Thief

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, and its 36 MB of shared L3 cache is substantial for a desktop part. In the context of Thief, a 2014 stealth title, this CPU’s role is primarily to ensure that the game’s logic, AI, and physics calculations are never the bottleneck. Benchmark results indicate that the processor’s PassMark single-thread score of 4823 and multi-thread score of 60860 place it in the 96th percentile among all CPUs, meaning it has far more headroom than a game of this era requires. The data shows that at lower resolutions and settings, where the GPU is less stressed, the CPU is more than capable of feeding frames, but the measured FPS patterns suggest that the limiting factor quickly shifts to the graphics card as resolution and quality increase.

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

The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus brings 24 physical cores and 24 threads, which is a configuration designed for heavy multi-threaded workloads like rendering or compilation, not necessarily for a game from 2014. For Thief, which was released in February 2014, the game’s engine is unlikely to leverage more than a handful of threads effectively. However, the processor’s high boost clock of 5.80 GHz is directly relevant to the measured frame rates. The PassMark single-thread score of 4823 indicates excellent per-core performance, which is critical for games that rely on a primary render thread. The data shows that the CPU’s average benchmark score of 84003 is 0.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, its closest rival, and 1.1% higher than the AMD EPYC 4584PX. This marginal lead in synthetic benchmarks does not translate into a large FPS advantage in Thief because the game is not compute-bound at the CPU level.

The processor’s 36 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth are more than sufficient for the game’s data streaming needs. In the measured results, we see that at 1080p Low settings, the average FPS reaches 75, which is the highest measured value across all configurations. This suggests that the CPU is capable of pushing the frame rate well beyond what the GPU can sustain at higher settings. The fact that the CPU never appears to be the limiting component is evident when comparing the 1080p Low result (75 FPS) to the 1080p Ultra result (41 FPS); the drop is entirely attributable to GPU load. The CPU’s PassMark physics score of 3315 further confirms that it has ample processing power for the game's physics calculations, which are typically not heavy in a stealth game like Thief. The conclusion from the data is that this processor is vastly overqualified for the task, and any performance limitations observed are due to the graphics card, not the CPU.

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

Q: What is the average frame rate at 1080p with Medium settings for this combo?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with Medium settings is 57 FPS, with a minimum of 48 FPS and a maximum of 65 FPS.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84003, which is 0.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K’s score of 83807.

Q: What is the lowest average frame rate recorded for this combination?

A: The lowest average FPS is 17, recorded at 3840x2160 resolution on both High and Ultra settings.

Q: Is the AMD Radeon RX 570’s performance closer to the RX 6800M or the R9 M295X?

A: The RX 570 has an average benchmark score of 28766, which is 0.7% higher than the AMD Radeon R9 M295X’s score of 28580, and 0.4% lower than the AMD Radeon RX 6800M’s score of 28874. It is nearly equidistant from both.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves an average of 51 FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves an average of 28 FPS, representing a 23 FPS drop.

Q: How many threads does the CPU provide for the game to use?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus provides 24 threads across its 24 cores, all of which are available to the operating system and game.

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

The measured FPS data across resolutions tells a clear story about system balance. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 75 FPS on average. Moving to 1440p Low, the average drops to 51 FPS, and at 4K Low, it falls to 30 FPS. This progression shows a 60% reduction in frame rate from 1080p to 4K at the lowest settings, which is a significant scaling factor. However, the pattern at higher settings is even more telling. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 41 FPS; at 1440p Ultra, it is 28 FPS; and at 4K Ultra, it is 17 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is a 31.7% decrease, and from 1440p to 4K is a 39.3% decrease. These numbers indicate that the GPU is the primary limiting component, as the CPU’s performance remains constant regardless of resolution.

The specific data points highlight that the AMD Radeon RX 570, with its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth, is overwhelmed at higher resolutions. At 4K, even the Low preset only manages 30 FPS, which is barely playable. The Medium preset at 4K yields 23 FPS, and both High and Ultra are locked at 17 FPS. This saturation suggests that the GPU’s shading units and memory bandwidth are exhausted. The RX 570 has 2048 shading units and 32 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 39.81 GPixel/s, which is insufficient for 4K rendering in this title. The data shows that the scaling from 1080p to 4K is not linear but rather steep, confirming that the GPU is the bottleneck. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see similar FPS numbers across resolutions, but that is not the case. The CPU’s high boost clock and 24 threads ensure that it can feed the GPU at all settings, but the GPU cannot keep up with the increasing pixel count.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and the AMD Radeon RX 570 ranks 2744 out of 2851 tested combos in Thief. This places it in the bottom 3.7% of all combinations tested. This low ranking is surprising given the CPU’s high percentile ranking (96th among all CPUs) and the GPU’s respectable percentile (74th among all GPUs). The data suggests that the pairing is imbalanced; the CPU is far more powerful than the GPU, which drags down the overall combo ranking because the game’s performance is limited by the graphics card. The combo rank of 2744 indicates that most other tested systems, likely with more balanced CPU-GPU pairings, achieve higher average frame rates in Thief. The GPU’s nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon RX 470 with a deltaPct of -0.8%, perform similarly, which means that swapping the CPU would not change the rank significantly. The bottleneck is clearly the GPU, as evidenced by the fact that the CPU’s performance is in the top 4% of all processors, yet the combo sits in the bottom 4% of all tested systems.

The ranking also reflects the age of the GPU relative to the game. The RX 570 was released in April 2017, three years after Thief’s launch, but it is still a mid-range part from that era. The data shows that the combo’s average FPS across all settings and resolutions is low, which is consistent with the GPU’s 74th percentile score of 28766. The CPU’s high scores do not compensate for the GPU’s limitations in a game that is graphically intensive at higher settings. The ranking is a direct consequence of the GPU’s inability to process the game’s visual effects at playable frame rates, particularly at 4K. For a user with this CPU, upgrading the GPU would be the logical step to improve the combo’s rank, as the CPU is not the constraining factor.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 570 is built on the Polaris 20 chip, using the GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. It features 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s base clock is 1168 MHz, with a boost clock of 1244 MHz, and it has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. These specifications are moderate by modern standards, and the data shows they are insufficient for Thief at higher resolutions. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 28766 places it in the 74th percentile, with its nearest rival being the AMD Radeon RX 6800M, which scores 0.4% higher. The GPU’s FP32 performance of 5.095 TFLOPS is the raw compute capability, but in Thief, the limiting factor appears to be memory bandwidth and ROP throughput.

The measured FPS data shows that the GPU cannot maintain 60 FPS at any resolution or setting combination. The highest average FPS is 75 at 1080p Low, which is the only configuration that approaches a high refresh rate experience. At Medium settings, the GPU drops to 57 FPS at 1080p, 39 FPS at 1440p, and 23 FPS at 4K. The 4 GB VRAM is likely a constraint at 4K, where texture memory requirements can exceed 4 GB, leading to the low frame rates observed. The GPU’s texture rate of 159.2 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 39.81 GPixel/s are insufficient for 4K rendering, as evidenced by the 17 FPS averages on High and Ultra at that resolution. The data indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck in this combo, and its performance is consistent with its 74th percentile ranking, which is much lower than the CPU’s 96th percentile. The GPU’s 150 W TDP and dual-slot design are typical for its class, but they do not translate into enough performance for this game’s more demanding presets.

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

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the combo’s performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the average FPS for Low is 75, Medium is 57 (with min/max of 48/65), High is 43, and Ultra is 41. This shows a steady decline as settings increase, with a 45.3% drop from Low to Ultra. At 2560x1440, the averages are 51 for Low, 39 for Medium (min/max 33/45), 30 for High, and 28 for Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 45.1%, which is similar to the 1080p scaling. At 3840x2160, the averages are 30 for Low, 23 for Medium (min/max 19/26), 17 for High, and 17 for Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra at 4K is 43.3%, but the absolute values are all below 30 FPS, making the game unplayable at this resolution.

The data shows that the Medium preset at each resolution provides a balance between quality and performance, with the min FPS being above 19 at 4K and above 33 at 1440p. The High and Ultra presets at 4K both yield 17 FPS, indicating that the GPU is fully saturated and additional settings do not change the frame rate. At 1080p, the Ultra preset’s 41 FPS is only 2 FPS lower than High’s 43 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is not the limiting factor at these settings, and the CPU’s high clock speed is maintaining a stable frame rate. The min and max FPS values are only provided for the Medium preset, showing a 17 FPS spread at 1080p (48-65), a 12 FPS spread at 1440p (33-45), and a 7 FPS spread at 4K (19-26). This narrowing spread at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is consistently at its limit, with less variance in frame times.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset is the recommended choice for most users, as it provides the best balance between visual quality and playability. At 1080p Medium, the combo achieves 57 FPS on average, which is above the 50 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, with a minimum of 48 FPS that stays above the 45 FPS comfort zone for most players. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 39 FPS, which is still playable but may require adjusting expectations, as the minimum of 33 FPS can cause noticeable stutter in fast-paced scenes. At 4K Medium, the average is 23 FPS, which is not recommended for a smooth experience, but it remains the highest playable setting at that resolution.

For users prioritizing frame rate over visual fidelity, the Low preset is the only option that provides a consistently smooth experience. At 1080p Low, the average of 75 FPS is excellent, and at 1440p Low, the average of 51 FPS is still above 50. However, at 4K Low, the average of 30 FPS is just at the edge of playability. The High and Ultra presets are not recommended at any resolution above 1080p, as they both drop below 30 FPS at 1440p and below 20 FPS at 4K. The data shows that the Ultra preset offers no significant advantage over High, with identical 17 FPS averages at 4K and only a 2 FPS difference at 1080p. Therefore, for the best experience, users should select Medium at 1080p or 1440p, and only use Low settings if they must play at 4K. The Medium preset’s min FPS values indicate that it provides a more stable frame rate than the High or Ultra presets, making it the optimal choice for this hardware combination.