Thief

Thief, a 2014 stealth title, presents an interesting case study for modern hardware. This analysis examines the performance of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090, a combination that pairs a mobile-class, 3nm processor with a flagship desktop GPU. The data reveals a system capable of very high frame rates, but the relationship between the CPU and GPU shifts dramatically depending on resolution and settings.

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

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor based on the Panther Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, featuring 18 MB of shared L3 cache. This CPU is part of the Core Ultra Series 3, and its benchmark scores place it in the 88th percentile among all CPUs, indicating it is a very capable processor. In synthetic tests, it achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18,911 and a single-core score of 2,200.5, with a Passmark single-thread score of 4,280.

In the context of Thief, the CPU's role is significant, especially at lower resolutions where it can become the primary bottleneck. The game is from 2014, and while it is not as thread-hungry as modern titles, the high boost clock of 5.10 GHz is beneficial for single-threaded game logic. The data suggests this CPU is more than sufficient to feed the RTX 4090 at 1080p, as the performance scaling from 1080p to higher resolutions shows a clear GPU limitation rather than a CPU one.

When we look at the CPU's nearest rivals, its average benchmark score of 44,466 is almost identical to the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D, which is only 0.2% slower, and the Intel Core i9-13950HX, which is 0.3% slower. It is also 0.4% faster than the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 and 0.5% faster than the Intel Core i5-13600. This means that in terms of raw processing power, this mobile chip is on par with some very strong desktop and high-end mobile parts, making it unlikely to be the limiting factor in this pairing for a game like Thief.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is a behemoth of a graphics card, built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm process. It features 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, providing a massive 1.01 TB/s of memory bandwidth. The GPU has a base clock of 2235 MHz and a boost clock of 2520 MHz. Its raw compute power is immense, with 82.58 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 16,384 shading units. The card also has 128 RT cores and 512 Tensor cores, though these are less critical for a 2014 release. Its Passmark G3D score is 38,194, placing it in the 88th percentile of all GPUs.

The GPU's performance is the dominant factor in Thief at 4K resolution. The game's engine, while not modern, still scales significantly with GPU compute and memory bandwidth. The 24 GB of VRAM is far more than Thief requires, even at 4K with Ultra settings, so memory capacity is not a constraint. The high memory bandwidth is more relevant, as it helps maintain high frame rates at higher resolutions where pixel fill rates and texture fetching become more demanding.

Interestingly, the RTX 4090's average benchmark score of 60,347 is almost identical to the Intel Arc Pro A60, which has a 0% delta, and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48, which is 0.3% slower. However, these comparisons are based on synthetic workloads. In gaming, the RTX 4090's architecture is much more capable, and the benchmark data for Thief shows it is far from being a bottleneck at 1080p or 1440p.

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

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of how the system scales with resolution. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 225 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 175 FPS, a 22% decrease. At 4K Low, the average is 103 FPS, a further 41% decrease from 1440p. This pattern is consistent across all settings and indicates a classic GPU-bound scenario.

However, the rate of scaling is informative. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is relatively modest compared to the drop from 1440p to 4K. This suggests that at 1080p, the CPU is starting to become a more significant factor, limiting the absolute maximum frame rate. The 225 FPS at 1080p Low is likely near the practical ceiling for the game's engine and the CPU's ability to submit draw calls, even though the CPU is very powerful.

At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiting component. The frame rates are much lower, and the performance difference between settings is more pronounced. For example, at 4K, the difference between Low (103 FPS) and Ultra (57 FPS) is 46 FPS, while at 1080p, the difference between Low (225 FPS) and Ultra (141 FPS) is 84 FPS. This shows that at 1080p, the CPU can still push high frame rates even with higher settings, but at 4K, the GPU's workload is so heavy that the CPU has more headroom.

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

The measured data for this combo is comprehensive, covering three resolutions and four settings levels.

At 1920x1080, the system is exceptionally fast. With Low settings, the average FPS is 225. Increasing to Medium settings yields an average of 194 FPS, with a minimum of 165 FPS and a maximum of 223 FPS. High settings produce an average of 148 FPS. At Ultra settings, the average is 141 FPS. The data shows a clear, steady decline in performance as settings increase, but even the slowest 1080p configuration (Ultra) maintains a very high 141 FPS average.

At 2560x1440, the performance remains strong. Low settings achieve an average of 175 FPS. Medium settings drop to an average of 133 FPS, with a minimum of 113 FPS and a maximum of 153 FPS. High settings average 101 FPS. Ultra settings produce an average of 97 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra narrows at this resolution, suggesting that the GPU is becoming more of a factor and the graphical differences between these two presets are less impactful than the resolution increase.

At 3840x2160, the system is still very playable, but the demands are much higher. Low settings average 103 FPS. Medium settings average 78 FPS, with a minimum of 67 FPS and a maximum of 90 FPS. High settings drop to an average of 60 FPS. Ultra settings average 57 FPS. This is the only resolution where the system dips below the 60 FPS mark for High and Ultra settings, indicating that 4K is the true stress test for this combination.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the database of tested combinations, this specific pairing of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 ranks 372nd out of 2,851 combos for Thief. This places it in the top 13% of all configurations tested for this game.

This ranking is interesting because it shows that while the individual components are top-tier, the combination is not the absolute best. This is likely due to the CPU being a mobile part, even if it is a high-performing one. Desktop CPUs with higher sustained power limits might be able to push slightly higher frame rates, especially at 1080p where the CPU is more active. The ranking also implies that there are many other GPU and CPU pairings that can achieve very high frame rates in this older title, as the game is not particularly demanding by modern standards. The 88th percentile performance of both the CPU and GPU is not fully translated into an 88th percentile gaming rank, which suggests that other factors, such as game-specific optimizations, play a role.

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

Based on the measured frame rates, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and refresh rate.

For 1080p, the data shows that even Ultra settings provide an average of 141 FPS. This is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. The Medium preset offers 194 FPS, which would be beneficial for a 165Hz or 240Hz display. The Low preset at 225 FPS is only necessary for maximizing frame rates beyond 240Hz. Given the small performance difference between High and Ultra at this resolution, there is little reason not to use the highest settings unless seeking maximum frame rates.

For 1440p, Ultra settings still provide a very smooth experience with an average of 97 FPS. The High preset at 101 FPS is nearly identical. The Medium preset at 133 FPS is the sweet spot for 144Hz displays, offering a significant frame rate boost over the higher presets. The Low preset at 175 FPS is for competitive play or very high refresh rates. For most users, High or Medium will be the best balance, as the visual difference between Ultra and High is often minor.

For 4K, the recommendation is more nuanced. The Medium preset provides a solid 78 FPS average, which is good for a 60Hz display and offers headroom for VRR. The High preset at 60 FPS is playable but will struggle to maintain a locked 60 FPS in more demanding scenes. The Ultra preset at 57 FPS is the most demanding and should be avoided for a consistently smooth experience. The Low preset at 103 FPS is surprisingly high, but it sacrifices too much visual quality. Therefore, for 4K, the Medium preset is the most balanced choice, as it offers a significant FPS advantage over High and Ultra while maintaining a good level of visual fidelity.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Thief at 4K with a stable 60 FPS?

A: At 4K, the Medium settings preset achieves an average of 78 FPS, with a minimum of 67 FPS. The High preset averages 60 FPS, but the data does not show a minimum FPS for this preset, making a locked 60 FPS less certain. The Ultra preset averages 57 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target.

Q: What is the best resolution for high refresh-rate gaming?

A: At 1080p, the system achieves 194 FPS on Medium and 225 FPS on Low. At 1440p, the Medium preset averages 133 FPS. These are the configurations that will best take advantage of 144Hz or higher refresh rate monitors.

Q: How does the performance difference between High and Ultra settings change with resolution?

A: At 1080p, the difference between High (148 FPS) and Ultra (141 FPS) is only 7 FPS. At 1440p, the difference is 4 FPS (101 FPS vs. 97 FPS). At 4K, the difference is 3 FPS (60 FPS vs. 57 FPS). The data indicates the relative performance gap between these two presets remains small across all resolutions.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions. The frame rate drops significantly from 1440p to 4K. At 1080p Low, the 225 FPS result may be limited by CPU or engine constraints, as it is a very high ceiling.

Q: How does the RTX 4090's performance compare to its closest rivals?

A: The RTX 4090's average benchmark score of 60,347 is within 2.9% of the AMD Radeon PRO V710, which has a lower score. It is also nearly identical to the Intel Arc Pro A60 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48, with deltas of 0% and 0.3% respectively.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS for the Medium settings preset?

A: The Medium preset is the only one with complete min and max data. At 1080p, the FPS ranges from 165 to 223. At 1440p, it ranges from 113 to 153. At 4K, it ranges from 67 to 90.