Thief

# Thief — Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus + Intel Arc B370

This combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and Intel Arc B370 produces a fundamentally GPU-limited experience in Thief, with the integrated graphics solution acting as the primary constraint across all tested resolutions and settings. The data shows a steep performance curve that collapses at higher resolutions, while the CPU's substantial multi-threaded capacity remains largely untapped by a 2014 stealth title that rarely stresses modern processors.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a dramatic drop as resolution increases, confirming that the Intel Arc B370's rendering throughput is the limiting factor at every tested setting level. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 78 FPS at 1920x1080 to 53 FPS at 2560x1440, representing a 32% reduction. Moving from 1440p to 4K at Low settings further reduces the average to 31 FPS, another 41% decline. The total scaling from 1080p Low to 4K Low is a 60% performance loss, which is a harsh penalty that points directly at the GPU's fill-rate and shading limitations rather than any CPU bottleneck.

At High settings, the scaling pattern is similar but slightly less severe in percentage terms. The average drops from 45 FPS at 1080p to 31 FPS at 1440p (a 31% reduction), then to 18 FPS at 4K (a 42% reduction from 1440p). The absolute numbers at 4K High are nearly unplayable, with the average sitting just 1 FPS above the single-digit territory. Ultra settings show the same trend: 43 FPS at 1080p, 29 FPS at 1440p, and 17 FPS at 4K. The consistent pattern across all four settings presets — an approximately 30% drop from 1080p to 1440p followed by another 40% drop from 1440p to 4K — indicates that the Arc B370's pixel throughput and memory bandwidth (system shared) are exhausted well before the resolution reaches 4K.

The fact that the FPS scaling is nearly uniform across Low, Medium, High, and Ultra settings suggests that the GPU is not merely limited by shader work but by fundamental pixel-processing capacity. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see smaller absolute FPS differences between resolutions at lower settings. Instead, the data shows that even at Low settings, where the CPU would have minimal graphics driver overhead, 4K performance falls to 31 FPS. This is a clear signature of a GPU that cannot keep up with pixel count regardless of scene complexity.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process from Intel. Its specifications include 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operations units, with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The memory configuration is entirely system shared, meaning the GPU draws from the same DDR5 pool as the CPU, with bandwidth described as system dependent. This shared-memory arrangement is a major factor in the poor 4K results, as the GPU competes with CPU workloads for memory bandwidth.

The GPU's compute capabilities are modest: 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 performance and a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s. In Thief, a game with dense geometry and dynamic lighting, these figures translate to the measured FPS numbers. At 1080p Medium, the average of 59 FPS with a minimum of 50 FPS shows the GPU can handle moderate loads when the resolution is reasonable. However, the 4K Ultra result of 17 FPS average indicates that the pixel rate and texture rate (96.00 GTexel/s) are simply insufficient for 8.3 million pixels per frame.

The GPU's benchmark score in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 is 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are older discrete mobile and entry-level desktop parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (0.2% higher), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% higher), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% higher). The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (1.4% lower). This positioning alongside decade-old hardware underscores that the Arc B370 is not designed for high-end gaming, and Thief's results reflect that reality.

The boost clock of 2400 MHz helps at lower resolutions, where the GPU can maintain higher utilization without thermal or power constraints (the TDP is just 25 W). But at 4K, the sheer volume of pixel work overwhelms the 20 ROPs, causing the frame rate to collapse. The fact that the GPU's memory bandwidth is system dependent means that at 4K, the shared DDR5 bandwidth is also a bottleneck, though the data does not separate memory latency from raw bandwidth effects.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the most balanced experience is at 1920x1080 with Medium settings, which produces an average of 59 FPS with a minimum of 50 FPS and a maximum of 68 FPS. This is the only tested configuration that stays above the 50 FPS minimum threshold while maintaining a playable average. The Low preset at 1080p delivers 78 FPS average, but the visual quality reduction is substantial, and the game's stealth mechanics benefit from better shadow and texture fidelity that Low settings remove.

At 2560x1440, the best option is Low settings, yielding 53 FPS average. Medium at 1440p drops to 41 FPS with a 35 FPS minimum, which may be acceptable for slower-paced stealth gameplay but risks noticeable stutter in busy scenes. High at 1440p averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 29 FPS — both below the 30 FPS threshold that most players consider the floor for smooth play.

At 3840x2160, no settings preset achieves a playable frame rate. Low averages 31 FPS, Medium averages 24 FPS with a 20 FPS minimum, High averages 18 FPS, and Ultra averages 17 FPS. The data suggests that 4K is not viable on this combo, even at the lowest quality settings. The 31 FPS at 4K Low is borderline, but the minimum FPS is not reported for that row, and the 24 FPS at Medium with a 20 FPS minimum indicates that any increase in detail causes frame times to spike.

The measured data also shows that the jump from Low to Medium at 1080p costs 19 FPS (78 to 59), while the jump from Medium to High costs 14 FPS (59 to 45), and High to Ultra costs only 2 FPS (45 to 43). This suggests that the Ultra preset adds little over High for a minimal performance hit, but the Medium preset provides the best balance of visual fidelity and frame rate at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full settings range is playable. Low settings produce an average of 78 FPS. Medium settings yield 59 FPS average with a minimum of 50 FPS and a maximum of 68 FPS. High settings average 45 FPS. Ultra settings average 43 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 35 FPS, showing that the GPU has headroom at this resolution to handle increased detail without collapsing.

At 2560x1440, performance degrades noticeably. Low settings average 53 FPS. Medium settings average 41 FPS with a minimum of 35 FPS and a maximum of 47 FPS. High settings average 31 FPS. Ultra settings average 29 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 24 FPS, and the minimum at Medium (35 FPS) is close to the average at High (31 FPS), indicating that frame pacing becomes erratic as resolution increases.

At 3840x2160, all settings fall below playable thresholds. Low settings average 31 FPS. Medium settings average 24 FPS with a minimum of 20 FPS and a maximum of 27 FPS. High settings average 18 FPS. Ultra settings average 17 FPS. The minimum at Medium (20 FPS) is a clear sign that the GPU cannot sustain even moderate detail at 4K. The difference between High and Ultra at this resolution is just 1 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is completely saturated and additional settings have no measurable impact.

The Medium preset is the only one with full min/max data across all three resolutions. At 1080p, the range is 50-68 FPS (18 FPS spread). At 1440p, the range is 35-47 FPS (12 FPS spread). At 4K, the range is 20-27 FPS (7 FPS spread). The narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is hitting a hard performance ceiling, with less variation because every frame is equally constrained by pixel throughput.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Thief, this pairing ranks 2634 out of 2851 combos, placing it in the bottom 8% of all tested systems. This ranking reflects the Intel Arc B370's position as an integrated GPU with a 5th percentile benchmark score. The CPU's performance class — the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus ranks in the 96th percentile of all CPUs — does nothing to boost the combo's standing because the game is entirely GPU-bound.

The CPU alone would be a top-tier choice for Thief, given its 24 cores and 24 threads, but the measured FPS data shows no scenario where the CPU's capabilities are the differentiator. The combo rank of 2634 out of 2851 is consistent with the GPU's own percentile ranking of 5, confirming that the GPU dictates the overall experience. The CPU's nearest rivals — the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (0.2% higher average score), AMD EPYC 4584PX (1.1% higher), and AMD EPYC 9135 (1.2% higher) — are all within a few percent in synthetic benchmarks, but none of that matters for Thief's frame rates.

For context, the GPU's nearest rivals are all significantly older parts, and the delta percentages are tiny (0.2% to 1.4%). This indicates that the Arc B370 performs at a level comparable to GPUs from over a decade ago, and in a game like Thief that was released in 2014, it barely meets minimum expectations at 1080p.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Thief?

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where average frame rates stay above 43 FPS across all settings. At 2560x1440, only Low settings exceed 50 FPS average, and at 3840x2160, no preset reaches 32 FPS.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K in Thief?

A: No. The highest 4K average is 31 FPS at Low settings, with Medium at 24 FPS, High at 18 FPS, and Ultra at 17 FPS. The minimum at 4K Medium is 20 FPS, indicating severe frame pacing issues.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the Arc B370 scores 1184. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (0.2% higher), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% higher), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% higher). The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (1.4% lower).

Q: Does the CPU affect performance in Thief with this combo?

A: The data suggests no. The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, but the FPS scaling across resolutions is consistent with a GPU bottleneck. The combo ranks 2634 out of 2851, which closely mirrors the GPU's 5th percentile standing.

Q: What settings preset gives the smoothest experience?

A: At 1920x1080, Medium settings provide 59 FPS average with a 50 FPS minimum, which is the only preset/resolution combination that maintains a minimum above 50 FPS. Low at 1080p is faster at 78 FPS but with reduced visual quality.

Q: Is the Ultra preset worth using at any resolution?

A: At 1080p, Ultra averages 43 FPS versus 45 FPS for High, a negligible 2 FPS difference. At 1440p, Ultra averages 29 FPS versus 31 FPS for High. At 4K, Ultra averages 17 FPS versus 18 FPS for High. The Ultra preset adds no meaningful benefit over High in any case.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture on a 3 nm process from TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core. Its memory support is DDR5 with dual-channel bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s and ECC capability. The TDP is 125 W, and it uses the Intel Socket 1851.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU demonstrates strong multi-threaded performance: 51,731 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 21,727 in Cinebench R20 multi-core, and 60,860 in Passmark multithread. Single-thread scores are equally robust: 7,303 in Cinebench R23 single-core, 4,823 in Passmark single-thread, and 736 in Cinebench R15 single-core. The CPU's average benchmark score is 84,003, ranking in the 96th percentile of all CPUs.

However, in Thief, the CPU's role is minimal. The game was released in 2014, and its engine does not scale to 24 threads. The measured FPS data shows no evidence of CPU limitation: at 1080p Low, the GPU produces 78 FPS, which is far below what this CPU could theoretically drive. The CPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks — the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (0.2% higher), AMD EPYC 4584PX (1.1% higher), and AMD EPYC 9135 (1.2% higher) — would all perform identically in Thief because the GPU is the bottleneck.

The CPU's high single-thread performance (7,303 in Cinebench R23 single-core) could help with game logic and AI in CPU-bound scenes, but the FPS data does not show any such bottleneck. The consistent resolution scaling across all settings presets is the definitive proof: if the CPU were limiting, we would see flat FPS numbers as resolution increases, not the steep declines observed. The 24 cores and 24 threads are effectively irrelevant for this title, and the CPU's capabilities are best utilized in other workloads.