Thief

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 desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture with a 3 nm process node from TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, drawing a TDP of 125 W. The chip uses an Intel Socket 1851 and supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The processor includes 30 MB of shared L3 cache, plus 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 3 MB of L2 cache per core.

The recorded benchmarks place this CPU in the 94th percentile among all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 70879. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Xeon 6511P at 71051 (-0.2%), the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 at 71370 (-0.7%), the Intel Core i7-14700KF at 70163 (+1%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F at 69996 (+1.3%). These close deltas indicate that the 265K sits in a tightly contested performance band, with no single rival holding a decisive edge.

In the context of Thief, a 2014 stealth game, the CPU's role is largely to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. The measured frame rates across all resolution and settings combinations show that the RTX 4090, not the CPU, is the primary limiter at higher resolutions. The 265K's strong single-core score of 2020 in Cinebench R23 and 2713 in Geekbench single-core suggests it has ample headroom for the game's threaded workload, which is modest by modern standards. The 20-core configuration also provides substantial multi-threaded capacity, scoring 35850 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, but Thief does not appear to scale meaningfully beyond a few cores based on the FPS data.

The CPU's integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU is present but irrelevant to this testing, as the discrete RTX 4090 handles all rendering. The processor's PCIe Gen 5 support with 20 lanes (CPU only) provides a high-bandwidth connection to the GPU, though the RTX 4090 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, which is backward compatible. The 265K's 125 W TDP and 3 nm process indicate an efficient design, but the measured FPS results show that at 1080p Low, the combo reaches 242 FPS, suggesting the CPU can drive very high frame rates without bottlenecking the GPU in this title.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this CPU and GPU combination in Thief?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 242 FPS at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K compare to its nearest rival in the database?

A: The 265K has an average benchmark score of 70879, which is 0.2% lower than the Intel Xeon 6511P (71051) and 1% higher than the Intel Core i7-14700KF (70163).

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded across all tested configurations?

A: The lowest average FPS is 80 FPS, recorded at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings.

Q: Does the RTX 4090 show a performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: Yes, at 2560x1440, the Low setting produces 213 FPS average, while the Ultra setting produces 136 FPS average, a difference of 77 FPS.

Q: How many total combinations were ranked for this game, and where does this combo place?

A: The database ranked 3720 combinations for Thief, and this specific CPU and GPU combo ranks 16th overall.

Q: What is the RTX 4090's average benchmark score and percentile ranking?

A: The RTX 4090 has an average benchmark score of 60347 and ranks in the 88th percentile among all tested GPUs.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 achieves a rank of 16 out of 3720 tested combinations in Thief. This places the combo in the top 0.4% of all recorded configurations, which is a strong result for a game released in 2014. The high rank is driven primarily by the RTX 4090's raw rendering power, as the GPU's 16384 shading units and 82.58 TFLOPS FP32 performance provide exceptional throughput for the game's DirectX 11-era graphics pipeline.

The CPU contributes to this ranking through its high single-thread performance, which matters for the game's main thread and physics calculations. The 265K's Cinebench R15 single-core score of 708 and PassMark single-thread score of 4928 indicate strong per-core capability. In a game like Thief, where the simulation and AI logic often run on a limited number of threads, this single-core strength helps maintain high frame rates even at low resolutions where the GPU is less taxed.

The nearest rival combinations in the database are not broken out by specific CPU-GPU pairings, but the individual component rankings provide context. The CPU's 94th percentile among all processors and the GPU's 88th percentile among all GPUs suggest that this combo leverages two high-tier components. The gap between the 16th rank and the 1st rank likely comes from combinations using even faster CPUs or multiple GPUs, though the data does not specify those configurations.

At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 242 FPS average, which is near the top of what any single-GPU setup can deliver in this title. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 80 FPS, which is still well above playable thresholds. The rank of 16 indicates that only a small number of tested combos outperform this setup, and those are likely built around CPUs with even higher single-thread scores or GPUs with higher raw compute. The measured data confirms that this combination delivers elite-level performance in Thief.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The database records 12 distinct measurements for this combo across three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four settings levels (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). The Medium setting is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values, providing additional granularity.

At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 195 at Ultra to 242 at Low. The Medium setting shows an average of 219 FPS, with a minimum of 186 and a maximum of 252. The High setting averages 198 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 47 FPS, indicating that the GPU has substantial headroom even at the highest settings for this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the averages are lower but still high. Low settings produce 213 FPS, Medium produces 187 FPS (with min 159 and max 215), High produces 143 FPS, and Ultra produces 136 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 77 FPS, a larger gap than at 1080p, which suggests the GPU is becoming more of a limiting factor as pixel count increases.

At 3840x2160, the averages drop significantly. Low settings deliver 145 FPS, Medium delivers 110 FPS (with min 94 and max 127), High delivers 84 FPS, and Ultra delivers 80 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 65 FPS. The minimum FPS of 94 at 4K Medium is still comfortably above 60 FPS, indicating that even the most demanding settings remain playable.

The Medium setting at each resolution shows a consistent pattern: the minimum FPS is roughly 15-20% below the average, while the maximum is 10-15% above. For example, at 1080p Medium, the average is 219 with min 186 and max 252, giving a range of 66 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the average is 187 with min 159 and max 215, a range of 56 FPS. At 4K Medium, the average is 110 with min 94 and max 127, a range of 33 FPS. This narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates that frame time variance decreases as the GPU becomes more consistently loaded.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear scaling pattern as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 242 at 1080p to 213 at 1440p (a 12% decrease) and then to 145 at 4K (a 32% decrease from 1440p, or 40% from 1080p). This scaling indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, as the CPU's frame generation capacity is not being fully utilized at 4K Low.

At Medium settings, the averages are 219 at 1080p, 187 at 1440p (a 15% drop), and 110 at 4K (a 41% drop from 1440p, or 50% from 1080p). The percentage drops grow as resolution increases, which is typical for a GPU-bound scenario. The RTX 4090's 1.01 TB/s memory bandwidth and 24 GB of GDDR6X VRAM provide ample capacity for the game's textures, but the raw pixel throughput at 4K reduces frame rates substantially.

At High settings, the averages are 198 at 1080p, 143 at 1440p (a 28% drop), and 84 at 4K (a 41% drop from 1440p, or 58% from 1080p). At Ultra settings, the averages are 195 at 1080p, 136 at 1440p (a 30% drop), and 80 at 4K (a 41% drop from 1440p, or 59% from 1080p). The High and Ultra settings show similar scaling patterns, with the largest percentage drop occurring between 1080p and 1440p, followed by a slightly smaller drop between 1440p and 4K.

The data indicates that the CPU is not limiting in any configuration. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 242 FPS, which is close to the practical limit for many display refresh rates. The fact that increasing resolution to 1440p Low only reduces FPS by 12% suggests the CPU can still drive high frame rates, but the GPU's workload increases. At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiting component, as the FPS drops align with the increased pixel count (4K has 4 times the pixels of 1080p, but the FPS does not drop by 4 times, indicating that the GPU's parallel processing handles the load efficiently).

The limiting component shifts from CPU-bound at 1080p Low to GPU-bound at 4K Ultra. At 1080p Low, the 242 FPS average suggests the CPU is near its maximum frame delivery rate for this game. At 4K Ultra, the 80 FPS average shows the GPU's pixel processing capacity is the constraining factor. The transition point appears to be around 1440p, where the FPS drops from Low to Ultra (213 to 136) indicate that both components contribute to the performance envelope.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of how each settings preset affects performance. The Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and frame rate stability, as it is the only preset with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values, allowing for a more complete assessment of frame time consistency.

At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 219 FPS average, with a minimum of 186 FPS. This means the worst-case frame rate still exceeds 180 FPS, which is well above the refresh rate of most high-end monitors. The Ultra preset at 1080p delivers 195 FPS average, only 24 FPS lower than Medium, but the lack of minimum FPS data for Ultra makes it harder to assess stability. The High preset at 198 FPS average sits between Medium and Ultra, with a smaller gap to Ultra (3 FPS) than to Medium (21 FPS). For 1080p users, the Medium preset provides the highest average with documented stability, making it the safest choice for competitive play where frame consistency matters.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset delivers 187 FPS average, with a minimum of 159 FPS. The Ultra preset delivers 136 FPS average, and High delivers 143 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is 44 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is 7 FPS. This suggests that the visual quality difference between High and Ultra costs very little performance, while the jump from Medium to High costs significantly more. For 1440p, the High preset offers a good compromise: it stays above 140 FPS average, which is sufficient for 144 Hz displays, and the 7 FPS cost over Ultra is minimal. The Medium preset offers the highest frame rate headroom with documented stability, making it the best choice for users prioritizing smoothness over visual fidelity.

At 3840x2160, the Medium preset delivers 110 FPS average, with a minimum of 94 FPS. The High preset delivers 84 FPS, and Ultra delivers 80 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is 26 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is 4 FPS. At 4K, the Medium preset is the clear recommendation: it maintains an average above 100 FPS with a minimum above 90 FPS, which is excellent for a 4K experience. The High and Ultra presets both fall below 90 FPS average, which may introduce perceptible frame pacing issues on 120 Hz or 144 Hz 4K displays. The 4 FPS difference between High and Ultra indicates that Ultra is essentially free in performance terms, but the step from Medium to High is more costly.

The data consistently shows that the Medium preset provides the best measured experience across all resolutions. It is the only preset with full FPS range data, and its minimum FPS values at each resolution (186 at 1080p, 159 at 1440p, 94 at 4K) confirm that frame rates never drop to problematic levels. The High preset offers a slight visual improvement over Medium but costs 21 FPS at 1080p, 44 FPS at 1440p, and 26 FPS at 4K. The Ultra preset provides marginal gains over High (3 FPS at 1080p, 7 FPS at 1440p, 4 FPS at 4K) but does not offer the same stability documentation.

For users with high refresh rate displays, the Low preset at 1080p (242 FPS average) or 1440p (213 FPS average) is the only way to approach 240 Hz refresh rates, though it sacrifices visual quality. The Medium preset remains the most versatile choice, delivering over 100 FPS at 4K, over 180 FPS at 1440p, and over 180 FPS at 1080p, all with documented minimum frame rates that stay well above playability thresholds. The recorded data supports Medium as the optimal settings level for this combo in Thief, balancing visual fidelity, average FPS, and frame time consistency across all tested resolutions.