I just bought Crysis 3 thinking I would have no problem running it on my setup. I run Crysis 2 on DX11, 1080p, all setting on ultra and max AA with a locked 60FPS. Started up Crysis 3 and I can barely get it to stay steady at 30 FPS with all settings on low. I have all the latest drivers and have checked every solution I can think of. I have also viewed youtube videos of people running the game close to maxed out with the GTX 670. My CPU is an AMD FX-4100 quad core 3.6ghz. My GPU is evga gtx 670 2gb memory. 8gb ram. windows 7 64-bit. I'm at the end of my rope. I can't help but feel like I've wasted my money on this game.

It's because of the relatively weak CPU. Upgrade to the 8350 if you can

yes crysis 3 is a huge cpu eater from what ive heard... id recommend a i5 3570k or i5 2500k.. very decent chips for their price

Sorry, but you would see absolute minimum performance increase by upgrading to a newer CPU, besides that, it would set you back a couple of hundred $.

You just need to get the settings right. The Anti Aliasing is to to blame for the low frame rates you are getting, try using 2xSMAA or TXAA. To get good frames from MSAA you either need a 690 or a second 670.

By turning your AA down you should be able to turn all other settings to 'Very High', but leave fog on medium. In the single player, this should get you to 40+ fps, and in MP it should warrant you 50+ fps. Good luck and report back your results before purchasing a new CPU.

that cpu is a huge bottleneck theres no arguement there.. im running a 660ti OC and i5 3570k @ high settings x2 AA at 1920x1080p at v-sync locked at 60fps.. i have very high texture res too..

my cpu runs at 45% i7-3770k
5.5gb used out of 16gb

cysis one made everyone to upgrade.

V-sync limits this game at 30fps, not 60. This why everyone turns it off. You also cannot 'lock' the game at any fps, it will only limit it, meaning that you can still drop to real low frames in demanding parts of the game. In reality there is absolutely no way that a 660ti can maintain an average of 60fps throughout the campaign, hell overclocked 680's cant even do that, neither can my 7970 clocked at 1100/1500.

I am not arguing that the CPU is not a bottleneck, but more, how much realistically it is the sole cause of his low fps. By spending $200+ minimum on a new CPU he might not even see an increase of 10 fps, that is not worth upgrading just for one game imo. Unlike another poster has mentioned, Crysis 3 is GPU intensive, not CPU intensive. He needs to completely lower AA settings before rushing out to buy a new CPU.

Actually it does lock at 60fps.. you clearly think you know more than you do... im not some genius but i sure as hell know how my system performs and what v-sync does... lol. in SP before patch i was getting drops from 60 - 30 with v-sync on in some places but its a lot better now and in multiplayer i get pretty much 60fps all the time... call me a liar, im here to give my input is and try and help by giving him a more info on how different rigs are.. im sorry your card doesnt do what mine does but that aint actually my problem..

At 1920x1080 your card only gets an average of 38 fps in Crysis 2 http://www.techspot.com/review/565-nvidia-geforce-gtx-660-ti/page5.html
If you are trying to tell me that you average 60 fps in Crysis 3 which is a far more demanding game than Crysis 2, then yes, I am calling you a liar.

I am not here to argue with you mate, I am trying to stop people from giving bad advice like going out to buy a new CPU before they even ask the OP what AA settings he is playing at.

"im sorry your card doesnt do what mine does but that aint actually my problem.." Looool, are you also trying to tell me that a 660ti > 7970 @ 1100/1500? Your card does not even compare. The OC 7970 will beat it in every single situation and every single resolution thrown at it, even a stock 7970 would.