Thief

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and AMD Radeon RX 9060 combination delivers a playable, if not uniformly smooth, experience in Thief, with performance scaling that clearly exposes the GPU as the primary constraint at higher resolutions. Benchmark data shows this pairing lands in the 55.6th percentile of all tested combos for this title, a middle-of-the-pack result that reflects the balance between a modern 10-core CPU and a mid-range graphics card.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 is a 10-core, 10-thread desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture and fabricated on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The processor includes 20 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core, alongside 192 KB of L1 cache per core. This configuration is more than sufficient for Thief, a 2014 stealth title that does not demand high thread counts.

The CPU’s single-thread performance, as indicated by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3655, is strong for the game’s era. Thief largely relies on one or two primary threads for game logic and AI, and the Ultra 5 225’s 4.90 GHz boost clock ensures those threads have ample headroom. In multi-core workloads, the chip scores 25891 in Cinebench R23, and it achieves a PassMark multithread score of 30459, with a single-thread score of 4412. These figures place the CPU in the 85th percentile of all processors, meaning it outperforms the vast majority of installed CPUs.

However, the data from this specific game pairing suggests that the CPU is rarely the bottleneck. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo produces 171 FPS on average, which is the highest figure recorded in the dataset. Even at this resolution and settings level, where CPU load is typically highest relative to GPU load, the processor shows no signs of limiting frame rates. The nearest CPU rivals, based on average benchmark scores, include the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (deltaPct: 0), the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (deltaPct: -0.2), and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 (deltaPct: -0.4). These chips all perform within 0.5% of the Ultra 5 225, confirming that the Intel part is competitively positioned but not exceptional.

For a game like Thief, which was released in 2014, the Ultra 5 225 provides far more compute capability than necessary. The PassMark data compression score of 302811 and encryption score of 22285 indicate strong general-purpose performance, but these have little bearing on gaming. The real takeaway is that the CPU’s high boost clock and modern architecture keep it out of the way, allowing the GPU to dictate performance scaling across resolutions.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with the Navi 44 chip, fabricated on a 4 nm process. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s base clock is 1700 MHz, with a boost clock of 2990 MHz and a game clock of 2400 MHz. It has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation pipelines, along with 28 ray tracing cores.

The 8 GB VRAM capacity is a notable consideration for Thief, even though the game is over a decade old. At 4K resolution with Ultra settings, the combo’s average frame rate drops to 38 FPS, and at High settings it reaches just 40 FPS. These figures suggest that the GPU is struggling with the memory bandwidth and fill rate demands at that resolution. The 128-bit memory bus and 288 GB/s bandwidth are modest by modern standards, and the 64 ROPs may limit pixel throughput at 4K.

The GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 17631 places it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, which is notably lower than the CPU’s 85th percentile ranking. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (deltaPct: -0.7), the AMD Radeon R9 370X (deltaPct: 1), and the AMD Radeon RX 7700 (deltaPct: 1). The RX 9060 is effectively on par with the RTX 3060 Ti in aggregate benchmarks, which is relevant context for understanding its performance ceiling in Thief.

The GPU’s FP32 compute rating of 21.43 TFLOPS and texture rate of 334.9 GTexel/s are adequate for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but the 4K results in the dataset show clear limitations. The pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s, combined with the 8 GB frame buffer, appears to be the main constraint at 4K Ultra, where the average FPS falls below 40. This is a classic case of a mid-range GPU being pushed beyond its comfortable envelope by a high-resolution, high-detail workload.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data reveals a predictable and steep decline as resolution increases, which strongly indicates that the GPU is the limiting component in this pairing. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 171 FPS. Moving to 1440p at the same settings drops the average to 117 FPS, a 31.6% reduction. At 4K Low, the average falls to 69 FPS, which is a 59.6% drop from the 1080p figure.

The scaling pattern is even more pronounced at higher settings. At Ultra settings, the 1080p average is 94 FPS, dropping to 65 FPS at 1440p (a 30.9% decrease) and then to 38 FPS at 4K (a 59.6% decrease from 1080p). This consistent percentage drop across settings levels, from roughly 31% between 1080p and 1440p and another 41-42% between 1440p and 4K, is textbook GPU-bound behavior. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the FPS would remain relatively flat as resolution increases, because the CPU workload does not scale with pixel count.

The data also shows that settings have a significant impact at each resolution. At 1080p, the difference between Low (171 FPS) and Ultra (94 FPS) is 77 FPS, or 45%. At 4K, that same settings spread is only 31 FPS (69 FPS at Low versus 38 FPS at Ultra). This narrowing gap at higher resolutions further confirms that the GPU is saturated at 4K regardless of the quality preset, as the pixel throughput becomes the dominant factor.

The 4K Medium results provide some insight into the GPU’s limits: the average is 52 FPS with a minimum of 45 FPS and a maximum of 60 FPS. This suggests that even at Medium settings, the GPU is near its capacity at 4K, and the frame time variance is moderate. The 1440p Medium results (89 FPS average, 76 min, 102 max) show a healthier margin, indicating that 1440p is the practical ceiling for this combo when aiming for smooth gameplay.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers strong performance across all settings. Low settings produce an average of 171 FPS. Medium settings yield 130 FPS, with a minimum of 110 FPS and a maximum of 149 FPS. High settings average 99 FPS, and Ultra settings average 94 FPS. The minimum FPS data for Medium (110) suggests that even the low-end frame rate is well above the 60 FPS threshold, making 1080p a comfortable experience on any preset.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain respectable but show the GPU’s growing workload. Low settings average 117 FPS. Medium settings produce 89 FPS, with a minimum of 76 FPS and a maximum of 102 FPS. High settings average 68 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 65 FPS. The 76 FPS minimum at Medium indicates that the combo can still hold above 60 FPS in most scenes at 1440p, but the Ultra setting’s 65 FPS average leaves little headroom for demanding sections.

At 3840x2160, the performance falls below the ideal threshold for smooth gameplay. Low settings average 69 FPS, which is playable but not consistently smooth. Medium settings average 52 FPS, with a minimum of 45 FPS and a maximum of 60 FPS. High settings average 40 FPS, and Ultra settings average 38 FPS. The 4K results clearly show that this combo is not suited for high-refresh-rate gaming at that resolution, with only the Low preset approaching a playable frame rate.

The data shows a consistent pattern: the gap between High and Ultra settings is minimal at all resolutions (99 vs 94 FPS at 1080p, 68 vs 65 FPS at 1440p, 40 vs 38 FPS at 4K). This suggests that the Ultra preset in Thief adds little visual benefit relative to its performance cost, particularly when the GPU is already strained. The Medium preset appears to be the sweet spot for this combo, offering a significant jump over High settings at 1440p (89 vs 68 FPS) and 4K (52 vs 40 FPS) without the marginal gains of Ultra.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and AMD Radeon RX 9060 ranks 1586th out of 2851 tested combos for Thief. This places it in the 55.6th percentile, meaning it outperforms just over half of all tested configurations and underperforms the top 44.4%. This mid-tier ranking is consistent with the individual component scores: the CPU is in the 85th percentile, but the GPU is only in the 59th percentile, dragging the overall combo down.

The rank indicates that this pairing is not optimized for Thief specifically, but rather represents a balanced mainstream setup. The CPU’s high single-thread performance is largely wasted on this title, as the game does not require the Ultra 5 225’s capabilities to avoid bottlenecking the RX 9060. Conversely, the GPU’s 59th percentile ranking is the more relevant metric for understanding the combo’s position, as it is the limiting factor in most scenarios.

Relative to other combos, this pairing sits in the lower half of the distribution, but it is not near the bottom. The 4K performance, which averages 38-40 FPS at High and Ultra settings, is likely a significant contributor to the below-average ranking. Combos with stronger GPUs or more VRAM would achieve higher frame rates at 4K, pushing this pairing down the list. However, the 1080p and 1440p results are solid, which prevents the rank from falling further.

The deltaPct values for the GPU’s nearest rivals show that the RX 9060 is within 2.1% of the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 and within 1% of the AMD Radeon RX 7700. This means that swapping the GPU for any of these alternatives would produce nearly identical results in Thief, confirming that the combo’s rank is primarily determined by the GPU tier rather than the specific model. The CPU’s nearest rivals are similarly close in performance, with deltaPct values between 0 and -0.5%, meaning any of those processors would yield essentially the same frame rates.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this CPU/GPU pairing in Thief?*

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 with Medium settings offers the best balance, producing an average of 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 FPS. This provides smooth gameplay while maintaining visual quality, unlike 4K where even Low settings only reach 69 FPS.

*Q: Is this combo capable of 4K gaming in Thief?*

A: It is playable but not ideal. At 4K Low, the average FPS is 69, which is acceptable, but at Medium settings the average drops to 52 FPS, and at High and Ultra it falls to 40 and 38 FPS respectively. The minimum FPS of 45 at 4K Medium indicates potential stuttering in demanding scenes.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: The CPU’s average benchmark score of 36938 is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (36945, deltaPct: 0). It is 0.2% behind the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D and 0.5% behind the Intel Core i9-12900T, indicating that all four processors perform within 0.5% of each other.

Q: What is the GPU’s performance relative to its closest competitors?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9060 scores 16014 on average, which is 0.7% below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti. It is 1% ahead of both the AMD Radeon R9 370X and the AMD Radeon RX 7700, and 2.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5500.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU at any resolution?

A: No. The FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are consistent with GPU-bound behavior. For example, at Low settings, the average FPS drops from 171 at 1080p to 117 at 1440p and 69 at 4K, a pattern that indicates the GPU is the limiting factor at all resolutions.

Q: How much performance is lost between the Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings produce an average of 171 FPS, while Ultra settings produce 94 FPS. This represents a 45% reduction in performance, showing that the Ultra preset is significantly more demanding even at the lowest resolution tested.