very bad gaming FPS on high end PC

Those all seem like very normal FPS for the GTX 970. See the benchmarks from Nvidia's own site: http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-970/performance

60-65 degrees is a LITTLE warm for the graphics card.

Also, make sure vertical sync is turned off. That will cap FPS if you have it on.

Lastly, what's your monitor? You could have literally 10,000 FPS on max settings but it would be worthless if your monitor was a simple 60hz refresh rate monitor.

crysis 3 ultra max AA : 40-45
Not bad. Crysis just eats video cards for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

Battlefield 4 ultra max AA : 60
Very good.

farcry 4 Nvidia setting max AA : 40-45
Based on the earlier 2 games, I would say this is very close to what I would expect for this one as well.

wolfenstein the new order : ultra max AA No vsync : 25-30
I have no personal experience with this game, but I have heard that it likes to do what Crysis does to video cards, and that seems to be what your numbers indicate here as well.

trine 3 : ultra extreme AA : 30-35
I have no info on this one at all.

GPU temp looks good as you indicated. But you left out which video card you have, and what system its attached to. And all of that matters. As well as the resolution you play at, the memory you have in your system, motherboard, CPU, and all of that good stuff.

I will also say this. Now to "What can do 60 FPS". Not much. Developers are pushing the limits on technology. And the harder they push, the lower the FPS numbers go. And then the players all want to operate like they are running their games on mainframes, and they forget that they did not pay millions of dollars for that video card. So its probably going to have a lot less power than a mainframe.

Here come some numbers.

At 1920x1080 resolution, each frame draws 2,073,600 pixels. Assuming a monitor operating at 60Hz, and 60 FPS, this is 124,416,000 million pixels a second.

If you game at 2560x1080, each frame is 2,764,800 pixels, and 165,888,000 per second.

4k (3840 X 2160) frames are 8,294,400 pixels, and a whopping 497,664,000 pixels per second.

If you happen to have a 120Hz monitor, double the above numbers. Or if you have a 144Hz monitor, take and above numbers and multiply by 2.4.

So even on the low end, we are asking our video cards to generate a billion pixels every 9 seconds. And when that doesn't happen, we get upset. Hopefully, this helps you understand why todays video sometimes fail to maintain 60 FPS, and sometimes can only get to half of that.

Turn the settings down. Turn antialiasing off. As long as the screen is in motion, you wont see the jaggies most of the time anyways. Turning things down will make the workload lighter, which means the GPU might have a chance in actually getting to 60 FPS and staying there in some scenes. But even a Titan X is going to drop below 60 FPS in the tough games, and if they cannot maintain 60 FPS lessor cards most certainly cannot.

MSAA (multi sample Anti-aliasing u can run this to 4/2 depending on the game)

SSAA( Super-sampling AA) is a brute force anti-aliasing technique that is used as an alternative to MSAA. SSAA rendes the games at like 2x-6x the resolution of your monitor, and then downsizes it to your monitor. It's like when you get a big pic and shrink it, it tends to look better

SSAA Will kill your card it is like DSR Never use it really

Hi,

Learn how to TWEAK the games settings. Don't simply crank visuals to max.

For example, if you wanted to cap to 60FPS (60Hz monitor) you could run VSYNC ON (or force Adaptive VSYNC) then tweak the settings so you rarely drop below 60FPS.

Dropping AA, Shadows or some combination of settings in many cases looks nearly IDENTICAL but allows a higher frame rate.

Other:
Crysis 3 only gets about 60FPS on a Titan X if absolutely everything is maxed (including highest AA) at 1080p so your 45FPS seems right.

Wolfenstein fps completely surprised me. I will double check what settings I had it, but I do remember it was maxed, and I was able to get 60ish fps on 970's at 1440p, let alone 1080p (and it's not the multi-GPU either, nVidia CP forces single GPU on the game).

That 30 fps sounds a lot more like either 21:9 1440p or even 4k.

If it is 4k, a single 970 is not remotely enough, hell even SLI Titan X isn't enough.

Weird.Heres mine

On 1080p

Crysis 3 Very High FXAA 60-70 fps
Battlefield 4 Ultra 70+ fps
Far Cry 4 Ultra 65+ fps

It really does depend on the game. And the game developer.

And any game that attempts to look life a real-life movie, they can be beautiful, but the incredible number of polygons required to calculate everything, and make your eye and brain think its live real-life action is going just beat GPU's to death for awhile longer.