Thief

This combo places 631st out of 1642 tested combinations in Thief, putting it in the upper-middle tier of the database. That ranking is respectable for a 2014 stealth title, but it is not a top-tier result. The position reflects a pairing where the GPU does most of the heavy lifting at higher resolutions, while the CPU ensures that frame rates stay high at lower settings. The data shows a system that can handle the game at 4K with adjustments, but truly shines at 1440p and 1080p where it delivers excellent performance across presets.

How This Combo Ranks

The 631st rank out of 1642 combos means this setup outperforms roughly 61% of all tested configurations in Thief. That is a solid result for a game from this era, but it is not exceptional. The ranking is pulled down by the GPU's relative standing among tested graphics cards. The RTX 3070 sits at the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, which is good, but its average benchmark score of 28238 is nearly identical to the AMD FirePro S7150 (28409, deltaPct -0.6) and only slightly better than the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (27985, deltaPct 0.9). This means that in pure compute terms, the 3070 is not a standout; it is merely a capable mid-range card.

The CPU, by contrast, is in a stronger position. The Core i5-14400F sits at the 88th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32508. That score is essentially tied with the Intel Core i7-12800H (32513, deltaPct 0) and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 7645 (32446, deltaPct 0.2). The difference between these processors is within statistical noise, which tells you that the i5-14400F is not holding this combo back. The bottleneck, if any, will come from the GPU side, especially at 4K where the 3070's 8 GB of VRAM and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth start to show their limits.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14400F provides 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. In Thief, a game designed around single-threaded performance from the early 2010s, the high boost clock matters more than the core count. The data supports this: the CPU's Cinebench R23 single-core score is 3093, which is strong for a modern chip, and its Passmark single-thread score of 3723 is equally respectable. These numbers indicate that the i5-14400F will rarely be the limiting factor in this game, even at high frame rates.

The multi-core performance is where the i5-14400F really stands out. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21914 and Geekbench multi-core score of 11209 are in line with its nearest rivals, but Thief does not heavily utilize many threads. The game's engine benefits more from the CPU's ability to maintain high clocks under load, which the 4.70 GHz boost clock handles well. The 20 MB of shared L3 cache also helps with game data locality, though the impact on Thief's frame times is modest. In practice, the CPU is overkill for this game, which means the measured FPS numbers are more a reflection of GPU limits than CPU headroom.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 is the star of this pairing, but it is also the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The GPU features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 1500 MHz with a boost of 1725 MHz, and it offers 5888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, and 96 raster operation pipelines. For a game like Thief, which was released in 2014, these specs are far beyond what the engine was designed to handle, yet the 8 GB VRAM capacity becomes a constraint at 4K with Ultra settings.

The GPU's Passmark G3D score of 22214 places it at the 72nd percentile, which is decent but not elite. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT, scores 27985 (deltaPct 0.9), meaning the 3070 is only about 1% faster. This tight margin explains why the combo's rank is not higher—there are many GPUs that can match or beat the 3070 in Thief, especially at lower resolutions where the CPU becomes more relevant. The 3070's ray tracing and tensor cores are irrelevant for this game, as Thief does not use those features, so the raw rasterization performance is what counts.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers strong performance across all presets. Low settings yield 182.3 FPS, Medium drops to 159.7 FPS, High is 119.3 FPS, and Ultra is 118 FPS. The small gap between High and Ultra (1.3 FPS) suggests that the GPU is not the bottleneck at these settings; instead, the CPU's high boost clock keeps the frame rate high even when the GPU is not fully stressed. The jump from Low to Medium is 22.6 FPS, which is a significant drop, but the overall experience is smooth at any preset.

Moving to 2560x1440, the numbers show a clear GPU dependency. Low settings produce 143.1 FPS, Medium 107.4 FPS, High 84.3 FPS, and Ultra 81.4 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra narrows to 2.9 FPS, indicating that the GPU is starting to hit its limits. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings is 39.2 FPS (182.3 to 143.1), which shows that even at the lowest preset, the resolution increase is taxing the GPU. This is a typical pattern for a card like the RTX 3070, which has enough bandwidth for 1080p but starts to struggle as pixel count rises.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the limiting component. Low settings yield 87.3 FPS, Medium 65 FPS, High 51 FPS, and Ultra 45.9 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 22.3 FPS, which is substantial, and the gap between High and Ultra is 5.1 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K is barely playable at 45.9 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target most players prefer. The data shows that the 8 GB VRAM and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are simply not enough to maintain high frame rates at 4K with this game's more demanding settings.

Resolution Scaling

The scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario. At Low settings, the FPS drops from 182.3 at 1080p to 143.1 at 1440p (a 21.5% reduction) and then to 87.3 at 4K (a 39% reduction from 1440p). This is a steady decline that tracks with the increase in pixel count, confirming that the GPU is the limiting factor at all resolutions when using Low settings. The CPU's influence is minimal here, as even at 1080p Low, the frame rate is high enough that the GPU is doing most of the work.

At Ultra settings, the scaling is steeper. The FPS drops from 118 at 1080p to 81.4 at 1440p (a 31% reduction) and then to 45.9 at 4K (a 43.6% reduction from 1440p). The larger percentage drops at higher settings indicate that the GPU is being pushed harder, and the 8 GB VRAM is likely causing additional overhead. The gap between 1080p and 1440p at Ultra is 36.6 FPS, while the gap between 1440p and 4K is 35.5 FPS. This shows that the GPU's performance degrades almost linearly with pixel count when settings are maxed out, which is typical for a card that is just below the high-end tier.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience, the data points to 1440p with High settings as the sweet spot. At 84.3 FPS, this preset offers a smooth frame rate with visual quality that is only slightly below Ultra. The gap between High and Ultra at 1440p is just 2.9 FPS, so there is no reason to choose Ultra unless you want every last visual detail. The 84.3 FPS is well above the 60 FPS threshold, and it leaves headroom for occasional drops without becoming unplayable.

If you prefer 1080p, the High preset at 119.3 FPS is an excellent choice, as it provides near-identical performance to Ultra (118 FPS) while potentially reducing input latency. For 4K, the data suggests using Medium settings at 65 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. Low settings at 4K (87.3 FPS) are also viable if you prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity, but the Medium preset strikes a better balance between image quality and smoothness. Avoid Ultra at 4K, as the 45.9 FPS result is too choppy for a stealth game that requires precise timing. The measured rows show that this combo is best utilized at 1440p, where it delivers the highest frame rates relative to the visual quality on offer.