AFMF: Was I Wrong?!?

Summary

The video compares AMD's new fluid motion frames driver-level frame generation to in-game FSR 3 implementations across several games. The presenter finds FSR 3 provides a smoother, more consistent experience without quality loss or stuttering during fast motion. In contrast, fluid motion frames often introduces distracting artifacts, tearing, and stutters when panning the camera. While fluid motion frames can boost fps, the presenter concludes it rarely improves perceived motion quality over playing natively. They suggest trying both technologies yourself since perception varies, but wouldn't enable fluid motion frames based on their testing.

Takeaways

• 😊 The video tests AMD's fluid motion frames technology in full release drivers across different games
• 👀 There are challenges conveying variable refresh rate experiences in fixed 60fps YouTube videos
• 🤔 The video compares in-game FSR 3 to driver-level AMD fluid motion frames
• 😕 The assistant found AMD fluid motion frames to have more stutters and lower frame quality than FSR 3
• 🎮 AMD fluid motion frames performed best starting from a 80-90fps baseline before frame generation
• 😟 But even then minor stutters occurred during camera pans with AMD fluid motion frames enabled
• 😐 In the tested games, disabling fluid motion frames gave the most consistent frame pacing
• ✨ The assistant is happy AMD is innovating with driver-level frame generation features
• 😀 Different people can have different perceptions of image quality and motion fluidity
• 👍 Viewers are encouraged to try AMD fluid motion frames themselves and share their experiences

Q & A

What technologies are being compared in the video?

The video compares AMD's driver-level fluid motion frames (AMMF) to Nvidia's DLSS 3 and AMD's FSR 3 implementations of frame generation.

What are the key differences between AMFM and FSR 3?

AMMF is a driver-level implementation while FSR 3 requires integration at the game engine level. FSR 3 has access to game motion vectors which helps generate higher quality interpolated frames.

What hardware was used for testing AMMF?

The author tested AMMF on an AMD Radeon 7900 XTX graphics card.

What games were used for testing?

Games tested include Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora, Plague Tale: Requiem, Cyberpunk 2077, and Elden Ring.

What monitor setup was used?

A 3440 x 1440 resolution ultrawide monitor with 165Hz maximum refresh rate.

What were the key drawbacks observed with AMMF?

The author noticed occasional microstutters, inconsistent frame pacing, and lower quality interpolated frames compared to FSR 3 implementations.

In what situations did AMMF perform best?

AMMF performed best when the base frame rate was already high (80-90 FPS) before enabling frame generation.

How can users best evaluate AMMF themselves?

The author recommends focusing on visual smoothness and consistency rather than FPS counter numbers when evaluating AMMF.

What was the author's overall assessment of AMMF?

The author felt AMMF did not provide a clear benefit over native frame rates in the games tested so far. More testing is needed.

What future improvements are hoped for with AMMF?

The author hopes AMMF continues to improve in consistency and integration with games to provide a smoother experience.