Alright,
I don't really know where to start here... The problem seems to be pretty complex and I have tried various things, but the computer just doesn't seem to run like the computer I spent all that cash on... :-)
 
First off, the rig is the same "BEAST" in ModsRigs > EVGA X79 FTW Motherboard with a 3930k CPU and a Coolermaster Siedon 120M closed-loop water cooler (yes, I know, I need to get the H110i, but I have yet to actually do it) overclocked to 4.2GHz. I do not feel comfortable going higher than that on the current cooler, so it is what it is... Memory is 4 X 4GB Quad-Channel (16GB ttl) running at 1600MHz... Again, don't really want to go much higher until better cooling for the CPU.
I've got dual 120GB Samsung PRO SSD's in a RAID 0 STRIPE for the OS and games, and dual 150GB Velociraptors in RAID 0 for storage (disk access speed is definitely not the problem as things load MIGHTY quick).
I also have an EVGA GTX 670 4GB SuperClocked edition video card for my video-out. I'm pushing dual-outputs; my primary display and gaming display is a DVI connected Dell 2407wfp 24" Widescreen 1920 X 1200 monitor, while my secondary display is a HDMI connected Samsung 55" SmartTV (A new edition, and really looks great for watching movies off the computer on, even in standard DEF). 
Lastly, and not so relevant, I've got a SoundBlaster X-FI Faltal1ty Edition sounds card on one of my PCI-E slots (the slowest PCI-E slot, not the 8X or 16X Slots).
 
My temps are around 45c when idle and 55c when crunching hardcore style. Never gets above 60c.
 
What I'm thinking is a problem is that I don't exactly blow myself away when playing games like I thought this CPU and video card would do me... BF4 gets around 30 FPS during any kind of action. Sitting still and looking at the ground might get me upwards of 50-60 FPS, but never more than that. God help me if I'm near an explosion... My FPS drops to the 10's or 20's. 
BF3 is similar, but not quite as bad as BF4.
 
The BF:Hardline Beta plays very well with minimal computer-related problems, I think most of the issues I see there are network/lag related.
 
And the real reason I'm here... Kerbal Space Program... I will admit... There is a memory cap, and yes, I do play installations with upwards of 48 different mods installed (including texture reduction mods to account for the 3.5GB memory cap in the 32 bit program)... But I also have a minimal install that runs in very much the same fashion as the larger install.
 
I've got the graphics set as low as they will go;

• Terrain Detail = LOW
• SM3 Terrain Shaders = Disabled
• Terrain Scatters (WIP) = Disabled
• Scatter  Density = 0%
• Render Quality Level = Fastest
• Texture Quality = Half Res
• Fallback Part Shaders = Disabled
• Aerodynamic FX Quality = Minimal
• Screen Resolution = 1920 X 1200
• Fullscreen = Enabled
• Anti-Aliasing = 4X
• vSync = Every Second VBlank
• Frame Limit = 140 FPS

 
Now, I have tried messing with things a bit and playing with settings, of course, but in the end the application just runs worse the higher I go with Render Quality and Texture Quality.
 
Honestly, I believe that I should be able to run this game, as well as BF4 and BF3 which also have their settings severely cut back, at close-to-ultra settings without having to sacrifice playability.
 
Are there any recommendations that anyone can give that I can look at that could be causing a problem with my rig? With this CPU and video card, while I will admit is not the greatest top of the line video card available, I would have thought that things would run better, but KSP is ALWAYS glitchy (which yes, I've come to expect from games still in development, but that doesn't explain while people like Scott Manley and other YouTubers run so great with their rigs), and depending on planet/moon I'm next to, it may run even worse! For those of you that play KSP, you will know Eve's moon, Gilly. That moon particularly bogs down my rigs something fierce... I'm assuming this is because when I get below a certain altitude the game actually renders the entire moons surface, which it pretty much must do due to the size of the moon (it's quite small). My FPS goes into the less-than-10 range when I get close to the moon, and the same thing happens when I get close to some of my larger space stations and stuff with relative high part-counts.
 
What I really want is to be able to enable better shadows as well as terrain scatter to aid in the landing on remote bodies... Right now this isn't possible at all because when I try to enable them, the computer runs at less than 5 FPS when I got within rendering range of an objects surface.
 
Ask questions! I would love to discuss this here on the EVGA forums and try to determine optimal settings for my rig as well as things I can do to speed up rendering and make games run more like they should on this $1500 rig!
 
Thanks,
-TigerDeath
[AK907] Head Co-Founder

bdary
Your CPU is plenty good.  If you want the cheapest route, I'd suggest picking up another 670 4GB GPU to SLI with your current one.  If you have more money to spend, pick up a 780 min (nice performance bump from 670), 780 Ti or Titan for best performance jump.

+1

As an addition to this post, Kerbal Space Program is now full release (version 1.0.2 as of now). I would also like to add that the nVidia GeForce Experience application correctly detected this game and offered optimized settings. 
 
I haven't played it much, but it does seem a little better managed (load times are about 5 seconds from click to start menu in game) from what little I've done!