS threshold, and the Ultra result is barely above a slideshow. The 4K Medium minimum of 20 FPS is particularly concerning, as it indicates that even the mid-range preset cannot maintain a consistent frame rate.

The data also shows that the gap between Low and Ultra grows with resolution. At 1080p, the difference between Low (78 FPS) and Ultra (43 FPS) is 35 FPS. At 1440p, the difference is 24 FPS (53 vs 29). At 4K, the difference is 14 FPS (31 vs 17). This narrowing gap suggests that at higher resolutions, the GPU is so saturated that even lowering settings yields diminishing returns. The pixel fill rate becomes the dominant constraint, not the shading complexity.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the best experience for this combo is at 1920x1080 with Medium settings. This preset delivers an average of 59 FPS, with a minimum of 50 FPS and a maximum of 68 FPS. The 50 FPS minimum ensures that the game remains fluid during most scenes, while the 59 FPS average is close to 60, which is the standard for smooth gameplay. The jump from Low (78 FPS) to Medium (59 FPS) is a 19 FPS drop, but the visual improvement from Low to Medium is substantial — Low typically removes shadows and reduces texture quality, which would detract from Thief’s atmospheric stealth gameplay.

If a higher visual quality is preferred, 1080p High is a viable option at 45 FPS average. This is still playable, though the lack of min/max data for High makes it harder to assess consistency. The 43 FPS average at Ultra is only 2 FPS lower than High, so if the system can handle High, it can handle Ultra with a negligible performance penalty. However, the 45 FPS High result is 14 FPS below the Medium result, and for a game that rewards smooth movement, the Medium preset is the safer choice.

At 1440p, the only recommended preset is Low, which averages 53 FPS. Medium at 1440p averages 41 FPS with a 35 FPS minimum, which may be acceptable for less demanding players but risks noticeable dips. High and Ultra at 1440p (31 FPS and 29 FPS, respectively) are not recommended, as they fall below the 30 FPS playability threshold. For 4K, no preset is truly playable. Low at 31 FPS is borderline, but the 24 FPS Medium and lower results are too choppy. The data suggests that 4K should be avoided entirely with this combo.

The recommendation is clear: run Thief at 1080p Medium for the best balance of frame rate and visual fidelity. The 59 FPS average and 50 FPS minimum provide a stable experience, and the Medium preset retains enough graphical detail to preserve the game’s moody lighting. For players who prioritize frame rate above all else, 1080p Low at 78 FPS is the fastest option, but the visual downgrade may hurt immersion. The 1080p Ultra preset at 43 FPS is also viable, but the marginal difference over High (2 FPS) makes High the better choice if Ultra’s extra effects are not critical.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, built on a 10 nm process. Its base clock is 2.50 GHz, and its boost clock is 4.60 GHz. The CPU has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The CPU’s TDP is 65 W, and it uses the Intel Socket 1700. Its launch MSRP was $196.

In Thief, the CPU’s role is secondary to the GPU, but the data shows that it is not a bottleneck at most settings. The CPU’s benchmarks are strong: in Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 22604, and in single-core, it scores 3191. In Geekbench, it scores 11068 multicore and 1996 single-core. These scores place it in the 77th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 25292. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (delta 0%), the Intel Core 5 120 (delta -0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (delta -0.3%). This indicates that the CPU is competitive with other mid-range and even some high-end mobile parts.

Given the GPU’s limitations, the CPU is almost always waiting for the GPU to finish rendering frames. The 1080p Low result of 78 FPS is the closest the system comes to CPU-bound behavior, but even then, the GPU’s modest fill rate likely prevents higher frame rates. The CPU’s 16 threads are more than enough for Thief, which was released in 2014 and likely uses only a few cores. The single-core performance, as measured by a 3DMark single-thread score of 960 and a Passmark single-thread score of 3634, is sufficient for the game’s AI and physics calculations.

The CPU’s cache configuration — 20 MB of L3 — is ample for a game of this era. The 10 cores and 16 threads provide headroom for background tasks and streaming, but they do not translate into higher FPS in Thief because the GPU is the limiting factor. The measured FPS differences between settings presets at the same resolution are entirely attributable to the GPU’s workload. For example, at 1080p, the CPU could easily handle 100+ FPS, but the GPU maxes out at 78 FPS on Low. The CPU’s percentile rank of 77 versus the GPU’s 5th percentile highlights the imbalance.

In summary, the Intel Core i5-13400F is a capable processor that is wasted in this configuration. Its performance in synthetic benchmarks places it near the top of its class, but Thief’s frame rates are dictated by the Arc B370’s output. The CPU’s boost clock of 4.60 GHz ensures that it can respond quickly to draw calls, but the GPU’s 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput is insufficient for high-resolution gaming. The data confirms that any attempt to improve performance in Thief would require a stronger GPU, not a faster CPU. The combo’s rank of 2634 out of 2851 is a direct result of this mismatch.