Thief

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K paired with the Intel Arc B390 is a severely imbalanced combination for Thief, producing playable frame rates only at 1080p with reduced settings. The data shows the combo ranks 2534th out of 2851 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 11% of all tested systems. While the CPU is a top-tier performer, the integrated GPU is the definitive bottleneck, limiting the experience to low-to-medium settings even at 1080p. For any resolution above 1080p, this configuration falls below acceptable playability thresholds.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with a 125W TDP. The processor features 30 MB of shared L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. This CPU is a powerhouse in general benchmarks, scoring 35,850 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,020 in single-core tests. Its average benchmark score of 70,879 places it at the 94th percentile among all CPUs, indicating it is a high-end desktop part.

In the context of Thief, which is a 2014 stealth title, the CPU's role is primarily to feed the GPU with draw calls and handle game logic. The data indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this combo. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 86 FPS, which is the highest score recorded across all tested settings and resolutions. This suggests that the CPU can handle the game's single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads efficiently. However, the game's performance is capped by the GPU at every setting above Low. The CPU's single-core performance, as evidenced by its 2,020 Cinebench R23 score, is more than sufficient for a 2014 game engine. The processor's high boost clock of 5.50 GHz ensures that even if the game were CPU-bound, it would likely still deliver high frame rates. The benchmark results show that the CPU is not the bottleneck; rather, the integrated Intel Arc B390 GPU is.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the best frame rate this combo can achieve in Thief?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 86 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that approaches high refresh rates.

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

A: No. At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 19 FPS on Ultra to 35 FPS on Low. Even the best 4K result, 35 FPS on Low, is below the standard 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

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

A: The Intel Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1,482, which is just 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX and 2.7% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710. This places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, indicating it is an entry-level integrated solution.

Q: What is the difference between 1080p Medium and 1080p Ultra performance?

A: At 1080p Medium, the system averages 66 FPS with a minimum of 56 FPS. At 1080p Ultra, the average drops to 48 FPS. The jump from Medium to Ultra costs 18 FPS, a 27% performance reduction.

Q: Does the CPU's high benchmark score translate to better gaming performance here?

A: No. The CPU scores in the 94th percentile, but the GPU scores in the 9th percentile. The gaming performance is entirely constrained by the GPU, as evidenced by the fact that even at 1080p Low, the system cannot exceed 86 FPS.

Q: Is there any resolution where the combo delivers a stable 60 FPS experience?

A: Only at 1920x1080 with Low settings does the average FPS exceed 60, hitting 86 FPS. At 1440p Low, the average drops to 59 FPS, which is marginally below the 60 FPS target.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo ranks 2534th out of 2851 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 11.1% of all systems tested in Thief. This rank is a direct reflection of the GPU's limitations. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is a top-tier CPU, ranking at the 94th percentile among all CPUs, but the Intel Arc B390 GPU ranks at the 9th percentile. This creates a massive disparity in capability. The GPU's average benchmark score of 1,482 is nearly identical to that of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, which scores 1,463. In fact, the Arc B390 is only 1.3% faster than the GT 520MX and 2.5% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM. This means the combo's performance is comparable to systems with decade-old entry-level discrete GPUs. The rank of 2534 out of 2851 indicates that there are only 317 combos that perform worse, and most of those likely pair similarly weak integrated graphics with older CPUs. The CPU's high multi-core score of 35,850 in Cinebench R23 does not help in this scenario, as the game's frame rate is capped by the GPU's fill rate and shading capabilities. The data shows a clear case of a high-end CPU being wasted on an inadequate GPU solution.

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

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best performance. On Low settings, the average FPS is 86. Moving to Medium, the average drops to 66 FPS, with a minimum of 56 and a maximum of 75. High settings yield an average of 50 FPS. Ultra settings produce an average of 48 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 38 FPS, a 44% reduction. This shows that the GPU is heavily taxed by higher graphical presets.

At 2560x1440, performance degrades significantly. Low settings average 59 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS target. Medium settings average 45 FPS, with a minimum of 38 and a maximum of 52. High settings average 34 FPS. Ultra settings average 33 FPS. The drop from 1080p Low to 1440p Low is 27 FPS, indicating that the GPU cannot handle the increased pixel count. At 1440p, no setting achieves a stable 60 FPS average.

At 3840x2160, the combo is not playable. Low settings average 35 FPS. Medium settings average 26 FPS, with a minimum of 22 and a maximum of 30. High settings average 20 FPS. Ultra settings average 19 FPS. The difference between 4K Low and 4K Ultra is 16 FPS, showing that even the lowest settings cannot provide a smooth experience. The minimum FPS recorded across all settings is 22 FPS at 4K Medium, which indicates severe frame pacing issues in demanding scenes. The data reveals that the GPU is the sole bottleneck, as the CPU's performance is more than sufficient to handle the game's logic at these resolutions.

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

The resolution scaling behavior clearly identifies the GPU as the limiting component. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 86 at 1080p to 59 at 1440p, a 31% decrease. From 1080p to 4K at Low settings, the average FPS drops from 86 to 35, a 59% reduction. At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 66 at 1080p to 45 at 1440p (32% decrease) and to 26 at 4K (61% decrease). For Ultra settings, the average FPS drops from 48 at 1080p to 33 at 1440p (31% decrease) and to 19 at 4K (60% decrease). This consistent ~60% performance loss from 1080p to 4K across all settings is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario, as the pixel count increases by a factor of four, and the frame rate drops by roughly half, indicating that the GPU is running out of fill rate and shading power.

If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates would remain relatively flat across resolutions, as the CPU's workload does not scale with pixel count. The fact that the FPS drops proportionally with resolution indicates that the Intel Arc B390's 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 24 ROPs are insufficient for high-resolution rendering. The GPU's texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s are simply too low for 1440p and 4K workloads. The data also shows that the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 38 FPS. At 4K, the difference is only 16 FPS. This suggests that at higher resolutions, the GPU is so saturated that the settings have a diminished impact, further confirming the GPU as the primary constraint.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

The only configuration that delivers a truly smooth experience is 1920x1080 with Low settings, which averages 86 FPS. This is the recommended setting for anyone seeking high frame rates. If visual fidelity is a priority, 1080p Medium offers a playable 66 FPS average with a minimum of 56 FPS, which is acceptable for most players. The minimum FPS of 56 at Medium ensures that the frame rate rarely dips below the 60 FPS target. At 1080p High, the average drops to 50 FPS, which is still playable but less consistent. 1080p Ultra at 48 FPS is the maximum visual quality, but the frame rate is borderline for a stealth game where smoothness is critical.

At 2560x1440, the best option is Low settings, which averages 59 FPS. This is technically below the 60 FPS target, but it is the only 1440p setting that comes close. 1440p Medium at 45 FPS is playable but will feel less responsive. The data shows that for a more stable experience, users should stick to 1440p Low. At 3840x2160, no setting is recommended for actual gameplay. The highest average FPS at 4K is 35 FPS on Low, which is below the playability threshold. Even the minimum FPS at 4K Medium is 22, which indicates significant stuttering.

Given the measured data, the best experience is achieved at 1080p with Medium settings. This preset balances the 66 FPS average with a minimum of 56 FPS, providing a smooth and visually acceptable experience. For players who prioritize performance above all else, 1080p Low at 86 FPS is the optimal choice. The Ultra preset at any resolution is not recommended, as the performance gains from Medium to Ultra are not worth the substantial FPS drop. The data indicates that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming with modest settings, and any attempt to run higher resolutions or presets will result in a subpar experience.