Thief

The Intel Core i7-14700KF paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 delivers playable frame rates in Thief at 1080p and 1440p on medium settings, but its 4K performance is far from smooth. The combo ranks 3079th out of 3,720 tested configurations, placing it in the lower quarter of the database. This outcome is largely a function of the GTX 1070's age and resolution sensitivity; the CPU, which sits in the 94th percentile of all processors, is not the limiting factor at any tested setting. The data shows a classic case of GPU-bound scaling: as resolution increases, average frame rates fall by roughly 30–40% per step, while the CPU's synthetic benchmark scores remain far above what Thief requires. Below, the measured frames per second are broken down by resolution and quality preset, with guidance on which settings yield the best experience.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the 3,720 combinations tested for Thief, this CPU-GPU pair is ranked 3,079th. That means 3,078 configurations outperform it, while only 641 deliver lower performance; the combo sits in the 18th percentile of the test pool, i.e., over 80% of tested systems achieve higher average FPS. The low absolute rank is not surprising given the GTX 1070's standing in the wider GPU benchmark: it holds a 47th percentile among all GPUs tested, which simply is not enough for a 2014 title at high presets.

By contrast, the Core i7-14700KF ranks in the 94th percentile of all CPUs based on its average benchmark score of 70,163 (across its multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads). This huge margin between processor capability and graphics output means the bottleneck is firmly on the GPU side. The nearest CPU counterpart, an AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, scores 69,875, just 0.4% lower, but even a substantially faster CPU would not rescue this combo's rank, as Thief is clearly GPU-bound across the measured resolutions. The same logic applies to the GTX 1070's nearest rivals: an AMD FirePro W5000 is 0.2% faster (its average score is 9,803 vs. 9,780 for the GTX 1070), while a Quadro M2000M is 0.5% slower. These narrow margins reinforce that the GTX 1070 is an average performer, and it is exactly this average performance that keeps the combo out of the top echelons.

GPU Role

The GTX 1070 is built on NVIDIA's Pascal architecture with 1,920 shading units, 120 texture units, and 64 ROPs. It has 8 GB of GDDR5 VRAM on a 256-bit bus, providing 256.3 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 1,506 MHz with a boost of 1,683 MHz, and the memory runs at 2,002 MHz (8 Gbps effective). For Thief, which is a 2014 title with modest VRAM requirements, 8 GB is more than enough; the real constraint is raw compute throughput. The measured data shows a clear relationship between VRAM suitability and frame rate: even the heaviest 4K Ultra run consumes less than the available 8 GB, yet FPS drops to an average of 28. That indicates the GPU's compute ceiling, not memory capacity, is the limit.

At 1080p, the GTX 1070 can push past 70 FPS on High and Ultra, showing that at lower pixel counts it can handle the game's rendering load. But at 3840×2160, the average FPS craters to 30 at High preset and 28 at Ultra, which is barely a single-digit improvement over the Low preset. This is typical of a GPU with a raw FP32 rate of 6.463 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 107.7 GPixel/s. Meanwhile, its GPU benchmark scores (e.g., a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,082) are typical for a mid‑range card, and it sits in the 47th percentile overall. When a combination like this appears in Thief, the GPU is the primary component that dictates the feel of the experience, and its relative age imposes a hard ceiling on high‑setting at high resolutions.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best setting to play Thief on this combo at 1080p?*

A: The Medium preset yields an average of 97 FPS with a min of 82 and max of 111, delivering a smooth, stable experience. High gives 74 FPS and Ultra 70, which are still playable but with less margin. Low is recommended only if you want a uncapped >120 FPS, as it averages 128 FPS.

Q: How does the combo perform at 1440p?

A: At 1440p (2560×1440), the Medium preset averages 66 FPS with min/max of 56‑76. High and Ultra drop to 51 and 48 FPS, respectively, while Low reaches 88 FPS. For a consistent 60 FPS claim, Medium is the only preset that clears 60, with High falling just short.

Q: Is 4K resolution feasible with this GPU?

A: No. At 3840×2160, the Ultra preset averages 28 FPS and High averages 30 FPS, both well below the 60 FPS target. Even Low yields 44 FPS effectively 51 FPS, and Medium delivers 39 FPS (with 33 FPS as the 1% low). None reach the 60 FPS mark, and the gameplay is not fluid under such conditions.

Q: Does the CPU become a bottleneck at any setting?

A: The benchmark data suggests not. The Core i7-14700KF has 20 cores and 28 threads with a 5.6 GHz peak boost, and its Cinebench R23 multi-score is 44,167, which is far above the typical requirement of Thief. No measured FPS curve shows a plateau indicating a CPU limitation – in every case the FPS scales with GPU load rather than showing a fixed CPU cap. The CPU percentile (94) vs GPU percentile (47) further confirms the CPU is never the limiting factor here.

Q: What is the lowest frame rate recorded, and where?

A: The 3840×2160 Ultra preset does not record a min FPS, but the 4K Medium preset logged a min of 33 FPS. At 1440p Medium the min is 56 FPS, and at 1080p Medium the min is 82 FPS. The 1080p Low slot, 128 FPS average, has no min lobby, but the Medium min values are the most reliable.

Q: How do these scores compare to the GPU’s synthetic averages?

A: The GTX 1070's average GPU score is 9,780, which is 0.2% below an AMD FirePro W5000 and 0.5% above a Quadro M2000M. These minutes are tiny, indicating that the GTX 1070 sits in a narrow performance band with its nearest rivals. In isolation, its 8‑VRAM pool, 150 W TDP and 16‑nm process are typical of a 2016 mid‑range card.

Measured FPS Breakdown

3840 × 2160 (4K)

• Low: 51 avg FPS
• Medium: 39 avg, 33 min, 45 max
• High: 30 avg
• Ultra: 28 avg

2560 × 1440

• Low: 88 avg
• Medium: 66 avg ( min 56, max 76 )
• High: 51 avg
• Ultra: 48 avg

1920 × 1080

• Low: 128 avg
• Medium: 97 avg ( min 82, max 111 )
• High: 74 avg
• Ultra: 70 avg

At every resolution, the Medium preset is the only one that reports a minimum and maximum frame window, while Low and High/Ultra only give average FPS. The Medium FPS windows show that frame consistency does not collapse when the Fort Photo—the 1080p Medium has a spread of 82 to 111 (29‑frame swing) and 1440p Medium a 20‑frame swing (56‑76). In contrast, the 4K Medium preset dips to a 33 FPS minimum, which is under the 35 FPS commonly considered a hard floor for playable. The severe drop from 1080p to 1440p and then to 4K is evident when comparing averages: 1080p High is 74 FPS, 1440p High is 50, and 4K High is 30. That is a 47% reduction from 1440p to 4K (from 50 to 30 FPS) and a 32% reduction from 1080p to 1440p (74 to 50). The GPU’s computational resources scale poorly with rising resolutions, and the 4K data shows that the 6.5‑TFLOPS compute budget cannot keep pace with higher pixel counts.

Settings Recommendations

For a balanced experience with no FPS dips, the Medium preset at 1080p is the most reliable. It produces a 97 FPS average with a minimum of 82, leaving enough headroom for action scenes. High and Ultra are also acceptable at 1080p – 74 and 70 FPS respectively – but they do not provide the extra 20–25% stability that Medium offers. At 1440p, only Medium clears 60, at 66 average FPS, so if the user runs a 1440p display, Medium is the only preset that meets a 60 FPS minimum bar (64–72 in the normal range, the min 56 sometimes stutters).

Ultra is not recommended at any resolution beyond 1080p. At 1440p Ultra is 48 FPS, and at 4K it is 28, which is an inconsistent experience. High at 1440p (51 FPS) is still playable but close to the stutter threshold for many. The data points to a clear sweet spot: always drop the preset from Ultra to High for a small FPS gain (≈10%), and then drop from High to Medium for another 30% gain. At 4K, even Low (51 FPS) is barely at 60, and given that 4K is not viable, the best recommendation is to stay at 1080p or 1440p with Medium or High.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-14700KF is a 14th‑generation chip (Raptor Lake, 10 nm process) featuring 20 cores (in a mix of performance and efficiency cores) and 28 threads. Its base clock is 3.40 GHz and boost reaches 5.60 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 33 MB shared L3. It supports DDR4- and DDR5 memory, with a dual‑channel bus. For a 2014 game like Thief, such a CPU has far more compute than required. Synthetic results confirm this: the Cinebench R23 multicore is 44,167, single‑core 5,115, and the Geekbench multi is 21,462. Its percentile vs. all CPUs is 94, meaning only 6% of CPUs are faster.

In the frame data for Thief, the average FPS drops uniformly as resolution increases, which is the signature of a GPU‑bound scenario. If the CPU were a bottleneck, higher resolutions would not reduce FPS because the CPU work load per frame stays roughly constant; instead we would see a flat curve. Here, the 1080p Ultra (70 FPS) to 1440p Ultra (48 FPS) is 31% lower, and 4K Ultra (28 FPS) is another 42% drop. This is a perfect GPU scaling curve. Additionally, the CPU’s own benchmark relatives are far beyond any that would impact the frame rate — the Passmark multi‑threaded score of 52, 425 is nearly double that of a typical gaming CPU of 2014, yet the game still does not rely on these dozens of cores. In dual‑core engines, the 20‑core processor will just idle most of the threads, so the primary contribution of the CPU here is to avoid any driver or API overhead, which it does elegantly.

Resolution Scaling

The scaling pattern from 1080p to 1440p to 4K reveals the GPU’s compute limit. At each preset, the ratio between resolutions is similar. For Low, 1080p averages 118 FPS, 1440p gives 88 (a 23% reduction), and 4K gives 44 (a 51% reduction of the 1440 value). For Medium, the numbers are 97, 66, and 39 — that’s a 32% drop to 1440 and 41% drop from 1440 to 4K. At High, 74 → 51 → 30, a 31% and 37% reduction. At Ultra, 70 → 48 → 24, a 31% and 50% reduction. These decreasing numbers are roughly proportional to the number of pixels: 1080p ≈61, 1440p ≈3.7Ã​; 4K ≈8.3Ã, so doubling pixel count from 1440 to 4K divides FPS by ~1.7 is actually expected for a frame‑rate limited unit. This is a textbook GPU bandwidth slew; the GTX 1070 with 256.3 GB/s bandwidth and 6.4 TFLOPS simply cannot feed enough pixels at those presets.

The fact that the CPU is far from its limit is also evident by the absolute scaling. If the CPU were saturated, the FPS at 1080p and 1440p would be close, but the drops are athletic. Therefore, resolution scaling is the tool this benchmark uses to identify the component that governs the best playable setting. For users with a 1080p or 1440p monitor, setting the preset to Medium ensures that the CPU’s high core count works for the title, while avoiding the GPU near its performance cliff. At 4K, the only usable preset is Low (51 FPS) or Medium (39 FPS), but neither keeps a consistent 60, so the recommendation is to upscale or lower the resolution to achieve both visual quality and fluid motion.