Thief

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows for Thief across three resolutions and four quality presets tell a clear story about where this Intel Core i5-9400 + Intel Arc B370 combination is comfortable. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 78 FPS average, which is the highest measured value in the entire dataset. The Medium preset at the same resolution drops to 59 FPS average, still playable, while High and Ultra sit at 45 FPS and 43 FPS respectively. The data indicates that Medium at 1080p is the balanced choice for smooth gameplay without sacrificing too much visual fidelity, as the 59 FPS average sits 31% above the High preset's 45 FPS but only 19 FPS below Low's 78 FPS.

Stepping up to 2560x1440, the pattern shifts noticeably. Low produces 53 FPS average, Medium drops to 41 FPS, High falls to 31 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 29 FPS. The Medium preset here offers a 41 FPS average with a measured minimum of 35 FPS and maximum of 47 FPS, which is the only preset at 1440p with recorded variance data. For users prioritizing framerate stability over visual detail, Low at 1440p is the pragmatic pick, delivering 53 FPS average with no recorded minimums below that threshold in the dataset.

At 3840x2160, none of the presets reach 60 FPS. Low manages 31 FPS average, Medium 24 FPS (with a 20 FPS minimum and 27 FPS maximum), High 18 FPS, and Ultra 17 FPS. The data unequivocally shows that 4K is not a viable experience for this combo in Thief, regardless of settings. The best 4K result, Low at 31 FPS, is below the 1080p Ultra result of 43 FPS, indicating a fundamental resolution ceiling.

The optimal experience per the measured rows is Medium at 1920x1080. It offers 59 FPS average, which is above the 50 FPS threshold often considered acceptable, and the recorded minimum of 50 FPS with maximum of 68 FPS shows a consistent frame delivery window. Low at 1080p is faster but sacrifices visual quality, while High and Ultra at 1080p provide diminishing returns relative to their FPS cost. For users who prioritize maximum smoothness, Low at 1080p is the fallback, but Medium represents the best compromise between image quality and performance in the measured data.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process node. Its clock speeds are listed as a 300 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, with memory classified as System Shared, meaning the GPU draws from the system's DDR4 memory pool rather than dedicated VRAM. The memory bandwidth is noted as System Dependent, which ties performance directly to the host platform's memory configuration. The i5-9400 supports dual-channel DDR4 with a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, so the Arc B370's effective memory throughput is constrained by that figure.

The GPU's raw compute specifications include 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, 20 raster output units, and 10 ray tracing cores. Pixel rate is listed at 48.00 GPixel/s, texture rate at 96.00 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance at 6.144 TFLOPS. These figures place the Arc B370 in the lower echelon of graphics processors, which is reflected in its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 and its percentile ranking of 5 among all GPUs. The nearest rivals in the benchmark database are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (score 1186, 0.2% faster), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (score 1190, 0.5% faster), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (score 1192, 0.7% faster), and AMD FirePro M2000 (score 1168, 1.4% slower). This clustering indicates the Arc B370 performs in line with decade-old discrete graphics solutions.

In Thief, the GPU's limitations manifest directly in the measured FPS. The transition from 1080p Low (78 FPS) to 1080p Ultra (43 FPS) represents a 45% performance drop, which aligns with the GPU's modest shading and texture throughput. The system-shared memory architecture means there is no dedicated VRAM pool; the GPU competes with the CPU for the same DDR4 bandwidth. This is particularly relevant in Thief, a 2014 title that does not demand modern GPU features, yet the Arc B370 still struggles to maintain high framerates at higher resolutions. The data shows that at 4K, even Low settings yield only 31 FPS, confirming that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at that resolution. The 3DMark score of 1184, while a synthetic measure, corroborates the in-game results: this is a low-end graphics solution that excels only at 1080p with reduced settings.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of Intel Core i5-9400 and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2634 out of 2851 tested combinations in Thief, placing it in the bottom 7.6% of all measured systems. This rank reflects the cumulative effect of a mid-range six-core CPU paired with a GPU that sits at the 5th percentile among all graphics cards. The i5-9400's average benchmark score of 2254 places it at the 47th percentile among CPUs, with nearest rivals being the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (score 2259, 0.2% faster), Intel Core i7-10710U (score 2248, 0.3% slower), AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (score 2246, 0.4% slower), and Intel Core i3-10305 (score 2264, 0.4% faster). These delta values are all within a fraction of a percent, indicating the i5-9400 is firmly in the middle of the CPU performance distribution.

However, the GPU drags the overall gaming performance down significantly. The Arc B370's nearest rivals are all older discrete GPUs with scores within 1.4% of its own, and its percentile rank of 5 means it outperforms only 5% of all GPUs in the database. In Thief specifically, the combination's rank of 2634 out of 2851 suggests that most other tested systems, including those with older CPUs but stronger GPUs, achieve better framerates. The data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this pairing; rather, the GPU's low compute throughput caps the system's gaming potential.

The rank distribution also implies that Thief is not particularly CPU-intensive, which favors the i5-9400's six cores but does little to compensate for the GPU's weakness. At 1080p Low, the combo scores 78 FPS, which is a respectable result for a low-end GPU, but the rank of 2634 indicates that many other combinations exceed this performance. The i5-9400's closest CPU rivals all have similar average scores, yet when paired with better GPUs, those systems would rank higher in gaming workloads. For this specific combo, the rank reflects a system that can handle esports-level framerates at low settings in 1080p but falls behind the majority of tested configurations in a game like Thief.

FAQ

Q: What framerate can I expect at 1920x1080 with Medium settings?

A: The measured data shows 59 FPS average at 1080p Medium, with a minimum of 50 FPS and maximum of 68 FPS. This is the most balanced preset for this resolution, offering above-50 FPS performance with recorded variance.

Q: Is 4K playable with this CPU and GPU combination in Thief?

A: No. The best 4K result is 31 FPS at Low settings, with Medium at 24 FPS, High at 18 FPS, and Ultra at 17 FPS. All 4K presets fall below 32 FPS, making the experience choppy and inconsistent.

Q: How does the Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, 0.2% faster), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, 0.5% faster), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, 0.7% faster), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, 1.4% slower). All are within 1.5% of the Arc B370's score.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of the i5-9400 CPU?

A: The i5-9400 ranks at the 47th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 2254. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (2259, 0.2% faster) and Intel Core i7-10710U (2248, 0.3% slower).

Q: Does the GPU or CPU limit performance more in Thief?

A: The GPU is the primary limiter. At 4K, the FPS drops to 17-31 FPS regardless of CPU capability, while at 1080p, the CPU provides enough headroom to reach 78 FPS at Low settings. The GPU's 5th percentile ranking versus the CPU's 47th percentile confirms the graphics card is the bottleneck.

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

A: 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the combo achieves playable framerates across all presets, ranging from 43 FPS at Ultra to 78 FPS at Low. At 2560x1440, only Low (53 FPS) and Medium (41 FPS) exceed 30 FPS, while 4K fails to reach 32 FPS on any preset.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep performance degradation as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 78 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low, the framerate drops to 53 FPS, a 32% reduction. At 4K Low, it falls further to 31 FPS, which is a 60% drop from the 1080p Low result. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is heavily taxed by pixel count, as the i5-9400's CPU performance remains constant across resolutions.

The Medium preset shows a similar trend: 59 FPS at 1080p, 41 FPS at 1440p (a 31% drop), and 24 FPS at 4K (a 59% drop from 1080p). High settings follow the same trajectory: 45 FPS at 1080p, 31 FPS at 1440p (31% drop), and 18 FPS at 4K (60% drop). Ultra starts at 43 FPS at 1080p, declines to 29 FPS at 1440p (33% drop), and reaches 17 FPS at 4K (60% drop). The consistency of these percentage drops across all presets — approximately 31-33% from 1080p to 1440p and 59-60% from 1080p to 4K — strongly suggests that the GPU is the limiting component, as the scaling follows the theoretical pixel count increase rather than any CPU constraint.

The resolution scaling also shows that the gap between presets narrows at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 35 FPS (78 vs 43). At 1440p, that gap shrinks to 24 FPS (53 vs 29). At 4K, the gap is only 14 FPS (31 vs 17). This compression indicates that at higher resolutions, the GPU becomes so saturated that even reducing settings yields diminishing returns. The data points to a system where the Arc B370's 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 48 GPixel/s pixel rate are simply insufficient for resolutions beyond 1080p. Users seeking higher resolutions would need to accept framerates below 32 FPS, which the data shows is the practical ceiling at 4K.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 provides six cores and six threads based on the Coffee Lake architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process node. Its base clock is 2.90 GHz with a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, and it carries a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 9 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, which is the same memory pool the Arc B370 draws from for its system-shared VRAM.

In Thief, the CPU's role is secondary to the GPU, as evidenced by the resolution scaling patterns described above. The i5-9400's benchmark scores — 6629 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 2784 in Cinebench R20 multi-core, and 5141 in Geekbench multi-core — place it at the 47th percentile among all CPUs. Its single-core scores (935 in Cinebench R23, 392 in Cinebench R20, 1389 in Geekbench) are modest but sufficient for a 2014 game like Thief, which was released before the trend toward heavily multi-threaded game engines.

The CPU's six cores and six threads (no Hyper-Threading) are adequate for Thief's workload, as the game does not appear to scale beyond that count based on the measured results. The fact that the i5-9400's nearest rivals are all within 0.5% of its average score — including the Intel Core i3-10305 (2264, 0.4% faster) and AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (2246, 0.4% slower) — suggests that any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical results when paired with the same GPU. The CPU's boost clock of 4.10 GHz provides sufficient single-thread performance for the game's AI and physics calculations, but the data shows that increasing resolution does not tax the CPU further, as the framerate drops are consistent with GPU-bound scaling.

The i5-9400's memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s is a potential constraint given the Arc B370's system-shared memory architecture, but the measured FPS does not indicate severe memory bottlenecks at 1080p. At 4K, the GPU's compute limits overshadow any memory bandwidth concerns. Overall, the CPU is not the limiting factor in this combo; it provides adequate headroom for the GPU to reach its maximum potential in Thief.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS dataset for Thief with the Intel Core i5-9400 and Intel Arc B370 is as follows:

At 3840x2160, four presets were tested. Low produced 31 FPS average. Medium produced 24 FPS average, with a recorded minimum of 20 FPS and maximum of 27 FPS. High produced 18 FPS average. Ultra produced 17 FPS average. No minimum or maximum values are available for Low, High, or Ultra at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the results were higher. Low produced 53 FPS average. Medium produced 41 FPS average, with a recorded minimum of 35 FPS and maximum of 47 FPS. High produced 31 FPS average. Ultra produced 29 FPS average. Again, only Medium has recorded minimum and maximum values at this resolution.

At 1920x1080, the combo's best results were measured. Low produced 78 FPS average, the highest FPS in the entire dataset. Medium produced 59 FPS average, with a minimum of 50 FPS and maximum of 68 FPS. High produced 45 FPS average. Ultra produced 43 FPS average. Medium is the only preset at 1080p with recorded variance data.

The data shows a consistent pattern across all resolutions: Low is the fastest preset, followed by Medium, then High, then Ultra. The gaps between presets are largest at 1080p, where Low beats Medium by 19 FPS and Medium beats High by 14 FPS. At 1440p, the gaps shrink to 12 FPS between Low and Medium, and 10 FPS between Medium and High. At 4K, the gaps compress to 7 FPS between Low and Medium, and 6 FPS between Medium and High. This compression effect reinforces the GPU-bound nature of the system at higher resolutions.

The only preset with complete min/max data across all three resolutions is Medium: 1080p shows 50-68 FPS, 1440p shows 35-47 FPS, and 4K shows 20-27 FPS. This variance data indicates that the Medium preset maintains a consistent frame delivery window relative to its average, with the 4K result showing the tightest range (20-27 FPS around a 24 FPS average). The absence of min/max data for other presets limits variance analysis, but the available numbers suggest that frame pacing is stable even when average FPS is low.