News AMD Fluid Motion Frames comes out of preview, claims up to 97% more FPS at 1080p in first full Radeon driver release

[Admin]

AMD Fluid Motion Frames is out of beta and is now a fully fledged feature for RDNA 2 and 3 graphics.

AMD Fluid Motion Frames comes out of preview, claims up to 97% more FPS at 1080p in first full Radeon driver release : Read more

 

[vanadiel007]

Time to do an in depth test of this, both based on numbers and on playability and compatibility with a large set of gaming titles.

That and I am first!

 

[d0x360]

AMD has proven without question that Nvidia is full of crap when they say you NEED a 4000 series card

 

[Gururu]

This will be interesting. Does anyone know what the preview might have looked like?

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

AFMF is AMD's driver level version of the frame generation technology that it uses for FSR 3, and trades off visual quality for compatibility spanning thousands of games using the DX11 and DX12 API.

So in other words, instead of lowering your IQ settings and resolution for more frames, you get to "claim" you're playing at high settings instead?

 

[valthuer]

AMD has proven without question that Nvidia is full of crap when they say you NEED a 4000 series card

Depends on what you need the card for.

If you 're only gaming at 1080p, you can definitely skip this generation.

But, if you 're a fan of the 4K Ultra eye candy, then you definitely need an RTX-40 series GPU - and a very specific one at that: the 4090.

 

[tamalero]

So in other words, instead of lowering your IQ settings and resolution for more frames, you get to "claim" you're playing at high settings instead?

Bingo, the whole thing is so full of bull... a total placebo.

 

[TJ Hooker]

AFMF is basically FSR 3 frame generation but without the upscaling technology that comes bundled with FSR. You can still expect frame generation to nearly double your framerate, just like with FSR 3 compared to FSR 2, but the visual quality is certainly going to be lower with just AFMF enabled.

This doesn't make sense to me. Why would rendering at native resolution result in worse quality than rendering at a lower resolution and upscaling (using frame generation in both cases)? I don't know why you'd assume that you're still running at a lower resolution even if you're not using FSR upscaling.

Performance would obviously be worse at native vs lower resolution, but you should still be getting significantly better fps than without frame gen (albeit with some of those frames being 'fake').

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

Yes but also no. The best exemple that one can use is a TV : watch a video on you computer and then watch the same video on a TV and the internal upscaling system the TV uses will make you monitor look like it was broken.

FG and DLSS/FSR/XESS do indeed render at a lower resolution and then upscale it and doing so creates a few artifacts that may or may not be tolerable(don't find out what they are as you won't be able to unsee them) but they do provide a much higher quality than the render quality so for 4k it upscaler from 2k but the result is extremely close to 4k. Needless to say that the lower you go the worst it gets.

Yes, but like the article says AFMF doesn't do any upscaling

AFMF is basically FSR 3 frame generation but without the upscaling technology that comes bundled with FSR. You can still expect frame generation to nearly double your framerate, just like with FSR 3 compared to FSR 2, but the visual quality is certainly going to be lower with just AFMF enabled.

And to use your TV analogy, it seems to be the same thing that many TVs do and just duplicates frames to make for a smoother look, which increases latency (stated it does), and requires Radeon AntiLag and 60fps+ to work, so it also sounds like anyone with a 60hz monitor can't use it else face possible tearing and artifacts from generating frames in exceess of their refresh rate.

 

[Sleepy_Hollowed]

I mean, cool I guess for those that like high numbers and latency on all AMD cards vs just certain NVIDIA cards.

 

[purpleduggy]

I mean, cool I guess for those that like high numbers and latency on all AMD cards vs just certain NVIDIA cards.

"just certain Nvidia cards" are the vast majority of Nvidia cards if you look at Steam hardware survey. Most dont have a 4000 or even 3000 series card, but rather a GTX1060. on these cards, the frame generation tech from AMD is a huge deal, since Nvidia has abandoned their old cards, AMD made them playable again.

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

 

[ezst036]

Any word on AFMF on Linux?

 

[derekullo]

"just certain Nvidia cards" are the vast majority of Nvidia cards if you look at Steam hardware survey. Most dont have a 4000 or even 3000 series card, but rather a GTX1060. on these cards, the frame generation tech from AMD is a huge deal, since Nvidia has abandoned theirbold cards, AMD made them playable again.

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

If you convert that chart to an excel table and filter out everything not a 3000 or 4000 series Nvidia you get 36.23% are using 3000 or 4000 gen hardware.

According to the table less people use a Geforce 1060 @ 3.87% than a Geforce 3060, the #1 most used card at 5.29%!

 

[Blacksad999]

AMD has proven without question that Nvidia is full of crap when they say you NEED a 4000 series card

The incredibly low quality of AMD's frame generation says otherwise. You get much worse visual fidelity, terrible artifacting, stuttering, and just a worse experience overall.
But hey...it's "open source", amirite? You get what you pay for.

 

[Blacksad999]

"just certain Nvidia cards" are the vast majority of Nvidia cards if you look at Steam hardware survey. Most dont have a 4000 or even 3000 series card, but rather a GTX1060. on these cards, the frame generation tech from AMD is a huge deal, since Nvidia has abandoned their old cards, AMD made them playable again.

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

The most popular/common GPU on Steam hardware survey is the RTX 3060.

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

At least try to get your facts straight.

 

[Sleepy_Hollowed]

"just certain Nvidia cards" are the vast majority of Nvidia cards if you look at Steam hardware survey. Most dont have a 4000 or even 3000 series card, but rather a GTX1060. on these cards, the frame generation tech from AMD is a huge deal, since Nvidia has abandoned their old cards, AMD made them playable again.

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

What I meant by that was the top end 4000 series of NVIDIA. While the 3000 series may be able to use it (and maybe older as well, the jury is out) when they release an update to their version, only the higher end really "needs" them for maxing out at 4K, or rather, could use them, at over 60fps in a stable manner.

 

[tamalero]

The most popular/common GPU on Steam hardware survey is the RTX 3060.

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

At least try to get your facts straight.

Did you see the percentages? The 3060 barely overtook the 1060 and 1650 recently.

 

[spongiemaster]

Did you see the percentages? The 3060 barely overtook the 1060 and 1650 recently.

The survey did not differentiate between desktop and mobile for Pascal and older generations so they are all lumped into one listing. If you combine 3060 which is 1st overall and 3060 laptop which is 6th overall, it passed the 1060 a long time ago and is currently at more than twice the market share (8.77% vs 3.87 %). In fact, the 3060 is higher than the 1650 and 1060 combined currently.

 

[purpleduggy]

The most popular/common GPU on Steam hardware survey is the RTX 3060.

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

At least try to get your facts straight.

View: https://youtu.be/65u-6zVFRwc?si=jZv-iy-Be04d3ucV