And test with Elden Ring. It's locked at 60FPS for gameplay reasons but getting that 120FPS smoothness is now possible and it's amazing. If they get it working with FreeSync it will be perfect. The soulsborne games are extremely popular and that's just 1 use case. This review was very poor as they comoared it to DLSS FG and FSR3, this has different usecases. And since it's AMD only it's legit a selling point, assuming reviewers do their job well. Even smaller techtubers picked up on all the possible use cases yet HUB has nothing positive to say about it?!
@@marceelino but then they can't milk it for many videos, despite hurting AMD's image by testing it in all the wrong games and not realizing what it's truly best for. All Soulsborne games can now be played with 120FPS smoothness, no noticeable input lag and no noticeable artifacts. Considering their popularity, this is huge, and that's just 1 use case. Big W for AMD here.
*Improperly tested!* Elden Ring and ALL Soulsborne games, which are extremely popular, are perfect use cases for AFMF as they are locked at 60FPS for gameplay reasons. With AFMF you can double this to 120FPS with no noticeable artifacts and the game will in fact look significantly smoother. *Total system latency in Elden Ring is 31ms and there is no noticeable input lag at all.* *The goal of AFMF is different from FSR3 yet you review them the same, poor review. Not to mention it's optional, literally a bonus feature that DOES have good uses in certain games. I'm stunned you fail to mention even 1 good thing about it. Even smaller techtubers picked up on the ability to bypass FPS locks to get smoother gameplay. This video is not up to standard, HUB.* Of course it'll be worse than DLSS or FSR3, it's driver side and works in ALL DX11 and DX12 games. Whether or not it's good depends on the game, you can't expect it to be good in all games, which you are seemingly expecting in this video. DLSS3 is not good in all games either. Show me DLSS3 FG 10x slowed down and zoomed in and I'll show you a bunch of artifacts. *As an AMD only feature and considering the popularity of Soulsborne games (just 1 example) and others locked at 60FPS this most certainly has added value.*
Today's driver update makes it SO MUCH better, looks so much more crisp, I almost thought it was off, and HDR support, a very very good update, impressed with the speed and quality of these drivers.
@@fervargraider5274I believe the latest drivers are numbered something like 23.10.??? You have to got to AMDs website to find it as Adrenalin isn’t showing them at the moment. I also think it doesn’t feature AFMF. But I did see some 3-5 fps gains after I updated from AFMF beta to the new driver.
I don't want a Frame-Smearing arms race. I want better raster and better utilization of VRAM. Improving those 2 will yield results that are undeniably better, instead of new tech that makes us debate and contrast and compare under an intense microscope to even figure out which is On and which is Off and which is better, if at all.
My thoughts exactly. It seems a choice has been made to cheat (probably because it's easier and overall less expensive) rather than truly optimise games and make the experience better. We are getting visual artifacts and frames that you have no input on, no wonder retro gaming is taking more and more of my spare tim.
so youre basically asking for BIG performance ? then go buy top end cards lol, the fact frame gen feature is helping boosting people is something, if you whine like this then go buy yourself an actually capable card like 4090
@@Eleganttf2 i already have a 7900 XTX. i've seen it. the frame smearing, the RT, the FSR. i've seen it all. and i hate all of it. i've paid a premium for trash-tier features, and it would be only marginally better with green team, but it'd still be trash-tier features nonetheless. i want a gpu with the raster power of 7900 XTX, minus all the garbage features, and of course at 35% less cost.
It looks like the only purpose of this technique is to compete in fps benchmarks against NVIDIA. But the root of rhe problem is that quite a few yutubers are falling into the trap of calling them FPS. The fact is thay neither AMD and NVIDIA advanced-bs techniques ( upscaling and frame generation) can compete with the quality of native rendering, they are just software tricks to avoid giving us the good silicon and should be ignored in honest benchmarks. Or at least put a different name to garbage fps, I suggest youtubers to present them as BSFPS in their benchmarks tables (bull shit fps). Maybe in that way their marketing departments will stop using those tricks to confuse costumers.
Yeah. They are putting all this effort in to fool consumers into thinking progress is being made. While selling garbage silicone to them and keeping the good stuff for AI cards.
@@jonathanellis6097 cant blame AMD or Nvidia, gamers are the smallest market and most poor target market since most of them are cheapskates, why bother focusing more on them if more serious people are into AI ?
@@Eleganttf2 To start with because most of the "more serious people" doing AI also play games with them (if only secretly). Yes, we all do that. If you are an it guy with access to an RTX 6000 Ada and you don't play with it then you will feel that you are not improving artificial intelligence but natural stupidity. Secondly, my complain is primarily about marketing departments, not technical. Those image tricks are nice to have in some games, (I also use them sometimes) but if you use them to cheat kids about the FPS and resolution that they can get with their little savings then that is the difference between something "nice" and "bs" (with my excuses for bulls, as their bs is at least native )
@@javiej ny guy im not reffering to you, im replying to that guy, and also regarding your "if you have access to RTX 6000 ADA but you don't play with it then you're not improving artificial intelligence" how is playing video games improving neural network, artificial intelligence ??? i dont get what you're trying to say here
Honestly I think this works best when playing with a gamepad. Mouse movement is jerky & unpredictable, while analog aiming has more gradual sweeping movements. You're also less sensitive to input latency that way & you get to just enjoy the motion fluidity. Not a great fit for every game genre, but racing, flight & RPG games are great. Even FPS when playing singleplayer at lower difficulties, or when the games are slower-paced.
HDR is the only reason I haven't tried this tech yet but AMD is doing the correct thing working this out in a public test branch. I'm not 100% certain what the intended use case is for this technology but I guess it's hard to complain about the option being available.
I mean you can still use it just dont use it in games you have a great frame rate in. The driver does disable screen recording tho. Or atleast i cant get mine to work.
And its usecase is NVIDIA did a thing, the media hyped it up so much that AMD was forced to release a tech prior to it being ready for tech older than rdna3
I get lost with all these new additional features, it must make testing and reviewing an absolute nightmare. Congratulations on a VERY well deserved 1m subs, great work as always, guys.
Not really. They test with them all disabled unless it's a specific feature test like here. Native rendering is king. Native rendering performance is what we pay for. The rest is just potentially a bonus if you happen to fit a use-case where it works well enough to bother with.
I've starting using AFMF yesterday on my RX 6800 + R7 5800X3D, and I couldn't notice any difference at all to the the image quality. It was so dam good! On ultra, games where I was getting 100 fps, I've started getting 200 with AFMF on. I believe the latast update improved the overall image quality, because the things I saw in the video I couldn't notice at all. The only game I saw something strange was Days Gone, where I had a few chimearing on the crosshair, but nothing major. I believe it's a must use feature, I hope they make it viable to more cards, so people can test it by their on eyes and hands. PS: I'm currently running a 240hz display.
@@butterfly3737 AFMF stands for Amd Fluid Motion Frames. For now we have only the preview software, and it works only for the RX 6000 and 7000 series AMD GPUS. For Nvidia you should look after Frame Generation, and I guess, DLSS 3, which only works in specific games, where devs implement it. Thus, AFMF works on the software level, not needing any implementation in the games by the devs. Hope I helped you in anyway.
I've been trying AFMF on all of my games to really give it a go, 7900XTX at 4k 120hz. Overall I really like it, zero frame pacing issues for me. My critiques are covered in this HU video: UI and crosshairs struggle noticeably when moved quickly over complex backgrounds, no ability to really limit FPS to match my monitor. The added latency was low enough that I definitely appreciate it. If they continue to improve it, it is a great addition with potential considering its universal use. FSR3 should of course be the focus and all devs should make it an option since it is so accessible to users - even old Nvidia GPUs.
I really liked it as well. I used it to play RE4 1440p 240hz +RT high at around 190fps, and it was glorious. I've misssed the HDR option but as of yesterday's driver that is no longer a limitation.There is a frame cap option in the driver but it's confusing how it is interpreted with AFMF. I honestly couldn't care less for flickering menus or vsync compatibility
I am actually curious of how AFMF will work in a heavily CPU bound scenario like Baldur's Gate III. Especially since you play it more in a slow, tactical table top perspective. If it helps smoothing out animations as well as camera pans/rotation that's okay with me. Ultimately, both FSR3 and FMF feel like they are in a beta-stage at the time being, So I really hope AMD can improve the technology over time! Personally I really want VRR to work, with good frame pacing and a framerate cap at the monitors max refresh-range. If AMD can reach that point one day, it would make me an extremely happy gamer. (And of course, native implementation of FSR3 frame generation in BGIII)
I've found Forza Motorsport to be the best candidate to the point where I would actually use it because FSR doesn't give you much performance back and AFMF works really well in that game.
You should take a look at what's happening over on Linux. Valve and AMD are currently pushing, close to release, most of the stuff you're asking for. You should look at MESA, Wayland, Gamescope and the KDE Desktop ( for VRR ).
This video came out during the October 6th update. AMD has had 3 updates since then and all the Nvidiots keep referring to this video to talk badly about AFMF when they dont even realize that their GPU is now slower since then. Here are the updates since then please pin this so people dont get confused with what the actual performance is. December 7th - What’s New? Updated to include all changes and improvements from AMD Software: Adrenalin Edition 23.12.1. Improvements to stutter and pacing when AFMF is active. General improvements to the stability of AFMF. November 9th - What’s New? Improvements to driver stability during task switching. Improvements to resolve cases of AMD Software: Adrenalin Edition™ intermittently crashing, or failing to display metrics. October 13th - What’s New? We have added initial support for HDR to expand the AFMF gaming experience. After monitoring user experience feedback, AFMF can now be globally enabled on all DirectX® 11 and 12 titles. Users may use the per-app settings to individually disable or enable AFMF. Improvements to frame pacing have been made, resulting in an overall smoother gameplay experience and improved image quality.
I now checked enough games and have to say the latest preview driver seems to work very well. Hitman 3, Green Hell, Medieval Dynasty I restrict my frames to 50% of my monitor refresh rate (via riva statistic from MSI afterburner) and then activate AFMF I have my refresh rate maxed out. My Graphics card only uses 80% of the power because it only has to render 80 frames even though I could do more. This way I save power, less noises from the fans and the experience is pretty good. It works OK for Red Dead Redemption 2, Cyberpunk and sons of the forrest. Starfield and some other titles are a bit of stuttefest still, but in total it already works OK for a preview driver. This feature is good to max out you refresh rate by already havin solid base fps. And it also can save power usage of you graphic card.
Also i heard u can use this as a replacement for the original fluid motion tech amd had for videos, i think someone got it working by using a gaming profile for a media app and got it working that way when enabling afmf on it then i think it worked. Good for rdna cards as i think they stopped support in drivers for them compared to vega 56 when i had it on in that tho i could never get it working somehow even tho was in the drivers with that card.
The problem with you guys, you are playing games with very high end rigs, you wont need these technologies, for low to midrange graphics cards with high refresh rate monitors, this is a god send technology even today. But if you have medium to high end systems, you wont need this technology quite that much.
I totally disagree. The negatives of this technology become even more negative when using a lower spec PC. Turning on AFMF when you already have a low base framerate will make the game look and feel worse. Why play PC if you want to have an experience that is even worse than console? This is console/handheld technology for users who have no idea how awful the fps, resolution, and latency are.
@@jjlw2378 I am totally disagree too. Your kind of thinking is the whole reason I did that comment. "Lower spec gaming do not need to be low fps gaming!!!" There are people still uses 720p/900p/1080p with gtx/polaris graphics card. Often they have old 120/144hz panels. This a perfect case for them. I was one of those. Not everything should be console equivalent or ultra high framerate with ultra+++ graphics. There are settings in any pc games for a reason! I am pretty sure I would enjoy this tech with my old gtx card if it was available. Lock fps to your monitor refresh rate or -1 for adaptive sync purposes and that's all.
they released a new version October 13th, stating better pacing, HDR support and i guess works on Vulkan? that's some fast updates to the drivers and also makes this current video entirely irrelevant now, i would keep it though just because it's cool to have a record for how fast the tech is improving. feelsbadman, all of that work, i guess that's just how it is when reporting on beta software.
The new preview driver seems to have corrected this issue. Also, you should test double gpu system (with one amd and nvidia gpu) using the nvidia gpu to render the game and the amd one as the display output (and enabling afmf), because, on my end, this seems to be working. Right now, my 3090 with dlaa is using afmf in cyberpunk :) That would be a big plus if amd make afmf possible for their egpu.
I'm curious. What's your use case for a dual gpu system across brands? Does having ALL the drivers give your system random issues? Please tell me this is running on an Intel CPU. That said, how exactly do you configure it to run the game on nVidia card, and then how do you configure AFMF with the AMD card as output?
@@emma6648they've stated before in Q&As and floatplane Livestream that they don't really care that much and basically the work keeps on spinning and it's business as usual.
It's extremely impressive that this tech works at all, even from a base frame rate below 100. This is a big development for high refresh rate panel owners, and I could see myself using this to saturate a 240hz or higher panel, though I admit that it is a rather niche use.
But i think it won't replace "real" high fps, because those also reduce the input lag. In other analysis it is emphasized, that low fps into generated high fps feels really weird, because of the increased latency
not so sure about that i do get 200+ fps in some games and glitches the very smallest of glitches really stand out also the lowered input lag is dangerous once you have it then it becomes the new normal not really a trade off maybe if we are talking a very tiny amount
But what is the point of that high of frames in a single player game? Just use vrr and have a near perfect experience. I don’t see the point in seeing the super high frame number when we already have perfect tech for these scenarios. Now if it allowed lower input lag and more frames in competitive games, that would be important.
Mmm, a little unfortunate HUB didn't try it with AMD's Enhanced Sync driver feature turned on. I've been using it with AFMF on my 6900XT and tearing hasn't been an issue and subjectively the pacing feels good. HUB Quality recommended settings in Starfield @ Ultrawide rez, I'm getting with some FSR2 help between 65 and 90 base fps depending on the scene. AFMF with Enhanced Sync and Anti-lag turned on the smoothness has gone up and I hit over 130fps sometimes 160fps, higher than my 120Hz monitor and so looks nicer in that respect. Starfield is slow paced enough that latency isn't much of a factor and to me still looks good. Sure I can see some artifacting but doesn't bother me much. It's interesting tech that I'm more interested in for older generation cards (like mine) as a way to help them pump out more fps as they get older. Hopefully it gets as much widespread game support as FSR and continues to improve!
I agree, I always prefer native over FSR or DLSS. However where I DO see this technology becoming heavily leveraged is in the handheld PC market. To see this technology on something like the ROG Ally with 120Hz VRR screen should be truly awesome.
How can it be leveraged on mobile devices when you need 60fps for the thing to not feel like junk and look strange? The pocket PC's struggle to do 60fps alone...
OCT 13 driver resolved issues I had with frame pacing and screen tearing (as well as the driver timeout issue on tabbing-out, at least as far as I can see). VRR seems to be fixed, at least on my setup. I had reported to AMD the tearing issue on OCT 6 driver when it opened up to 6000 series, and 6 days later here is the new driver resolving that issue in particular.
yep, I was afraid they will announce the issues when they are already fixed but they did. daniel owens and vex made a much better showcase of the technology.
@@Davinmk don't get me wrong, their main criticisms are still valid - the quality of the generated frames is subpar in certain scenarios due to limited information (motion vectors) - the introduced lag/latency is noticeable at anything below about 120fps on mouse (and about 70/80 on controller imo). Where this shines is ultimately super high refresh rate (165+ hz) and CPU limited scenarios, say 120 -> 240hz - there are still minor cases of stutter, some bugs surrounding resolution switching, and refresh rate modes - it does not work with vsync on in engine, which can not always be disabled. - it does not feel good at anything below 50fps at all. This tech is not, and probably will not, be able to make up for that. You still need to enable upscaling or turn down settings to achieve 60fps+ at a bare minimum, so the 30-45fps crowd hoping to go up to 60/75fps are outta luck with this tech. The benefit, however, is that it _can_ be enabled in like, 90% of all games ever. Whether it's the best option or not, especially looking at some older games or console ports that are locked to 60. I'm most excited to see how it behaves with emulators like rpcs3 and console exclusive games. I tested it out with (PC) Skyrim and, despite some artifacting, that type of game with a frame limit worked really well at 120.
I play with a 5800X3D and 7900 XTX, and I've tried FMF out in a few games, and yeah, some games looked like a complete garbled mess, like Starfield and RDR2. I didn't have too bad of a time with CP2077 though 4K Ultra RT at 80fps, then there's Witcher 3, which seemed to have the best experience by far with AFMF. I decided to Google to see what others experiences where, and the majority I came across seem to agree with Witcher 3 having the best experience by far as well. With AFMF still in beta phase, it's understandable there are issues, and looking forward to them ironing everything out.
Weird. Complete opposite experience in those games on a 5800X + 6800 XT. Starfield is flawless for me, and is the best example of AFMF I've found so far. RDR2 is fine, just not as good as Starfield. CP2077 is terrible, big increase in input latency and tons of judder.
@@K31TH3R Interesting. I feel the experience is tied to frame rate, and monitor refresh rate, and if you’re able to get within a certain threshold of your refresh rate, it’s either smooth, a jittery mess. I was able to limit the fps in some of the games I tried, and that really helped. Like locking at 60 in game, AFMF would be closer to 120 pretty steady, which is what I did with Witcher 3, and was quite pleasant. Regardless, still a lot of ironing out need to be done for sure.
@@TimothyStovall108 Think I'd probably agree 100% with it being tied to display refresh rate. I have also toyed around with setting up scanline sync with RTSS and I've been able to make the more juddery games feel a bit smoother, but the problem with that method is that once GPU usage goes above ~75-80%, the screen tearing shows up instead of the judder. So you end up using more upscaling or reducing settings in either scenario, just for different reasons.
I do not understand the purpose of this video. Twenty minutes on a preview driver. Many of the issues have already been fixed, I can understand the motion vectors angle, and so the resulting limitations tied to it, but I don't think the purpose of AFMF is to be on par with full fledged frame gen from AMD itself, or Nvidia. Its purpose is to be a decent place holder for game titles that do not have 'proper' frame gen support. On an adjacent note, considered the negativity profused in this video, you guys should ignore the idiots writing 'AMD-Unboxed' on r/hardware, you already have a pretty neutral POV when it comes to hardware brands, there is no need to try hard at showing that you're not biased in favour of AMD.
Putting framerates ahead of image quality has now gone way too far. What's the point of getting double FPS is the image is trash and the input lag is higher?
The more talk I hear about frame generation, regardless of whose version, the more I feel people aren't understanding what the point of this tech is. This is not meant to improve performance or to save old cards; it's meant to allow already high fps experiences to push quality settings to the limit while maintaining a feeling of smoothness. It's not a magic button to improve your gaming experience, it just better utilizes a high refresh rate monitor. I think Nvidia is actually to blame for the misconceptions with how they marketed it in cyberpunk initially. Even if ai suddenly takes a massive leap forward, this tech will still push out its best guess of what a frame will probably look like and still be at least somewhat wrong. The idea that afmf should look better or maintain high frame rate under high movement boggles my mind; of course it won't work, it's relying on motion vectors rather than actual game data. It either shuts itself off until the uninterpretable motion goes away, or the generated frames will be a mess and ruin what you're looking at. I don't know what people are expecting outside of perfection.
tried fluid motion with WH40K: Darktide (game got new patch, can recommend darktide now for sure) on 6800 XT, pretty good result, can reach up to 210 fps, which is like double fps... real caviet is when you get to real intensive scene, fluid motion just give up and you are back to your 'real' frames having 165 Hz 2K monitor, didnt really notice any tearing
I don't really like it's graphics. It seems not as sharp. Idk how to explain it. I play on 2k, but it feels like it's 720-1080p. It looks pixelated no matters what...@@mylarrito
From the full speed capture, I can't tell the difference. I understand this is probably a youtube thing. But if I can only tell the difference at 2% speed, to me, this is akin to spotting how a magician did it by watching the trick one frame at a time.
I have a lot of questions about your test setup and capture card, because with a 6900xt and a cheapo 144hz 1080p monitor, the only perceivable problems are greasy wet surfaces at times, and some of the other light artifacting, but tearing wasnt noticeable in any game tested. Seemed to work well in ff14, exceptionally well in BG3, and decently with cyberpunk. Could be because the fps of the first 2 were "so" high that it became a forest for the trees scenario, and with cyberpunk I was lucky to break far beyond 144 so... idk... All I know is I welcome our new AMD GPU overlords and I look forward to the intel AMD wars of 2030.
Take the criticisms presented by reviewers with a grain of salt, since they're out there evaluating every second frame by frame with 300% zoom and you're probably not doing that during your regular gameplay. Make your own decisions about what tech you enjoy or not if at all possible.
@@Safetytrousers Image smoothness when moving the camera around and that's it really. I theorize Frame generation, was never meant to make slow low end GPU's play high end games, they would never let that happen anyway, they want to sell the high end expensive GPU's. IMO frame gen from AMD and Nvidia, should be renamed to "visual smoothing" or something. And also IMO frame rate counters, should be updated to ignore these fake frames, so GPU makers don't get to sell GPU's based on fake fps numbers.
This might have a potential use with old games that are limited to 60fps, No One Lives Forever, for example won't display cutscenes or conversations correctly above 60. RSR is most useful in old games that have a max res of 1080p or less when using a 1440p or above displays. AFMF could find itself in a similar niche.
Could see it used in racing games capped at 60 fps like Burnout Paradise. The game heavily uses motion blur, so AFMF artifacts could be less of an issue
@@sirdapplton You may be able to work around that with DXVK if they readd vulkan support at least back to DX9 games (though not all games work with DXVK on windows).
Tbh im amazed how much ppl are bitching and moaning about small picky things with AFMF... Its way better than Nvidia making you buy a 1500$ gpu and only supporting a few games... we should be celebrating this as a huge win for gamers. Frame gen on 100% of titles. Nvidia is really turning to garbage fast.
I personally find these kind of benchmarks a little exaggerated, why? I personally have been using AFMF in every dx11/12 game and haven't seen any difference in image clarity but i could feel the smoothness, one thing that I saw is if you have small base fps (less than 40) the game doesn't feels good at all and is blurry (like motion blur) but if you have like 100fps in a game and you want that extra 100fps then AFMF is really good for it, latency wise i didn't really felt anything differently (maybe is bigger but nit enough for me to feel it) I use it while playing bf1, titan fall 2, cs2 and dbd and i can only say good things about it.
I've tried it too in many games and with a high base frame rate of 70+ on a 7900XTX and I feel it negatively impacts the image quality, third person games especially where panning the camera even slowly makes things blurry, breaking up or doubling of thin lines, or windows roofs, complex geometry that sort of thing takes a big hit. The only game I've used it where it works probably the best is Forza Motorsport. With a base framerate of 60 it works rather well. Other than that I have seen some comments of people saying it looks great or they can't tell its even on and that's just not true. I don't see how you can't notice it. Maybe you feel that the tradeoff is worth it because of the smoothness it offers and that's fair, that's your choice to make but the only reason I can see people not liking a deep dive into these technologies like this is because maybe it breaks the illusion to them that there are issues and that's no surprise because the way it works there have to be issues especially when its being done on the driver level without access to game engine data. There's also a performance cost to this as well. I took a look at TLOU on my 6800XT a game where this tech actually works alright and lost around 15% of real framerate performance just turning AFMF on so than you are presented with a situation where you could just enable FSR Quality and get maybe less total frames than with AFMF on but they are real frames of much higher overall quality consistently, with lower latency than introducing low quality generated frames amongst real frames. Right now I would only use it in Forza Motorsport because FSR and DLSS dont give you much performance turning them on and the game is demanding so to reach my 120hz refresh rate I feel the tradeoff is worth it. Every other game I wouldnt use it because I feel its not worth it but if it works for you than that's great.
Hey guys, with the new October 13 version of AFMF, the feature runs WAYYY better. I think it deserves a new video because it went from unusable to really good.
After having used AFMF for a while now I generally agree with most of what you said in the video but the frame pacing issue you've experienced has been nonexistent for me. You mentioned it appears to be working correctly on the ReLive capture (which is how my games looked) and is chopped up haphazardly with your external capture card. Is it possible this has to do with the capture fps or the capture card and not AFMF? I currently have AFMF, Radeon Anti-Lag, and Radeon Enhanced Sync enabled in my driver settings. VRR enabled with freesync 48-165. I am not currently locking my fps. If you decide to look into this more and have other settings questions lemme know!
Yea it doesnt look like that for me neither. Im using it in FFXIV Online. I dont recommend it for shooters, i tried it in BF2042 and it wasnt pleasant.
you can analyze it all you want and I experienced first hand that it's not perfect but at least AMD tries to be there for the gamer. with Playing at 2% speed you'll always see imperfections. Kinda pointless tho.
What I want to see is frame generation(if will be fixed) for 60fps locked games to be boost it to 120 and use BFI. And if it will work with wrappers like dx9 to dx11.
What I want is even more unreasonable. I want consoles to be able to use it to go from 30 -> 60. I’m well aware that doing so is pretty much a pipe dream from a technical standpoint, but it’s a fun dream
@@istealpopularnamesforlikes3340And I want something that seems even more unreasonable, games already running at 60fps 😂😂😂 Sad, but true in the current gaming landscape
Being able to enable and fiddle around with this kind of tech ourselfs is clearly a win in itself tbh it was never the idea to replace framegen.. Nvidia meanwhile hardlocks every new tech behind a paywall even for their own customers (read; RTX 20, 30 series) are hardlocked out of "DLSS3" wich is so mega anti consumer its unbelievable not even gonna start about deliberatly limitting VRAM so ur card only lasts max 2/3 yrs xD. AMD meanwhile just tries to make tech for everyone( or almost).
Stop using "read", it's annoying and a decade retired. You're already reading aren't you? In addition "paywall for their own customers" suggests a double payment, which is false. You buy an RTX 4 series you get DLSS3. Don't expect old hardware to support new features, AMD does this as well. Or is AMD also implementing a paywall for their own customers (read: 5000 series)
@@csammy123 badly informed I see xD nice try tho.. fsr 3 even works on older hardware and Nvidia its juts not recommended to go below rx5000 series but it does work. And yes u call something a pay wall when u are required to buy something (new) or be excluded thats what it means in this context oh and next time u try to school someone know the facts mate.. Indeed ur right nobody expected it from Nvidia to support new tech with older cards that says it all concerning the stance of Nvidia towards their own customers. The fact AMD can pull it off without "dedicated hardware" makes or Nvidia greedy because it could work (like fsr3 )or just plain lazy. btw that my writing doesnt suit u well nobody cares grow up kid.
@@TimfyGaming Badly informed? Maybe REREAD everything about FSR3 and AFM (read: reread everything about FSR3 AFM). They're not comparable, the experience is bad (read: nowhere near the quality of DLSS3), and it's an attempt to give the illusion of competition yet no one will use simply due to the major drawbacks (read: major drawbacks) outlined in this very video (see: this video). 😆
@@csammy123 never said AFM was comparable nor said that FSR 3 is the same u are so smart haha it is STILL frame generation tho and u dropped the thing about paywalls because u screw up many details and information. Also implying I said and meant things I clearly didnt say.
@@TimfyGaming It seems you're confused by your own arguments, you can't seem to pick a goal post to defend. Rather than call others "kid", when it's clear you're clueless on what to argue against, just stick to the facts? You tried to insinuate a double paywall for Nvidia and I showed that analogy doesn't make sense. You say AMD just tries to make tech for "everyone" yet that's meaningless if the tech is garbage. Maybe that's why Nvidia locks their new features to new hardware so it's guaranteed they work? Have you even seen the final thoughts of this video? Go to the 13 minute mark and reREAD the conclusions. Please, go ahead and champion AMD for trying to increase marketshare with garbage features, meanwhile the competition actually knows what they're doing and keep releasing superior tech while AMD always plays catchup. Guess who's marketshare strategy is actually winning/increasing? Hint, it doesn't start with A.
Made up stuff is only as successful as gullible the consumer is. This, unfortunately, does not apply to just computer graphics. Marketing, (geo)politics, mainstream journalism, financial and pharmaceutical industries and the list just goes on.
The oct 13 beta driver works fine. Doubles my frame s with starfield and cyberpunk with no major noticeable visual degradation . Works with rdna2 aside from rdna3. Works with HDR now. No UI issues. Though lag is noticeable with cyberpunk with RT
While i understand your conclusion could you put it into real terms for real people. So if say is AFMF on with blury frames on ultra better looking than say native on medium settings at the same FPS. So which looks/plays best: Native ultra at 60fps AFMF ultra at 120fps Native Medium 120fps
Exactly. Reviewers like Tim and Steve are actively looking for imperfections and are sensitive to them. Most regular people wouldn't notice them and they have to put them in slow motion to actually notice. I wish they could have a blind test for regular people in their videos.
Damn all this work for nothing lol AMD already updated the preview driver. You need to retest then release a video but there is a chance that AMD will again update the preview driver and made video obsolate. IMO this preview drivers are the bomb and it finaly fixes power consumption when watching full screen YT video on my LG C2 now it drops to like 50W on my 7900XTX before it was 104W.
This video should at least have 'Preview' in the title or something idc. Preview drivers have been updated again, and I don't doubt we'll continuously get updates. Since I don't think it's necessary to always make an AFMF video for each preview update, I'll hold off till the 'offical' release of AFMF. While I'm not trying to brown nose AMD, I don't think it seems fair to have a final conclusion (while I do think most of your thoughts will hold up on release) to AFMF while it's still an beta. FSR3 tho, I can understand the flak it got, because it being the launch.
AMD should have just focused fully into making FSR3 (and not come out with AMFM at all) driver based and a higher quality DLSS when it comes to image quality. This fake frame tech is just....dumb
Can someone please explain to me why people think frame generation is a big deal? The whole point of higher framerates was lower input latency and with VRR screens we don't have to worry about screen tearing anymore. Why is everyone getting so worked up about fake frames that don't reduce input latency at best and increase input latency at worst? I figured the whole thing was a dumb marketing stunt by Nvidia to just make the bar graphs bigger without actually giving any more performance. I totally get upscales though. Those are great for making a 1080p card work on a 4k screen or allowing me to run Armored Core 6 at 5 watts on my steam deck to get like 5-6 hours of battery life. It's a shame they're being used to compensate for optimizing games since they don't look better than native at all.
My sons 6900xt with RTSS fixed to 72 FPS on 144hz Monitor. In Settings use Not async instead Front Buffer sync. No Tearing and Butter smooth. Thats it. Easy.
I think your view is narrow minded regarding this tech, there's A TONS of games that are engine limited that won't ever get patched or resolved, and thats where AFMF comes into play, most if not all of those city builders and strategy games are engine related and after a certain amount of time or at certain scenarios the gameplay literally becomes too choppy and stuttery to enjoy it, its not an FPS or a TPS there's isn't much of a movement and if AMD (the way I think it should be feasable) comes with an algorithm that can detect those games' hud/ui since they are mostly in the bottom of the screen and keep them out of the frame generation or deal with them differently it'll be amd's biggest win since its a technical solution to a problem that plagued video gaming industry since the beggining of times.
And the crowd falls silent as all the 40 IQ amd fanboys who have been saying comments like "amd are kings they are bringing frame gen to everyone even on older cards get hit by a face full of reality as they learn (the extremely obvious) that frame gen without dedicated hardware was never going to run in a remotely playable way. It's almost like it was locked to 40 series because it wouldn't run well on cards without the hardware to run it... Who said that again? Oh right nivida said it over a year ago when they introduced frame gen that all the little amd babies cried and said "thats not true it would run they are just greedy wahhh" First amd fanboys getting a fg reality check when amd cards can finally use it understanding why it's great tech then they get another reality check learning what nivida said was true all along. It could run on cards without dedicated hardware but it would run so poorly it is not worth it. This month has been great for amd fanboys getting reality checks and all the "nivida are lying" whining has been debunked lol.
I don't get the push for frame gen. It only works well when you don't really need it (high native framerare). And then it will disable at times with fast mouse input... What? Isn't that when we really want high fps? Who cares about high fps when standing still. Maybe it will be what we want some day and I get we have to start somewhere.
I tried it on starfield and I will just say this . This tech is just as gimmicky as I thought when It first came out from Nvidia. I rather spend more money on the power to run it native. All these features actually does little to improve the game play or experience. It's just an artificial fps boost
Could an edge case for this be on monitors with a somewhat poor experience at the lower range of the vrr window. For example, my Asus VG27A kind of sucks below 100hz. I will grant that it does not look very compelling in general, just a fun little bonus.
Honestly, the majority of people will hardly notice half the issues while gaming. Unless your sticking your face into the screen looking for issues, zooming in and slowing down frames. I personally dont use fake frames and still prefer settings at native.
Framegen being intended for turning 60 into 120 is just totally pointless, the big use case for this stuff is turning 20-30 into 60 on something like steam deck.
Unfortunately, they've already addressed some of the issues you've found. They have had an update every Friday since they rolled out the preview driver and it looks like that may continue to happen until Q1 2024 when its released into mainline drivers. You need to either keep retesting it for multiple videos or wait until official release.
This feature is clearly not intended for every game use, there are tons of slow paced games that benefit from this, no one should use this on fast paced FPS games!
I would like to see this used on something that isn’t 1st or 3rd person. Like a scenario where a lower end user might want to go from 30fps to ~60 on something turn based for example.
Great review Tim. Ive found one game where ot works rather well where i would use it and thats Forza Motorsport. Since neither FSR or DLSS give you much performance in that game and its demandong to begin with its pretty good. All other games though the image quality takes a noticeable hit thats not really worth it buy its a tech preview and will hopefully get better with time.
@NoodleAsian I should also add that I tried DLSS 3 FG, FSR3 FG and AFMF, because I was curious. I don't like any of these tricks. With upscaling, I have a more nuanced view. Upscaling is somewhat OK in my experience when you're at 1440p or higher. I have multiple PCs but for gaming I currently use curved ultrawide (21:1 3440x1440) monitor. If I can't sustain 90 FPS (range 75-105), I will first try upscaling on highest quality setting. Then I will lower various settings. Play with both for some time, and go by the feel. In some games it's better to use quality upscaling to 4K or 3440x1440 in my case, but in others, it's better to lower graphical settings, because when you notice in motion artifacts, you can't unsee them. The Last Of Us 1 is a good case where FSR2 Quality is doing an excellent job, and it's better to have all settings at Ultra. But as soon as you drop to Balanced, FSR2 doesn't have enough information to do a good job and it's better to lower some other settings. Same with DLSS in this game. If I was playing at 1080p, none of the upscaling techniques (DLSS, FSR, XeSS) do a good enough job for ME Personally. However, it is important to acknowledge that DLSS does a better job at lower resolutions, and if you don't have enough GPU power, you have to compromise somewhere. Because gaming under 60 FPS is just pain and suffering.
My AMD card hasn't arrived yet so I can't test it further. From what I heard, there was an update that made AFMF more fluid by correcting frame passing. and launched, but you can give your opinions about it as you wish, as the more it is tested, the more AMD will be able to improve the technology
The thing I hate about these frame gen techniques is that they are being used to severly bloat prices. Generated frames are worse than native full stop and shouldn't be advertised like they double your framerate with no downsides like AMD and Nvidia are doing.
AMD released today an update that adds HDR support and is said to improve frame pacing. It will be nice to see another look at this once the technology matures, although I suspect that the base issues with image quality might take a while to be improved, if they'd be improved at all.
@@andersonfrancotabares3614 AMD is still eating their crayons and sniffing their glue when it comes to coordinated PR. HUB has AMD contacts, and make proper use of them (as we've seen in many announcements where Tim or Steve have asked them for additional clarification). That this one slipped through the cracks is just dumb as rocks. But on the other hand it's also one the things I kinda like about AMD. Getting more of the leather jacket's "It just works! The more you buy the more you save!" will make me barf. AMD has their fumbles, but they seem to genuinely want to do what the market wants, rather than tell the market what it needs.
@@andersonfrancotabares3614 Yeah, it does invalidate several points, and I think it would be nice if HUB posted something to make sure viewers know that part of this video is now irrelevant, perhaps release a short update video. Though I won't expect a full re-test until AFMF is in a release driver.
They aren't fake. They are functional distinct frames. And they have the result you would expect. They increase fluidity and decrease eye tracking motion blur and stroboscopic step sizes. As for the future, we're moving towards 1000Hz and beyond monitors. And given the slowing rate of progress in silicon, the only realistic way to feed these monitors with enough frames for modern games will be by using tricks like frame interpolation.
Where a frame is generated is not really relevant, there is no real and fake frames. We have reached a point where shrinking transistors is almost impossible due to the laws of quantum physics. Hardware will not improve much more unless we discover a revolutionary way of creating hardware. Frame generation is a way to continue improving performance. It is not in any way perfect but it will improve and become indistinguishable from frames generated earlier in the graphics pipeline sometime in the future. Without frames gen, we might be stuck more or less at current performance.
Seeing the starfield footage made me think. Did you ever explore that starfields got immense artifacting on objects that are down relative to the player? Basically if I grab a box and throw it around on the floor it's got ghosting that remains for a good while. Do the same along the horizon of the game and I saw no issues. I can't explain that.
One scenario that absolutely sold AFMF to me was using it on games that are locked to 60 FPS. Tried it in The Crew 2 the other day and it was mindblowing. There is some artifacting, but it's still fairly minimal outside of few menu animations especially on the world map. It's a small price to pay to me anyway. The whole game isn't as smooth as if it had a native 120 FPS, but it's still visually smoother than a locked 60 FPS. Plus this game is a best case scenario anyway considering its frame pacing is impecable to begin with.
I can see that being good since I did take a somewhat thorough look at Forza Motorsport and found it to be the best example for AFMF. Every other game I've tries though the image quality hit is still not worth the tradeoff for me but it seems to work ok in raving games?
@@TerraWare It's alright as long as there isn't a lot going on around the car for sure. Within The Crew 2, AFMF disabled itself multiple times due to large portions of the screen having very fast motion, definitively putting the "fast mouse movement" fact entirely. But eh, for the rest it's really good.
@@impointr Without camera movement, you would barely feel the smoothness. With camera movement, AFMF breaks apart. It's the exact same tech used in TVs under "sports" mode. This just has slightly better latency than that. So how on earth can someone say it's visually smoother when you actually cannot rotate the camera!? In most games, camera control is paramount! This is what differentiates it from movies. It's TV frame interpolation with less latency penalty.
@@jal.ajeera I suggest you actually give it a shot honestly. I was also very skeptical about all this, yet it simply just works. If I were to not care much about framerate in games with little camera movements (e.g. racing games) then I'd stick to 30 FPS which... Just isn't desirable at all is it? What would even be the point of reaching 144 FPS in a game such as Forza Horizon 5 too since there is little camera movement? Sadly this is a very very subjective topic and there really isn't any definitive answer. Personally I see a big difference and I'm happy to use such tech for these games where I am prevented from going above a certain framerate. For any other games though I'll do without, obviously.
Think this need a retest in the near future as updates seem to be coming fast. Maybe doing another test and add in comparison with motion interpolation on TVs such as Samsung, Sony etc which also does not have acess to game vector data?
GPUs will be more and more expensive and they won't even be able to squeeze out 60fps without frame generation or upscaling or some other AI bullshit... quite unfortunate times for PC gaming
I just got the preview driver to check it out. It seems way less blurry now I would love to see a retest and a comparison as I have no idea how the older patches looked like irl...
I was hoping they showed an external app locking the fps to 60....it seems it works better that way from what I heard..I only want it for games that drop from a perfect locked 60 to 50, so they are always at 60. I hope it works good on that scenario.
(AFMF Config for smoothness) set a frame cap to a frame rate that matches or divides into the native frame rate of the monitor this works really well and helps with frame pacing. I run AFMF with AMD Super Resolution and 20% sharpening to upscale games with higher frame rate and resolution it looks great and makes game look amazing at 5k upscale resolution. I can run it on all games where I want to turn up all the eye candy with double fps it really does work you just have get your settings right. On a high refresh monitor with a frame cap it works well the key is the fps cap, set fps cap to keep gpu below 95% usage with the rule of running at native refresh rate or one that divides evenly this will make it smooth and avoid micro stutters. Also make sure your game is running at least 90fps or higher to keep input lag manageable the higher your fps cap the lower the input lag will be with AFMF. You can make custom CRU profiles for your monitor to create different refresh rates to fine tune everything for good frame pacing.👍
The only game I've ever used frame generation was Diablo 4, with DLSS, and it looked and felt quite good, allowing me to use my 240hz 1440p display closer to the higher spectrum of refresh.
The latest oct 13 preview driver has been a massive improvement to my eyes. Would love to see a retest
I got the preview driver before that update. Do I need to reinstall the driver to get that or is it automatically got the fixes they did?
Has anyone tested if it works on Zen 4 series igpu which is rdna2?
I would like to test it on videos
igpus arent supported @@batelcho
The latest preview driver (4th patch, iirc) improves frame times massively. I presume the retest is due
they should just test it when it's officially out.
Also quality, look SO MUCH better, and HDR support!
@@marceelino Agree, every preview update will probably add significant changes.
And test with Elden Ring. It's locked at 60FPS for gameplay reasons but getting that 120FPS smoothness is now possible and it's amazing. If they get it working with FreeSync it will be perfect.
The soulsborne games are extremely popular and that's just 1 use case.
This review was very poor as they comoared it to DLSS FG and FSR3, this has different usecases. And since it's AMD only it's legit a selling point, assuming reviewers do their job well.
Even smaller techtubers picked up on all the possible use cases yet HUB has nothing positive to say about it?!
@@marceelino but then they can't milk it for many videos, despite hurting AMD's image by testing it in all the wrong games and not realizing what it's truly best for.
All Soulsborne games can now be played with 120FPS smoothness, no noticeable input lag and no noticeable artifacts. Considering their popularity, this is huge, and that's just 1 use case. Big W for AMD here.
*Improperly tested!*
Elden Ring and ALL Soulsborne games, which are extremely popular, are perfect use cases for AFMF as they are locked at 60FPS for gameplay reasons. With AFMF you can double this to 120FPS with no noticeable artifacts and the game will in fact look significantly smoother. *Total system latency in Elden Ring is 31ms and there is no noticeable input lag at all.*
*The goal of AFMF is different from FSR3 yet you review them the same, poor review. Not to mention it's optional, literally a bonus feature that DOES have good uses in certain games. I'm stunned you fail to mention even 1 good thing about it. Even smaller techtubers picked up on the ability to bypass FPS locks to get smoother gameplay. This video is not up to standard, HUB.*
Of course it'll be worse than DLSS or FSR3, it's driver side and works in ALL DX11 and DX12 games. Whether or not it's good depends on the game, you can't expect it to be good in all games, which you are seemingly expecting in this video. DLSS3 is not good in all games either. Show me DLSS3 FG 10x slowed down and zoomed in and I'll show you a bunch of artifacts.
*As an AMD only feature and considering the popularity of Soulsborne games (just 1 example) and others locked at 60FPS this most certainly has added value.*
Today's driver update makes it SO MUCH better, looks so much more crisp, I almost thought it was off, and HDR support, a very very good update, impressed with the speed and quality of these drivers.
What update?
@@fervargraider5274 AMD put out an update to the AFMF preview driver today that improves pacing and adds HDR support for AFMF.
Ficou muito Bom!! Agora eu vejo a fluidez!!👁️👁️
Which driver version is that?
@@fervargraider5274I believe the latest drivers are numbered something like 23.10.???
You have to got to AMDs website to find it as Adrenalin isn’t showing them at the moment.
I also think it doesn’t feature AFMF. But I did see some 3-5 fps gains after I updated from AFMF beta to the new driver.
I don't want a Frame-Smearing arms race. I want better raster and better utilization of VRAM. Improving those 2 will yield results that are undeniably better, instead of new tech that makes us debate and contrast and compare under an intense microscope to even figure out which is On and which is Off and which is better, if at all.
My thoughts exactly. It seems a choice has been made to cheat (probably because it's easier and overall less expensive) rather than truly optimise games and make the experience better. We are getting visual artifacts and frames that you have no input on, no wonder retro gaming is taking more and more of my spare tim.
You won't get it. Move on. Quit whinning. Frame gen is the future.
so youre basically asking for BIG performance ? then go buy top end cards lol, the fact frame gen feature is helping boosting people is something, if you whine like this then go buy yourself an actually capable card like 4090
@@Eleganttf2 i already have a 7900 XTX. i've seen it. the frame smearing, the RT, the FSR. i've seen it all. and i hate all of it. i've paid a premium for trash-tier features, and it would be only marginally better with green team, but it'd still be trash-tier features nonetheless.
i want a gpu with the raster power of 7900 XTX, minus all the garbage features, and of course at 35% less cost.
@@jal.ajeera if only i had some fries to go with all this salt your sending me hahaha
It looks like the only purpose of this technique is to compete in fps benchmarks against NVIDIA. But the root of rhe problem is that quite a few yutubers are falling into the trap of calling them FPS. The fact is thay neither AMD and NVIDIA advanced-bs techniques ( upscaling and frame generation) can compete with the quality of native rendering, they are just software tricks to avoid giving us the good silicon and should be ignored in honest benchmarks. Or at least put a different name to garbage fps, I suggest youtubers to present them as BSFPS in their benchmarks tables (bull shit fps). Maybe in that way their marketing departments will stop using those tricks to confuse costumers.
Yeah. They are putting all this effort in to fool consumers into thinking progress is being made. While selling garbage silicone to them and keeping the good stuff for AI cards.
@@jonathanellis6097 cant blame AMD or Nvidia, gamers are the smallest market and most poor target market since most of them are cheapskates, why bother focusing more on them if more serious people are into AI ?
The term they've been using at HUB is "base framerate" for non-upscaled, non-FG.
@@Eleganttf2 To start with because most of the "more serious people" doing AI also play games with them (if only secretly). Yes, we all do that. If you are an it guy with access to an RTX 6000 Ada and you don't play with it then you will feel that you are not improving artificial intelligence but natural stupidity.
Secondly, my complain is primarily about marketing departments, not technical. Those image tricks are nice to have in some games, (I also use them sometimes) but if you use them to cheat kids about the FPS and resolution that they can get with their little savings then that is the difference between something "nice" and "bs" (with my excuses for bulls, as their bs is at least native )
@@javiej ny guy im not reffering to you, im replying to that guy, and also regarding your "if you have access to RTX 6000 ADA but you don't play with it then you're not improving artificial intelligence" how is playing video games improving neural network, artificial intelligence ??? i dont get what you're trying to say here
Works amazing in MMOS. You don't turn the camera super fast, you're staring at one spot.
Works wonders in those dense towns, or in raids/world bosses.
Honestly I think this works best when playing with a gamepad. Mouse movement is jerky & unpredictable, while analog aiming has more gradual sweeping movements. You're also less sensitive to input latency that way & you get to just enjoy the motion fluidity. Not a great fit for every game genre, but racing, flight & RPG games are great. Even FPS when playing singleplayer at lower difficulties, or when the games are slower-paced.
HDR is the only reason I haven't tried this tech yet but AMD is doing the correct thing working this out in a public test branch. I'm not 100% certain what the intended use case is for this technology but I guess it's hard to complain about the option being available.
I mean you can still use it just dont use it in games you have a great frame rate in. The driver does disable screen recording tho. Or atleast i cant get mine to work.
And its usecase is NVIDIA did a thing, the media hyped it up so much that AMD was forced to release a tech prior to it being ready for tech older than rdna3
HDR works with latest driver version.
@@retro-jw9mswhere to download the update?
There's a newer version, try that one.
I get lost with all these new additional features, it must make testing and reviewing an absolute nightmare. Congratulations on a VERY well deserved 1m subs, great work as always, guys.
Not really. They test with them all disabled unless it's a specific feature test like here. Native rendering is king. Native rendering performance is what we pay for. The rest is just potentially a bonus if you happen to fit a use-case where it works well enough to bother with.
I've starting using AFMF yesterday on my RX 6800 + R7 5800X3D, and I couldn't notice any difference at all to the the image quality. It was so dam good! On ultra, games where I was getting 100 fps, I've started getting 200 with AFMF on. I believe the latast update improved the overall image quality, because the things I saw in the video I couldn't notice at all. The only game I saw something strange was Days Gone, where I had a few chimearing on the crosshair, but nothing major. I believe it's a must use feature, I hope they make it viable to more cards, so people can test it by their on eyes and hands. PS: I'm currently running a 240hz display.
How to enable it? Or it's only an amd thing?
@@butterfly3737 AFMF stands for Amd Fluid Motion Frames. For now we have only the preview software, and it works only for the RX 6000 and 7000 series AMD GPUS. For Nvidia you should look after Frame Generation, and I guess, DLSS 3, which only works in specific games, where devs implement it. Thus, AFMF works on the software level, not needing any implementation in the games by the devs. Hope I helped you in anyway.
I've been trying AFMF on all of my games to really give it a go, 7900XTX at 4k 120hz. Overall I really like it, zero frame pacing issues for me. My critiques are covered in this HU video: UI and crosshairs struggle noticeably when moved quickly over complex backgrounds, no ability to really limit FPS to match my monitor. The added latency was low enough that I definitely appreciate it. If they continue to improve it, it is a great addition with potential considering its universal use. FSR3 should of course be the focus and all devs should make it an option since it is so accessible to users - even old Nvidia GPUs.
I really liked it as well. I used it to play RE4 1440p 240hz +RT high at around 190fps, and it was glorious. I've misssed the HDR option but as of yesterday's driver that is no longer a limitation.There is a frame cap option in the driver but it's confusing how it is interpreted with AFMF. I honestly couldn't care less for flickering menus or vsync compatibility
congratulations on hitting 1 million subs 😊
Might eyes just might be getting old but I can’t see any difference except when it’s slowed down to 2% speed.
I am actually curious of how AFMF will work in a heavily CPU bound scenario like Baldur's Gate III. Especially since you play it more in a slow, tactical table top perspective. If it helps smoothing out animations as well as camera pans/rotation that's okay with me. Ultimately, both FSR3 and FMF feel like they are in a beta-stage at the time being, So I really hope AMD can improve the technology over time! Personally I really want VRR to work, with good frame pacing and a framerate cap at the monitors max refresh-range. If AMD can reach that point one day, it would make me an extremely happy gamer. (And of course, native implementation of FSR3 frame generation in BGIII)
Yeah, BG3 has been my Main use-case since this was announced.
I don’t remember which channel covered BG3 with AFMF but it was covered.
I've found Forza Motorsport to be the best candidate to the point where I would actually use it because FSR doesn't give you much performance back and AFMF works really well in that game.
I tried it with bg3 and it does feel better. Just like in oxygen not included.
You should take a look at what's happening over on Linux. Valve and AMD are currently pushing, close to release, most of the stuff you're asking for. You should look at MESA, Wayland, Gamescope and the KDE Desktop ( for VRR ).
This video came out during the October 6th update. AMD has had 3 updates since then and all the Nvidiots keep referring to this video to talk badly about AFMF when they dont even realize that their GPU is now slower since then. Here are the updates since then please pin this so people dont get confused with what the actual performance is. December 7th - What’s New?
Updated to include all changes and improvements from AMD Software: Adrenalin Edition 23.12.1.
Improvements to stutter and pacing when AFMF is active.
General improvements to the stability of AFMF.
November 9th - What’s New?
Improvements to driver stability during task switching.
Improvements to resolve cases of AMD Software: Adrenalin Edition™ intermittently crashing, or failing to display metrics.
October 13th - What’s New?
We have added initial support for HDR to expand the AFMF gaming experience.
After monitoring user experience feedback, AFMF can now be globally enabled on all DirectX® 11 and 12 titles.
Users may use the per-app settings to individually disable or enable AFMF.
Improvements to frame pacing have been made, resulting in an overall smoother gameplay experience and improved image quality.
remember people, just try it for yourself
I now checked enough games and have to say the latest preview driver seems to work very well. Hitman 3, Green Hell, Medieval Dynasty I restrict my frames to 50% of my monitor refresh rate (via riva statistic from MSI afterburner) and then activate AFMF I have my refresh rate maxed out. My Graphics card only uses 80% of the power because it only has to render 80 frames even though I could do more. This way I save power, less noises from the fans and the experience is pretty good.
It works OK for Red Dead Redemption 2, Cyberpunk and sons of the forrest.
Starfield and some other titles are a bit of stuttefest still, but in total it already works OK for a preview driver. This feature is good to max out you refresh rate by already havin solid base fps. And it also can save power usage of you graphic card.
Congrats on the million subs and great job on the thorough and constructive analysis of this technology!
Also i heard u can use this as a replacement for the original fluid motion tech amd had for videos, i think someone got it working by using a gaming profile for a media app and got it working that way when enabling afmf on it then i think it worked. Good for rdna cards as i think they stopped support in drivers for them compared to vega 56 when i had it on in that tho i could never get it working somehow even tho was in the drivers with that card.
What's the point when you can use rife on vulkan?
And then they got it working again right?
From the small amount I've messed around with for the full release, it feels and looks like it's maybe a bit better than whats shown in this video
The problem with you guys, you are playing games with very high end rigs, you wont need these technologies, for low to midrange graphics cards with high refresh rate monitors, this is a god send technology even today. But if you have medium to high end systems, you wont need this technology quite that much.
I totally disagree. The negatives of this technology become even more negative when using a lower spec PC. Turning on AFMF when you already have a low base framerate will make the game look and feel worse. Why play PC if you want to have an experience that is even worse than console? This is console/handheld technology for users who have no idea how awful the fps, resolution, and latency are.
@@jjlw2378 I am totally disagree too. Your kind of thinking is the whole reason I did that comment.
"Lower spec gaming do not need to be low fps gaming!!!"
There are people still uses 720p/900p/1080p with gtx/polaris graphics card. Often they have old 120/144hz panels. This a perfect case for them. I was one of those. Not everything should be console equivalent or ultra high framerate with ultra+++ graphics. There are settings in any pc games for a reason! I am pretty sure I would enjoy this tech with my old gtx card if it was available. Lock fps to your monitor refresh rate or -1 for adaptive sync purposes and that's all.
they released a new version October 13th, stating better pacing, HDR support and i guess works on Vulkan?
that's some fast updates to the drivers and also makes this current video entirely irrelevant now, i would keep it though just because it's cool to have a record for how fast the tech is improving.
feelsbadman, all of that work, i guess that's just how it is when reporting on beta software.
The new preview driver seems to have corrected this issue. Also, you should test double gpu system (with one amd and nvidia gpu) using the nvidia gpu to render the game and the amd one as the display output (and enabling afmf), because, on my end, this seems to be working.
Right now, my 3090 with dlaa is using afmf in cyberpunk :)
That would be a big plus if amd make afmf possible for their egpu.
I'm curious. What's your use case for a dual gpu system across brands? Does having ALL the drivers give your system random issues? Please tell me this is running on an Intel CPU.
That said, how exactly do you configure it to run the game on nVidia card, and then how do you configure AFMF with the AMD card as output?
One million subscribers. I know you don’t care but congrats regardless.
They don’t have to acknowledge immediately, calm down
@@emma6648they've stated before in Q&As and floatplane Livestream that they don't really care that much and basically the work keeps on spinning and it's business as usual.
they should have at least 5 million! so underrated.
It's extremely impressive that this tech works at all, even from a base frame rate below 100. This is a big development for high refresh rate panel owners, and I could see myself using this to saturate a 240hz or higher panel, though I admit that it is a rather niche use.
But i think it won't replace "real" high fps, because those also reduce the input lag. In other analysis it is emphasized, that low fps into generated high fps feels really weird, because of the increased latency
@@PestifeR yea thats why AFMF is best used if you can achieve high base FPS which will benefit high refresh rate monitors
not so sure about that i do get 200+ fps in some games and glitches the very smallest of glitches really stand out also the lowered input lag is dangerous once you have it then it becomes the new normal not really a trade off maybe if we are talking a very tiny amount
It's garbage with the current implementation.
But what is the point of that high of frames in a single player game? Just use vrr and have a near perfect experience. I don’t see the point in seeing the super high frame number when we already have perfect tech for these scenarios. Now if it allowed lower input lag and more frames in competitive games, that would be important.
Mmm, a little unfortunate HUB didn't try it with AMD's Enhanced Sync driver feature turned on. I've been using it with AFMF on my 6900XT and tearing hasn't been an issue and subjectively the pacing feels good.
HUB Quality recommended settings in Starfield @ Ultrawide rez, I'm getting with some FSR2 help between 65 and 90 base fps depending on the scene.
AFMF with Enhanced Sync and Anti-lag turned on the smoothness has gone up and I hit over 130fps sometimes 160fps, higher than my 120Hz monitor and so looks nicer in that respect. Starfield is slow paced enough that latency isn't much of a factor and to me still looks good. Sure I can see some artifacting but doesn't bother me much.
It's interesting tech that I'm more interested in for older generation cards (like mine) as a way to help them pump out more fps as they get older.
Hopefully it gets as much widespread game support as FSR and continues to improve!
I've been doing the same thing but I have a 6800xt
@@carpelunam have you found the frame pacing with AFMF to be ok with enhanced sync?
I agree, I always prefer native over FSR or DLSS. However where I DO see this technology becoming heavily leveraged is in the handheld PC market. To see this technology on something like the ROG Ally with 120Hz VRR screen should be truly awesome.
How can it be leveraged on mobile devices when you need 60fps for the thing to not feel like junk and look strange? The pocket PC's struggle to do 60fps alone...
@@Greez1337 but how noticeable on a 7" screen remains to be seen. I certainly haven't seen any videos on it. So until then, who knows....
OCT 13 driver resolved issues I had with frame pacing and screen tearing (as well as the driver timeout issue on tabbing-out, at least as far as I can see). VRR seems to be fixed, at least on my setup.
I had reported to AMD the tearing issue on OCT 6 driver when it opened up to 6000 series, and 6 days later here is the new driver resolving that issue in particular.
not seeing any update for 0ct 13??
@@TheFob34 search for the preview drivers, there's the oct 6 (presumably what they tested) and there is a new driver for OCT 13
@@stevenbasher5363 I was running the September 29th update but have found the October 13th ,thank you
yep, I was afraid they will announce the issues when they are already fixed but they did. daniel owens and vex made a much better showcase of the technology.
@@Davinmk don't get me wrong, their main criticisms are still valid
- the quality of the generated frames is subpar in certain scenarios due to limited information (motion vectors)
- the introduced lag/latency is noticeable at anything below about 120fps on mouse (and about 70/80 on controller imo). Where this shines is ultimately super high refresh rate (165+ hz) and CPU limited scenarios, say 120 -> 240hz
- there are still minor cases of stutter, some bugs surrounding resolution switching, and refresh rate modes
- it does not work with vsync on in engine, which can not always be disabled.
- it does not feel good at anything below 50fps at all. This tech is not, and probably will not, be able to make up for that. You still need to enable upscaling or turn down settings to achieve 60fps+ at a bare minimum, so the 30-45fps crowd hoping to go up to 60/75fps are outta luck with this tech.
The benefit, however, is that it _can_ be enabled in like, 90% of all games ever. Whether it's the best option or not, especially looking at some older games or console ports that are locked to 60. I'm most excited to see how it behaves with emulators like rpcs3 and console exclusive games. I tested it out with (PC) Skyrim and, despite some artifacting, that type of game with a frame limit worked really well at 120.
love how he says there are all kinds of issues...and I basically barely see them...to not at all.
I play with a 5800X3D and 7900 XTX, and I've tried FMF out in a few games, and yeah, some games looked like a complete garbled mess, like Starfield and RDR2. I didn't have too bad of a time with CP2077 though 4K Ultra RT at 80fps, then there's Witcher 3, which seemed to have the best experience by far with AFMF. I decided to Google to see what others experiences where, and the majority I came across seem to agree with Witcher 3 having the best experience by far as well. With AFMF still in beta phase, it's understandable there are issues, and looking forward to them ironing everything out.
Weird. Complete opposite experience in those games on a 5800X + 6800 XT. Starfield is flawless for me, and is the best example of AFMF I've found so far. RDR2 is fine, just not as good as Starfield. CP2077 is terrible, big increase in input latency and tons of judder.
@@K31TH3R Interesting. I feel the experience is tied to frame rate, and monitor refresh rate, and if you’re able to get within a certain threshold of your refresh rate, it’s either smooth, a jittery mess. I was able to limit the fps in some of the games I tried, and that really helped. Like locking at 60 in game, AFMF would be closer to 120 pretty steady, which is what I did with Witcher 3, and was quite pleasant. Regardless, still a lot of ironing out need to be done for sure.
@@TimothyStovall108 Think I'd probably agree 100% with it being tied to display refresh rate. I have also toyed around with setting up scanline sync with RTSS and I've been able to make the more juddery games feel a bit smoother, but the problem with that method is that once GPU usage goes above ~75-80%, the screen tearing shows up instead of the judder. So you end up using more upscaling or reducing settings in either scenario, just for different reasons.
Have you tried with latest driver oct 13 version? I think frame pacing issues were somewhat fixed and hdr also working.
TDLR: nvidia channel quickly reviewing the AMDs new feature while its in beta
I do not understand the purpose of this video. Twenty minutes on a preview driver. Many of the issues have already been fixed, I can understand the motion vectors angle, and so the resulting limitations tied to it, but I don't think the purpose of AFMF is to be on par with full fledged frame gen from AMD itself, or Nvidia. Its purpose is to be a decent place holder for game titles that do not have 'proper' frame gen support.
On an adjacent note, considered the negativity profused in this video, you guys should ignore the idiots writing 'AMD-Unboxed' on r/hardware, you already have a pretty neutral POV when it comes to hardware brands, there is no need to try hard at showing that you're not biased in favour of AMD.
Putting framerates ahead of image quality has now gone way too far.
What's the point of getting double FPS is the image is trash and the input lag is higher?
The more talk I hear about frame generation, regardless of whose version, the more I feel people aren't understanding what the point of this tech is. This is not meant to improve performance or to save old cards; it's meant to allow already high fps experiences to push quality settings to the limit while maintaining a feeling of smoothness. It's not a magic button to improve your gaming experience, it just better utilizes a high refresh rate monitor. I think Nvidia is actually to blame for the misconceptions with how they marketed it in cyberpunk initially. Even if ai suddenly takes a massive leap forward, this tech will still push out its best guess of what a frame will probably look like and still be at least somewhat wrong. The idea that afmf should look better or maintain high frame rate under high movement boggles my mind; of course it won't work, it's relying on motion vectors rather than actual game data. It either shuts itself off until the uninterpretable motion goes away, or the generated frames will be a mess and ruin what you're looking at. I don't know what people are expecting outside of perfection.
tried fluid motion with WH40K: Darktide (game got new patch, can recommend darktide now for sure) on 6800 XT, pretty good result, can reach up to 210 fps, which is like double fps... real caviet is when you get to real intensive scene, fluid motion just give up and you are back to your 'real' frames
having 165 Hz 2K monitor, didnt really notice any tearing
Wish they'd use Darktide as a benchmarking game, such beauty and demanding from hardware.
I don't really like it's graphics. It seems not as sharp. Idk how to explain it. I play on 2k, but it feels like it's 720-1080p. It looks pixelated no matters what...@@mylarrito
From the full speed capture, I can't tell the difference. I understand this is probably a youtube thing. But if I can only tell the difference at 2% speed, to me, this is akin to spotting how a magician did it by watching the trick one frame at a time.
I have a lot of questions about your test setup and capture card, because with a 6900xt and a cheapo 144hz 1080p monitor, the only perceivable problems are greasy wet surfaces at times, and some of the other light artifacting, but tearing wasnt noticeable in any game tested. Seemed to work well in ff14, exceptionally well in BG3, and decently with cyberpunk. Could be because the fps of the first 2 were "so" high that it became a forest for the trees scenario, and with cyberpunk I was lucky to break far beyond 144 so... idk... All I know is I welcome our new AMD GPU overlords and I look forward to the intel AMD wars of 2030.
If the fps is so high what is the point of using it?
Take the criticisms presented by reviewers with a grain of salt, since they're out there evaluating every second frame by frame with 300% zoom and you're probably not doing that during your regular gameplay. Make your own decisions about what tech you enjoy or not if at all possible.
@@Safetytrousers Image smoothness when moving the camera around and that's it really. I theorize Frame generation, was never meant to make slow low end GPU's play high end games, they would never let that happen anyway, they want to sell the high end expensive GPU's.
IMO frame gen from AMD and Nvidia, should be renamed to "visual smoothing" or something. And also IMO frame rate counters, should be updated to ignore these fake frames, so GPU makers don't get to sell GPU's based on fake fps numbers.
6900xt for 1080p? Based
@@Safetytrousers smooths out dips in frame timing and for science mostly; cyberpunk it helped a fair bit tho
This might have a potential use with old games that are limited to 60fps, No One Lives Forever, for example won't display cutscenes or conversations correctly above 60. RSR is most useful in old games that have a max res of 1080p or less when using a 1440p or above displays. AFMF could find itself in a similar niche.
Could see it used in racing games capped at 60 fps like Burnout Paradise. The game heavily uses motion blur, so AFMF artifacts could be less of an issue
While this is an interesting way to look at it, the dx11/12 restriction is a massive blocker for that currently.
60 fps source framerate is not great, in practice you really want about 90 or more for a 144fps or more experience.
@@sirdapplton Not really, dgVoodoo sorts that.
@@sirdapplton You may be able to work around that with DXVK if they readd vulkan support at least back to DX9 games (though not all games work with DXVK on windows).
Tbh im amazed how much ppl are bitching and moaning about small picky things with AFMF... Its way better than Nvidia making you buy a 1500$ gpu and only supporting a few games... we should be celebrating this as a huge win for gamers. Frame gen on 100% of titles. Nvidia is really turning to garbage fast.
No cap
I personally find these kind of benchmarks a little exaggerated, why? I personally have been using AFMF in every dx11/12 game and haven't seen any difference in image clarity but i could feel the smoothness, one thing that I saw is if you have small base fps (less than 40) the game doesn't feels good at all and is blurry (like motion blur) but if you have like 100fps in a game and you want that extra 100fps then AFMF is really good for it, latency wise i didn't really felt anything differently (maybe is bigger but nit enough for me to feel it) I use it while playing bf1, titan fall 2, cs2 and dbd and i can only say good things about it.
I've tried it too in many games and with a high base frame rate of 70+ on a 7900XTX and I feel it negatively impacts the image quality, third person games especially where panning the camera even slowly makes things blurry, breaking up or doubling of thin lines, or windows roofs, complex geometry that sort of thing takes a big hit. The only game I've used it where it works probably the best is Forza Motorsport. With a base framerate of 60 it works rather well.
Other than that I have seen some comments of people saying it looks great or they can't tell its even on and that's just not true. I don't see how you can't notice it. Maybe you feel that the tradeoff is worth it because of the smoothness it offers and that's fair, that's your choice to make but the only reason I can see people not liking a deep dive into these technologies like this is because maybe it breaks the illusion to them that there are issues and that's no surprise because the way it works there have to be issues especially when its being done on the driver level without access to game engine data.
There's also a performance cost to this as well. I took a look at TLOU on my 6800XT a game where this tech actually works alright and lost around 15% of real framerate performance just turning AFMF on so than you are presented with a situation where you could just enable FSR Quality and get maybe less total frames than with AFMF on but they are real frames of much higher overall quality consistently, with lower latency than introducing low quality generated frames amongst real frames.
Right now I would only use it in Forza Motorsport because FSR and DLSS dont give you much performance turning them on and the game is demanding so to reach my 120hz refresh rate I feel the tradeoff is worth it. Every other game I wouldnt use it because I feel its not worth it but if it works for you than that's great.
Hey guys, with the new October 13 version of AFMF, the feature runs WAYYY better.
I think it deserves a new video because it went from unusable to really good.
After having used AFMF for a while now I generally agree with most of what you said in the video but the frame pacing issue you've experienced has been nonexistent for me. You mentioned it appears to be working correctly on the ReLive capture (which is how my games looked) and is chopped up haphazardly with your external capture card. Is it possible this has to do with the capture fps or the capture card and not AFMF?
I currently have AFMF, Radeon Anti-Lag, and Radeon Enhanced Sync enabled in my driver settings. VRR enabled with freesync 48-165. I am not currently locking my fps. If you decide to look into this more and have other settings questions lemme know!
Yea it doesnt look like that for me neither. Im using it in FFXIV Online. I dont recommend it for shooters, i tried it in BF2042 and it wasnt pleasant.
This thing is amazing. Tested and got DOUBLE (not more not less but double) the framerate my games run at. GJ AMD 👍
you can analyze it all you want and I experienced first hand that it's not perfect but at least AMD tries to be there for the gamer. with Playing at 2% speed you'll always see imperfections. Kinda pointless tho.
What I want to see is frame generation(if will be fixed) for 60fps locked games to be boost it to 120 and use BFI.
And if it will work with wrappers like dx9 to dx11.
What I want is even more unreasonable. I want consoles to be able to use it to go from 30 -> 60. I’m well aware that doing so is pretty much a pipe dream from a technical standpoint, but it’s a fun dream
@@istealpopularnamesforlikes3340And I want something that seems even more unreasonable, games already running at 60fps 😂😂😂
Sad, but true in the current gaming landscape
It is possible, specially with emulators
I hope this driver level frame gen will be compatible for OpenGL/Minecraft Java.
Yes it works for wrappers and fps locked games
A new version of the driver came out the same day as this video that fixes a lot of these issues
In my opinion, if you need to slow down the game to be able to see, the resource has already achieved its purpose.
Being able to enable and fiddle around with this kind of tech ourselfs is clearly a win in itself tbh it was never the idea to replace framegen.. Nvidia meanwhile hardlocks every new tech behind a paywall even for their own customers (read; RTX 20, 30 series) are hardlocked out of "DLSS3" wich is so mega anti consumer its unbelievable not even gonna start about deliberatly limitting VRAM so ur card only lasts max 2/3 yrs xD. AMD meanwhile just tries to make tech for everyone( or almost).
Stop using "read", it's annoying and a decade retired. You're already reading aren't you? In addition "paywall for their own customers" suggests a double payment, which is false. You buy an RTX 4 series you get DLSS3. Don't expect old hardware to support new features, AMD does this as well. Or is AMD also implementing a paywall for their own customers (read: 5000 series)
@@csammy123 badly informed I see xD nice try tho.. fsr 3 even works on older hardware and Nvidia its juts not recommended to go below rx5000 series but it does work. And yes u call something a pay wall when u are required to buy something (new) or be excluded thats what it means in this context oh and next time u try to school someone know the facts mate.. Indeed ur right nobody expected it from Nvidia to support new tech with older cards that says it all concerning the stance of Nvidia towards their own customers. The fact AMD can pull it off without "dedicated hardware" makes or Nvidia greedy because it could work (like fsr3 )or just plain lazy. btw that my writing doesnt suit u well nobody cares grow up kid.
@@TimfyGaming Badly informed? Maybe REREAD everything about FSR3 and AFM (read: reread everything about FSR3 AFM). They're not comparable, the experience is bad (read: nowhere near the quality of DLSS3), and it's an attempt to give the illusion of competition yet no one will use simply due to the major drawbacks (read: major drawbacks) outlined in this very video (see: this video). 😆
@@csammy123 never said AFM was comparable nor said that FSR 3 is the same u are so smart haha it is STILL frame generation tho and u dropped the thing about paywalls because u screw up many details and information. Also implying I said and meant things I clearly didnt say.
@@TimfyGaming It seems you're confused by your own arguments, you can't seem to pick a goal post to defend. Rather than call others "kid", when it's clear you're clueless on what to argue against, just stick to the facts? You tried to insinuate a double paywall for Nvidia and I showed that analogy doesn't make sense. You say AMD just tries to make tech for "everyone" yet that's meaningless if the tech is garbage. Maybe that's why Nvidia locks their new features to new hardware so it's guaranteed they work? Have you even seen the final thoughts of this video? Go to the 13 minute mark and reREAD the conclusions. Please, go ahead and champion AMD for trying to increase marketshare with garbage features, meanwhile the competition actually knows what they're doing and keep releasing superior tech while AMD always plays catchup. Guess who's marketshare strategy is actually winning/increasing? Hint, it doesn't start with A.
Came here from Paul's Hardware, congrats on hitting 1 million!
Made up stuff is only as successful as gullible the consumer is. This, unfortunately, does not apply to just computer graphics. Marketing, (geo)politics, mainstream journalism, financial and pharmaceutical industries and the list just goes on.
Works on RDR2 . So Vulkan included !
The oct 13 beta driver works fine. Doubles my frame s with starfield and cyberpunk with no major noticeable visual degradation . Works with rdna2 aside from rdna3. Works with HDR now. No UI issues. Though lag is noticeable with cyberpunk with RT
While i understand your conclusion could you put it into real terms for real people.
So if say is AFMF on with blury frames on ultra better looking than say native on medium settings at the same FPS.
So which looks/plays best:
Native ultra at 60fps
AFMF ultra at 120fps
Native Medium 120fps
Exactly. Reviewers like Tim and Steve are actively looking for imperfections and are sensitive to them. Most regular people wouldn't notice them and they have to put them in slow motion to actually notice. I wish they could have a blind test for regular people in their videos.
Damn all this work for nothing lol AMD already updated the preview driver. You need to retest then release a video but there is a chance that AMD will again update the preview driver and made video obsolate.
IMO this preview drivers are the bomb and it finaly fixes power consumption when watching full screen YT video on my LG C2 now it drops to like 50W on my 7900XTX before it was 104W.
This video should at least have 'Preview' in the title or something idc. Preview drivers have been updated again, and I don't doubt we'll continuously get updates. Since I don't think it's necessary to always make an AFMF video for each preview update, I'll hold off till the 'offical' release of AFMF. While I'm not trying to brown nose AMD, I don't think it seems fair to have a final conclusion (while I do think most of your thoughts will hold up on release) to AFMF while it's still an beta.
FSR3 tho, I can understand the flak it got, because it being the launch.
AMD should have just focused fully into making FSR3 (and not come out with AMFM at all) driver based and a higher quality DLSS when it comes to image quality.
This fake frame tech is just....dumb
Can someone please explain to me why people think frame generation is a big deal? The whole point of higher framerates was lower input latency and with VRR screens we don't have to worry about screen tearing anymore. Why is everyone getting so worked up about fake frames that don't reduce input latency at best and increase input latency at worst? I figured the whole thing was a dumb marketing stunt by Nvidia to just make the bar graphs bigger without actually giving any more performance. I totally get upscales though. Those are great for making a 1080p card work on a 4k screen or allowing me to run Armored Core 6 at 5 watts on my steam deck to get like 5-6 hours of battery life. It's a shame they're being used to compensate for optimizing games since they don't look better than native at all.
My sons 6900xt with RTSS fixed to 72 FPS on 144hz Monitor. In Settings use Not async instead Front Buffer sync. No Tearing and Butter smooth. Thats it. Easy.
Massive 1 Mil subs! Congratulations!
I love that amd is bringing this feature in, can't wait to see how it improves over the next year.
I think your view is narrow minded regarding this tech, there's A TONS of games that are engine limited that won't ever get patched or resolved, and thats where AFMF comes into play, most if not all of those city builders and strategy games are engine related and after a certain amount of time or at certain scenarios the gameplay literally becomes too choppy and stuttery to enjoy it, its not an FPS or a TPS there's isn't much of a movement and if AMD (the way I think it should be feasable) comes with an algorithm that can detect those games' hud/ui since they are mostly in the bottom of the screen and keep them out of the frame generation or deal with them differently it'll be amd's biggest win since its a technical solution to a problem that plagued video gaming industry since the beggining of times.
And the crowd falls silent as all the 40 IQ amd fanboys who have been saying comments like "amd are kings they are bringing frame gen to everyone even on older cards get hit by a face full of reality as they learn (the extremely obvious) that frame gen without dedicated hardware was never going to run in a remotely playable way. It's almost like it was locked to 40 series because it wouldn't run well on cards without the hardware to run it... Who said that again? Oh right nivida said it over a year ago when they introduced frame gen that all the little amd babies cried and said "thats not true it would run they are just greedy wahhh"
First amd fanboys getting a fg reality check when amd cards can finally use it understanding why it's great tech then they get another reality check learning what nivida said was true all along. It could run on cards without dedicated hardware but it would run so poorly it is not worth it. This month has been great for amd fanboys getting reality checks and all the "nivida are lying" whining has been debunked lol.
I don't get the push for frame gen. It only works well when you don't really need it (high native framerare).
And then it will disable at times with fast mouse input... What? Isn't that when we really want high fps? Who cares about high fps when standing still.
Maybe it will be what we want some day and I get we have to start somewhere.
I tried it on starfield and I will just say this . This tech is just as gimmicky as I thought when It first came out from Nvidia. I rather spend more money on the power to run it native. All these features actually does little to improve the game play or experience. It's just an artificial fps boost
Could an edge case for this be on monitors with a somewhat poor experience at the lower range of the vrr window.
For example, my Asus VG27A kind of sucks below 100hz.
I will grant that it does not look very compelling in general, just a fun little bonus.
you can always just lock your frame rate
Honestly, the majority of people will hardly notice half the issues while gaming. Unless your sticking your face into the screen looking for issues, zooming in and slowing down frames. I personally dont use fake frames and still prefer settings at native.
Framegen being intended for turning 60 into 120 is just totally pointless, the big use case for this stuff is turning 20-30 into 60 on something like steam deck.
Unfortunately, they've already addressed some of the issues you've found. They have had an update every Friday since they rolled out the preview driver and it looks like that may continue to happen until Q1 2024 when its released into mainline drivers. You need to either keep retesting it for multiple videos or wait until official release.
Unfortunately?
Im sorry but the fps just doesnt feel reel. If my game is at 40 fps and the amd afmf says 80, it still feels like 40.
That's because you're using it wrong nowhere does it advertise for you to use it under 60fps.
@@UKKNGaming Then its pretty much useless isnt it? If you are having over 60 fps, you dont need then, now do you?
Both AMD and nvidia are committed to the War on Real Frames. Just say no to fake frames that are decoupled from your human inputs.
This feature is clearly not intended for every game use, there are tons of slow paced games that benefit from this, no one should use this on fast paced FPS games!
Been following this channel for several years, congrats on hitting 1 mil+. Cheers!
I would like to see this used on something that isn’t 1st or 3rd person. Like a scenario where a lower end user might want to go from 30fps to ~60 on something turn based for example.
Great review Tim. Ive found one game where ot works rather well where i would use it and thats Forza Motorsport. Since neither FSR or DLSS give you much performance in that game and its demandong to begin with its pretty good.
All other games though the image quality takes a noticeable hit thats not really worth it buy its a tech preview and will hopefully get better with time.
I tried both FSR3 and AFMF and I prefer 70-90 FPS VRR then generated 140.
@NoodleAsian I should also add that I tried DLSS 3 FG, FSR3 FG and AFMF, because I was curious. I don't like any of these tricks.
With upscaling, I have a more nuanced view. Upscaling is somewhat OK in my experience when you're at 1440p or higher. I have multiple PCs but for gaming I currently use curved ultrawide (21:1 3440x1440) monitor. If I can't sustain 90 FPS (range 75-105), I will first try upscaling on highest quality setting. Then I will lower various settings. Play with both for some time, and go by the feel. In some games it's better to use quality upscaling to 4K or 3440x1440 in my case, but in others, it's better to lower graphical settings, because when you notice in motion artifacts, you can't unsee them. The Last Of Us 1 is a good case where FSR2 Quality is doing an excellent job, and it's better to have all settings at Ultra. But as soon as you drop to Balanced, FSR2 doesn't have enough information to do a good job and it's better to lower some other settings. Same with DLSS in this game.
If I was playing at 1080p, none of the upscaling techniques (DLSS, FSR, XeSS) do a good enough job for ME Personally.
However, it is important to acknowledge that DLSS does a better job at lower resolutions, and if you don't have enough GPU power, you have to compromise somewhere. Because gaming under 60 FPS is just pain and suffering.
My AMD card hasn't arrived yet so I can't test it further. From what I heard, there was an update that made AFMF more fluid by correcting frame passing. and launched, but you can give your opinions about it as you wish, as the more it is tested, the more AMD will be able to improve the technology
Funny thing this guy doesn't mention about the title is that it doesn't allow frame generation for EVERY game.
The thing I hate about these frame gen techniques is that they are being used to severly bloat prices. Generated frames are worse than native full stop and shouldn't be advertised like they double your framerate with no downsides like AMD and Nvidia are doing.
AMD released today an update that adds HDR support and is said to improve frame pacing. It will be nice to see another look at this once the technology matures, although I suspect that the base issues with image quality might take a while to be improved, if they'd be improved at all.
Your comment should be pinned.
Kinda funny how AMD released a driver that pretty much invalidates this entire video a few hours after
@@andersonfrancotabares3614 AMD is still eating their crayons and sniffing their glue when it comes to coordinated PR. HUB has AMD contacts, and make proper use of them (as we've seen in many announcements where Tim or Steve have asked them for additional clarification). That this one slipped through the cracks is just dumb as rocks.
But on the other hand it's also one the things I kinda like about AMD. Getting more of the leather jacket's "It just works! The more you buy the more you save!" will make me barf. AMD has their fumbles, but they seem to genuinely want to do what the market wants, rather than tell the market what it needs.
@@andersonfrancotabares3614 Yeah, it does invalidate several points, and I think it would be nice if HUB posted something to make sure viewers know that part of this video is now irrelevant, perhaps release a short update video. Though I won't expect a full re-test until AFMF is in a release driver.
Aren't fake frames.... Fake? 😂. This is what these companies want us to be accepting of and this apparently is the future so, yay fake frame!
They aren't fake. They are functional distinct frames. And they have the result you would expect. They increase fluidity and decrease eye tracking motion blur and stroboscopic step sizes.
As for the future, we're moving towards 1000Hz and beyond monitors. And given the slowing rate of progress in silicon, the only realistic way to feed these monitors with enough frames for modern games will be by using tricks like frame interpolation.
Where a frame is generated is not really relevant, there is no real and fake frames. We have reached a point where shrinking transistors is almost impossible due to the laws of quantum physics. Hardware will not improve much more unless we discover a revolutionary way of creating hardware. Frame generation is a way to continue improving performance. It is not in any way perfect but it will improve and become indistinguishable from frames generated earlier in the graphics pipeline sometime in the future. Without frames gen, we might be stuck more or less at current performance.
If you need to go to 2% speed to show an artifact, it mean it's actually pretty good... and not terrible as you say.
Using a new tech that's not ready for mainstream as a marketing tool is Nvidias purview only. @16:30
Seeing the starfield footage made me think.
Did you ever explore that starfields got immense artifacting on objects that are down relative to the player?
Basically if I grab a box and throw it around on the floor it's got ghosting that remains for a good while.
Do the same along the horizon of the game and I saw no issues.
I can't explain that.
"We have added initial support for HDR to expand the AFMF gaming experience." From latest preview driver release notes.
Vulkan is supported too.
One scenario that absolutely sold AFMF to me was using it on games that are locked to 60 FPS. Tried it in The Crew 2 the other day and it was mindblowing. There is some artifacting, but it's still fairly minimal outside of few menu animations especially on the world map. It's a small price to pay to me anyway.
The whole game isn't as smooth as if it had a native 120 FPS, but it's still visually smoother than a locked 60 FPS. Plus this game is a best case scenario anyway considering its frame pacing is impecable to begin with.
I can see that being good since I did take a somewhat thorough look at Forza Motorsport and found it to be the best example for AFMF. Every other game I've tries though the image quality hit is still not worth the tradeoff for me but it seems to work ok in raving games?
@@TerraWare It's alright as long as there isn't a lot going on around the car for sure. Within The Crew 2, AFMF disabled itself multiple times due to large portions of the screen having very fast motion, definitively putting the "fast mouse movement" fact entirely.
But eh, for the rest it's really good.
@@impointr Without camera movement, you would barely feel the smoothness. With camera movement, AFMF breaks apart.
It's the exact same tech used in TVs under "sports" mode. This just has slightly better latency than that. So how on earth can someone say it's visually smoother when you actually cannot rotate the camera!? In most games, camera control is paramount! This is what differentiates it from movies. It's TV frame interpolation with less latency penalty.
@@jal.ajeera I suggest you actually give it a shot honestly. I was also very skeptical about all this, yet it simply just works. If I were to not care much about framerate in games with little camera movements (e.g. racing games) then I'd stick to 30 FPS which... Just isn't desirable at all is it? What would even be the point of reaching 144 FPS in a game such as Forza Horizon 5 too since there is little camera movement?
Sadly this is a very very subjective topic and there really isn't any definitive answer. Personally I see a big difference and I'm happy to use such tech for these games where I am prevented from going above a certain framerate. For any other games though I'll do without, obviously.
@@jal.ajeeraIts you again, I corrected you many times before and you stopped responding.
Now I know you're just trolling.
Think this need a retest in the near future as updates seem to be coming fast.
Maybe doing another test and add in comparison with motion interpolation on TVs such as Samsung, Sony etc which also does not have acess to game vector data?
it just looks like that everything that AMD is releasing has a preview status for years... its so sad
GPUs will be more and more expensive and they won't even be able to squeeze out 60fps without frame generation or upscaling or some other AI bullshit... quite unfortunate times for PC gaming
Yeah I’m about over PC gaming with all this nonsense technology and bad ports.
I just got the preview driver to check it out. It seems way less blurry now I would love to see a retest and a comparison as I have no idea how the older patches looked like irl...
A lot of these issues got fixed in the driver released 4 days later that fixed frame pacing
I was hoping they showed an external app locking the fps to 60....it seems it works better that way from what I heard..I only want it for games that drop from a perfect locked 60 to 50, so they are always at 60. I hope it works good on that scenario.
@3:41 In motion I don't notice anything going on. You guys must have great eyesight.
Congrats on 1 million subscribers. Well deserved.
Congratulatuions gents! Having a beer for you both.
So, i have a 7900XT and a 60hz monitor. Based on this, I don't have to worry about frame generation. Okay.
AFMF is leaving beta at the end of January. Hopefully this gets revisited at that point to see the improvements (which there definitely has been)
Same
w000t 1mil subs! Gratz guys, here's to another mil!
(AFMF Config for smoothness) set a frame cap to a frame rate that matches or divides into the native frame rate of the monitor this works really well and helps with frame pacing. I run AFMF with AMD Super Resolution and 20% sharpening to upscale games with higher frame rate and resolution it looks great and makes game look amazing at 5k upscale resolution. I can run it on all games where I want to turn up all the eye candy with double fps it really does work you just have get your settings right. On a high refresh monitor with a frame cap it works well the key is the fps cap, set fps cap to keep gpu below 95% usage with the rule of running at native refresh rate or one that divides evenly this will make it smooth and avoid micro stutters. Also make sure your game is running at least 90fps or higher to keep input lag manageable the higher your fps cap the lower the input lag will be with AFMF. You can make custom CRU profiles for your monitor to create different refresh rates to fine tune everything for good frame pacing.👍
The only game I've ever used frame generation was Diablo 4, with DLSS, and it looked and felt quite good, allowing me to use my 240hz 1440p display closer to the higher spectrum of refresh.
I mean, it adds significant latency, unless you're already above 100fps (in which case the visual bonus is negligible)
@surewhynot6259 if you're on AMD, yes. Nvidia framegen only adds minor latency
Happy One Million!
i know i am late congratulation on 1 millions subs been watching you since 100k subs keep up good work