fps reports/rants

Main menu:
dx11 lowest settings / 195-205fps
dx9 lowest settings / 130-140fps

dx11 highest settings / 100-115fps
dx9 highest settings / 95-110fps

Settings impact in main menu:
Reflections / 5fps
Ambient occlusion / 30fps
Anis. Filter / 5fps
Atmospherics / 25fps
AA / 10fps
Shadows / 20fps

Sandbox mode - docking - marines side:

dx11 lowest settings / 130-140fps
dx9 lowest settings / 120-130fps

dx11 highest settings / 110-120fps
dx9 highest settings / 90-100fps

Settings impact in SB:
nope.

I suppose(guess? Imagine? Blabber about?) in the main menu the difference between high/low settings and dx9/dx11 is so huge because your are technically gpu limited since you are not in a server and there is no cpu/networking shizzles, and graphic settings and dx level are all about gpu. In sandbox mode I got those results, which shows a much tighter difference because there is most likely a hint of cpu limitation in action. In actual servers The difference between high/low settings is basically inexistent, I have seen shit drop to 40fps in combat to peak around 130fps and alfs bases with all the infestation range around 60-90fps. I was tempted to say dx11 helps more on high settings then it does on low settings but what the fuck should I know my numbers say otherwise, but w/e, plus since everyone in this game is basically cpu limited dx11 didnt help anyone really. (:s)
OpenGL doesn't even work.
The only time I have seen ns2 using all the cores was during load, rendering time, the stuff you do once, that stuff filled all the damn cores but did the rendering in like 10 seconds.

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that they left the most cpu dependent engine of all time (source) to basically build one as much cpu gluttonous as the one they discarded?

I might just have written a bunch of bullshit but w/e, I must justify my shattered dream of steady 120fps somehow.

System:
amd 9370-fx @ 5.1ghz
r9 290

ps: please take numbers as surrounded by a field of tildes ~~~~~