Thief

This benchmark pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 delivers in Thief a measured frame-rate profile that spans everything from a 221 FPS ceiling at 1080p Low to a 72 FPS average at 4K Ultra. The configuration ranks 127th out of 3,720 tested combos, placing it firmly in the upper strata of system pairings. Both components sit high in their respective percentile rankings, with the CPU above 89% of all processors and the GPU above 86% of all graphics cards, and their individual benchmark scores nearly match their closest rivals.

How This Combo Ranks

The joint rank in Thief is 127 out of 3,720 unique CPU + GPU combinations. That places this system near the very top of the database for this title. The CPU, the Intel Core Ultra 5 235, has a percentile score of 89, meaning it outperforms 89% of tested CPUs overall; its average benchmark score is 46,062. The GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080, has a percentile of 86 among all GPUs and an average score of 54,247.

Relative to its nearest CPU competitors, the Core Ultra 5 235 is virtually tied: against the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 it is 0.1% faster (deltaPct 0.1), while it is 0.1% slower than the Intel Core i9-13900HX (deltaPct −0.1). It also sits 0.2% ahead of both the AMD EPYC 4364P and the AMD EPYC 7303 (deltaPct 0.2 each). The GPU shows the same small differentials. It beats the GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER by 0.1% (deltaPct 0.1) and trails the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X by 1.1% (deltaPct −1.1) and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB by 2.6% (deltaPct −2.6). Given that a delta of 0.1% is within measurement noise, this system is effectively equal to the two most similar rival pairs in the database.

The 127 / 3,720 placement means that fewer than 4% of all benchmarked configurations produce higher performance in Thief. That puts this combo not merely in the high segment of the hardware hierarchy, but also in the very top echelon of results for this specific title, which is a 2014 stealth game that presents a mix of CPU and GPU demand.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 compare to the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 in raw CPU benchmarks?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235 scores an average of 46,062; the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 scores 46,030. The deltaPct is 0.1, so the Intel part is effectively identical to its nearest rival.

Q: What is the highest average frame rate recorded for this system in Thief?

A: The largest measured value is 221 FPS at 1080p with Low settings.

Q: What does the setup deliver at 4K on Ultra settings?

A: The measured average is 72 FPS at 3840×2160 Ultra.

Q: Which GPU is the direct competitor to the RTX 4080 in these results?

A: The GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER is within 0.1% of the RTX 4080's performance (deltaPct 0.1), making it the closest rival in the nearestRivals list.

Q: Does the game run above 100 FPS at 2560×1440 with High settings?

A: Yes, the measured average is 129 FPS at 1440p High.

Q: How many frame rates are listed in the dried data for this game?

A: The file reports 12 unique measurement rows across three resolutions (1080p, 1440p, 4K) and four quality presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). Five of those rows include only the average FPS, while the Medium preset also includes minimum and maximum values.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a consistent downward trend as resolution increases from 1920×1080 to 3840×2160, across every quality preset. For example, at Low settings the average moves from 221 FPS at 1080p to 195 FPS at 1440p and then to 131 FPS at 4K. The same pattern is visible at Ultra: 178 FPS at 1080p drops to 123 FPS at 1440p and settles at 72 FPS at 4K.

The gap between the 4K Ultra (72 FPS) and the 1080p Ultra (178 FPS) is over 2×, illustrating how the GPU becomes a more significant limitation when the pixel workload multiplies. Even at the least demanding preset, Low, the difference between 1080p and 4K is still 90 FPS (221–131). This dramatic scaling indicates that the frame rate is dominated by the pixel draw — the RTX 4080's 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and 716.8 GB/s bandwidth are pushed harder with each resolution bump.

Interestingly, the Medium preset shows a FPS value of 169 at 1440p, which is higher than the High preset at the same resolution (129 FPS). That pattern holds at 4K as well (Medium 100, High 76) and at 1080p (Medium 200, High 181). This suggests that the High preset includes added geometric or lighting effects that cost more GPU time than the step from Medium to High justifies, at least in this title. The data may hint at specific settings like high-quality textures or pixel-heavy effects, but the numbers cannot be segmented further.

Measured FPS Breakdown

Raw numbers isolate the performance per resolution and preset:

1920×1080

• Low: 221 FPS
• Medium: 200 FPS (min 170, max 230)
• High: 181 FPS
• Ultra: 178 FPS

2560×1440

• Low: 195 FPS
• Medium: 169 FPS (min 144, max 195)
• High: 129 FPS
• Ultra: 123 FPS

3840×2160

• Low: 131 FPS
• Medium: 100 FPS (min 85, max 114)
• High: 76 FPS
• Ultra: 72 FPS

The Medium rows are the only ones in the data set that include min and max values; the others report only an average. At 4K Medium, the range of 85–114 FPS broadens the picture: the average of 100 conceals occasional dips below the 100ms threshold, though they still stay above 60. At 1080p Medium, the 230 max and 170 min frame the performance well within the range of high refresh-rate monitors.

These numbers also show that going from Low to Ultra costs performance progressively. At 1080p the difference between Low and Ultra is 43 FPS (221–178). At 1440p the same delta is 72 FPS (195–123). At 4K the delta grows to 59 FPS (131–72). The relative cost of the highest preset becomes obvious: at 4K Ultra the system barely holds above 60% of the 4K Low result. The absolute frame counts remain smooth for 60 Hz displays, but for 144 Hz monitors only the 1080p and Medium 1440p categories are likely to reach that refresh rate.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the three resolutions measured, making a presets recommendation depends heavily on the target display and refresh rate. For users with a 1080p monitor, every setting is playable, but Ultra at 1080p provides the full visual quality while still delivering an average of 178 FPS — far above the 60 FPS mark and even well above typical 144 Hz panels. If the goal is to push raw FPS for e-sports or maximum reflexes, the Low preset reaches 221 FPS, but that sacrifices any detail.

At 2560×1440, the Medium setting (169 FPS) is the highest FPS setting after Low, and it still preserves a graphical advantage over Low. The High preset drops to 129 FPS, and Ultra to 123 FPS, which are still above 120 FPS and therefore acceptable for high-frequency monitors. Medium gives the best balance between speed and visual quality for this resolution, given its 169 FPS average and a max frame rate of 195.

For 4K resolution, the data suggests that Medium is the most balanced choice: 100 FPS average with a min of 85 and max of 114. Ultra at 4K yields a 72 FPS average, which is still playable, but the difference between Ultra and Medium (72 vs 100) means the visual tier increase is paid for with a 28% lower frame rate — exactly the opposite of what the High preset delivers (76 FPS), which is only 4 FPS below Ultra but 27 FPS below Medium. Since High is so close to Ultra in performance but not much to Medium, choosing Medium at 4K seems the best cost-effective way to approach 100 FPS while keeping a better-than-Low level of detail. Low at 4K does give 131 FPS, but it uses the lowest preset, which loses most of the game’s lighting talent.

Ultimately, the data supports that the right setting for the majority of users is Medium for 1440p and 4K, and Ultra for 1080p if visual fidelity is the priority. The High preset is an odd middle ground that provides exceptionally narrow gains over Medium in FPS but still better than Low, slightly less frame rate than Medium, and while the visual difference is not in the measurements, the numbers recommend against it unless a specific effect needed.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a 14-core / 14-thread processor from the Arrow Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost up to 5.00 GHz. Its L3 cache is 24 MB shared, with a per-core L2 of 3 MB and 192 KB of L1. The CPU uses Socket 1851 and a DDR5 dual-channel memory interface, offering a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

These specs suggest a high core count with a locomotive single-thread performance; the single-thread benchmark (Cinebench R23 single-core) is 2,085, while multi-core is 14,769. The Passmark single-thread score is 4,516, and the multithread is 37,816. In comparison to the nearest CPU rivals, the Core Ultra 5 235 is essentially identical to the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (delta 0.1%). Given the measured FPS, the CPU is more than adequate for Thief, a 2014 game that likely scales to four threads.

The frame-rate data at 1080p Low (221 FPS) implies that the CPU is not a lifting in the majority of settings. Even at 4K Ultra, where the GPU is most challenged, the average still is 72 FPS, which is still highly playable. The CPU’s 14 cores do not need to be al in an older title, but the engine appears to utilize the clock efficiency: the high single-core benchmark at 2,085 is projected to handle the legacy game well.

GPU

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is the performance pillar here. Its 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s. It has 9,728 shading units, 304 texture mapping units, and 112 ROPs, with 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores. The base clock is 2,205 MHz and the boost is 2,505 MHz. A 32 kW TDP—feels large, but it is for a top-tier card.

The GPU's measured average benchmark score is 54,247 with a percentile of 86 across all those seen. At 4K Ultra the average FPS falls to 72, but the GPU can still hit 131 FPS at 4K Low, showing a large headroom at lower presets. The Max FPS at Medium settings (195 at 1440p) points to a 3D pipeline that is extremely fast when not limited by resolution. The RTX 4080 is at 0.1% of its closest rival, proving that the performance spread among the top cards in this range is incredibly small.

For that 2014 title, the GPU is effectively the bottleneck only when settings and resolution are pushed to the max. At 1080p, even Ultra yields 178 FPS, far beyond any display's refresh, so the card is likely CPU-saturated or frame-limited4. The measured averages show the balance.

The GPU's VRAM heavy role is evident in that 4K is often limited by the raw memory bandwidth; the 256-bit bus of 716.8 GB/s is sufficient, and the 16GB capacity is not a limit. The data reveals that Thief at its highest 4K Ultra is still GPU-bound, but the card handles it with ease relative to the displays of that time.

In summary, the RTX 4080 is a high-end part that gives this configuration its top-tier performance in Thief, while the CPU provides the strong foundations that lift the system to the upper ranks of the database.