Nearly $1000 rig cant keep constant 60fps in Black Ops 3

[aquasmotion]

I bought a pre-built pc from IBuyPower, it has served me well for the past year, I can get 45-55fps on medium settings in most games. : AMD FX-4300, ADATA 8GB DDR3 1600mhz, PowerColor R7 260x, MSI 760GMA-P34, WD 1TB 7200rpm, 400w psu. But with Black Ops 3, I would get 50-55fps on medium to low settings at 1080p, and with COD, being fast paced, just one or two frames to me, really affects my enjoyment.
So I made some upgrades, got a new case (Rosewill Thor V2) to support a new Geforce GTX 970 STRIX 4GB, and I also got a Corsair CX750M psu to power it, and in case I wanted to upgrade more in the future I would have the psu necessary for it.

No problems with compatibility, everything went together well with no big driver issues, I get significantly better performance in games like minecraft or csgo, but black ops 3, I didn't see as much performance increase than I had expected, I get 50-60 fps on high/ medium settings but I was really looking for constant 60fps on decently high settings, when it has more than double the futuremark score than my old card. Even in BF4 I would only get 40 frames or so on medium, a $300 card only changed performance by a few fps.

Is my cpu or mobo bottle necking my gpu that should be sufficient for what I want to use it for?
If so, how should I go about upgrading, I'm not looking to drop $400-$500 on a i7 4790k and a high end mobo for a couple extra frames since my monitor is only 60hz. Around $200-$250 max is what I want to spend, preferably the lower end on the budget that will handle newer games for a while.

Thanks!

 

[MDXX]

I bought a pre-built pc from IBuyPower, it has served me well for the past year, I can get 45-55fps on medium settings in most games. : AMD FX-4300, ADATA 8GB DDR3 1600mhz, PowerColor R7 260x, MSI 760GMA-P34, WD 1TB 7200rpm, 400w psu. But with Black Ops 3, I would get 50-55fps on medium to low settings at 1080p, and with COD, being fast paced, just one or two frames to me, really affects my enjoyment.
So I made some upgrades, got a new case (Rosewill Thor V2) to support a new Geforce GTX 970 STRIX 4GB, and I also got a Corsair CX750M psu to power it, and in case I wanted to upgrade more in the future I would have the psu necessary for it.

No problems with compatibility, everything went together well with no big driver issues, I get significantly better performance in games like minecraft or csgo, but black ops 3, I didn't see as much performance increase than I had expected, I get 50-60 fps on high/ medium settings but I was really looking for constant 60fps on decently high settings, when it has more than double the futuremark score than my old card. Even in BF4 I would only get 40 frames or so on medium, a $300 card only changed performance by a few fps.

Is my cpu or mobo bottle necking my gpu that should be sufficient for what I want to use it for?
If so, how should I go about upgrading, I'm not looking to drop $400-$500 on a i7 4790k and a high end mobo for a couple extra frames since my monitor is only 60hz. Around $200-$250 max is what I want to spend, preferably the lower end on the budget that will handle newer games for a while.

Thanks!

Upgrade the psu. Dont take cx for a high end system. Especially if you want to upgrade in the future

https://pcpartpicker.com/part/evga-power-supply-220g20750xr

And agreed with the 970. I like mine

 

[IntelTurtleFan]

CX units will kill your system. They are not as good as made out to be. A good 550w EVGA GS / G2 will work nicely. The FX chips are also very slow by today's standards. A FX 9590 is slower than i5s in games. Even most i3s are faster than a 9590. You do not need a i7 for gaming the i5 is plenty.

 

[dantheman0809]

"even most i3's are faster than a 9590"
no, just no

 

[hagjohn]

The R7 is a bit dated by now. I have a R9 390 and it's great. It is very long, so you have to have a case that can handle the length. You might want to look into possibly buying SSD for the OS and a game drive (It is one of best ways to speed up a computer). Use your hard drive for things pictures, music, movies & etc.

I have an AMD 6300, which plays games just fine. I can't tell you if every game you come across will be great but I do not have any complaints with my system.

 

[IntelTurtleFan]

Last Gen i3 getting 1 fps less in Far Cry 3 and 2 less in Crysis 3 than a 9590. Tests were done by an independent party not related to tomshardware, AMD, or Intel. Ram in the test was the same across so was video card and hard drives. The motherboard was similar due to socket differences. Also obviously the DDR4 RAM CPUs were not done on the DDR3 mobo. 6th generation i3s are 3-8% faster than previous gen ones so that should put them equal or ahead of the 9590s across the board.

Far Cry 3 1920x1080 Ultra (FPS Higher is better)
I7-5960X - 73
I7-5930K - 69
I7-5820K - 66
I7-4790K - 80
I5-4690K - 73
FX-9590 - 53
FX-8350 - 51
FX-6300 - 45
FX-6350 - 49
I3-4150 - 52
I5-4460 - 59

Crysis 3 1920x1080 Very High (FPS Higher is better)
I7-5960X - 49
I7-5930K - 48
I7-5820K - 48
I7-4790K - 49
I5-4690K - 46
FX-9590 - 36
FX-8350 - 31
FX-6300 - 30
FX-6350 - 32
I3-4150 - 34
I5-4460 - 41

 

[dantheman0809]

Battlefield 4
1080p max, 2x gtx 770
AMD FX-9590- 99.3 fps
i3 4360- 95.5

1080p max, Average FPS, Company of heroes 2
2x gtx 770
Fx-9590-47.0 fps
i3-4360-42.8

Witcher 3- gtx 980 @ 1080p
fx-9590- avg 94 fps
i3- 4130-avg 84 fps

Plus 8 cores, for somewhat future proofing vs a dual core.
I'm not recommending fx-9590 as it's not a great value chip and it's outrageously heat wasting, but you can't make the claim that i3 is better performance wise when it just isn't. You didn't list a single comparison where an i3 beats the 9590. You say that the 6th generation chips will be 3-8% faster but that is only based off of synthetic tests. For future games where quad core is minimum recommended, i3 is also lacking.

Value wise- yes better
Energy wise- yes better
Single core performance-yes better
but overall performance in newer games- no