1. Anyone saying I don't feel like those are real, STOP!!! every frame is a damn 101000111 at the end of the day whether it's native or generated, so keep your feelings for when touching your toes. 2. Don't look at the big numbers, check the FPS bellow which gives the real values of FPS that the monitor is actually showing. 3. AFMF2 is ALWAYS better at a +5-12%, though FSR3 is slightly better in quality and latency since it's optimized in game. Personal Opinion, FSR3 if exists, if not → AFMF2 (120FPS is perfect for my eyes)
I wish this was true but unfortunately it's not. Yes every frame is just 1's and 0's but if the inserted frames don't match what is represented by the original frame, you are going to notice a difference. By the logic of your statement, you would be able to add random images in place of frames and get the same experience as if you were playing the game natively and that's not how it works. Its probably easier going from 30 fps to 60 fps but when you are used to playing at 60 fps or higher, you will easily feel and see the difference using a generated frame. I'm all for the software advancing and perfecting this but at the same time, game devs need to not rely on this to make their games playable and that's what we have been seeing so far. They aren't optimizing games for the hardware and we are stuck needing this stuff just to get a playable experience. Some of us are also more sensitive to framerate than others and using this stuff isn't an option right now. I get motion sickness very easily and even the refresh rate of some LED light bulbs can make me sick. So I can 100% feel and see the difference in games and after about 20 minutes of playing, I'm about to puke. It actually sucks because I would love to use this stuff in every game.
@@jmp7624 Hey bro, for the point you brought up, I agree with you 100%. FG should have been the cherry on the pie. and not some sort of escape route to cover optimization failure. This have always been the case where something is supposedly created for a reason and turns out to be a tool for something completely different, it is sad but real . . . AI is being pushed so hard to become the future, and we can either shut it down in our minds or accept all the negatives that will come out of it. Still, for someone like me who used to play at 21 fps and enjoy myself back in the day, I'm glad I can play the games I like ( which are few nowadays) at a 120 FPS now. Who knows, with time this FG might actually get better if treated properly? let's stay positive. As you know we can always set it off right 😉
The problem with afmf is that you can clearly see frames 'wobble'. Not tearing but more like the imagine is moving. Its really strange and makes it pointless. AMD still far behind as always.
@@craigtrish2011 I agree they are behind in this aspect but I wouldn't say "as always". AMD is beating Intel in every aspect, they own the APU scene and the integrated GPU's are the best on the market, and they are only behind Nvidia on the very high end of GPU's but cost significantly less. They just have too many software features they are working on and they haven't perfected any of them whereas Nvidia just focuses on a couple of features that are specific to their hardware. AMD has the better control center, they were the first to implement overclocking in the control center and Ryzen Master, they have privacy view, FreeSync has always been way better than G-Sync, and so much else that is better than the competition. The only downside to AMD is the quality of the upscaling because its not using AI, ray tracing performance (that very few actually use), and lower performance in transcoding but they are improving that too with the new codecs being adopted.
AFMF 2 = ~ 200% Fps / increased latency a bit and "tearing" or what the name was.. And FSR = ~ 160% Fps / better quality / same latence / Short : FSR is better but for games where u dont need fast response is AFMF2 a good choice
I haven't noticed where AFMF 2 has given enough latency to really have a direct impact on reaction time, at least in single player games. With my 7800 XT I'm only getting a max of 7ms latency with AFMF 2 enabled (which is FAR better than the 12+ms with AFMF 1). Now, I DID try AFMF 2 with FSR 3 enabled, and if your frame rate is already high enough, the input lag isn't super noticeable on single player, I could definitely see where it would matter in multiplayer competitive, but with a single player game, the combination works pretty well.
@@Rickety you would see it in competitive games like valorant i did use it in valo and the latency was really noticable anyway who would want to use it in competitive games i am getting 400+ fps in 4k in valo why do i need more fps even thought i wont be able to see it cause my refresh rate is maxed out at 240hz
@dragoonxgamer yeah, I probably wouldn't use it in competitive gaming, I'm more of a singleplayer gamer either way, but even those don't seem to NEED AFMF 2, it just adds a little sex appeal lol
@@wolreb9331 exactly my thoughts. It shouldn't be this close, ghosting I suspect can be fixed with possibly as early as the next update, because even afmf 1 ghosting wasn't it's main issue, it was screen tearing, jitter in motion and disabling itself. I managed to turn the cross hair off in shooters, makes Fortnite a lot more challenging 🤣. I've turned AFMF 2 on permanently, only disable it in games that have official fsr3 support. Win win in my book.
THIS is the ONLY and TRUE answer. Use FSR 3.1 FG if the game has it implemented. Use AFMF 2 if the game has not implemented FSR3.1 FG. - 1440p and 4K = Search Mode = High. - 1080p = Search Mode = Standard. AFMF 2 Performance Mode is for APU's and mobile graphics cards. Note: If you know the game will not exceed the max refresh rate of your monitor, then enable the Anti lag. If the game will exceed the max refresh rate of your monitor, then enable the Anti lag AND the Raedon Chill to cap it. It's pointless to use any of these technologies if your system can't natively run a game over 60fps. That's it.
@@nike2706 🚨📢"It's pointless to use any of these technologies if your system can't natively run a game over 60fps."📢🚨 Majorly important point to make right there! Should have flashing lights around it! If you're getting below 60fps and you try to use frame gen of any kind, it's going to look like absolute DOGWATER!
What are your thoughts on afmf2? . I watched this video in the slow 0.25 speed, and i still couldn't see a significant difference between afmf2 and fsr3.1. i would say panning the camera fsr3 is a little smoother. Fsr3 fg also deals with dense vegetational scenery a little better. However, in the ghost of Tsushima clip @03:07 in 0.25 speed when swinging the sword, afmf2 actually keeps the image together a little better, fsr3 the top of the sword actually seperated, that didn't happen with afmf2. Overall afmf2 is looking like a great alternative in games that dont support fsr3. Ive turned it on and left it on. Looking forward to more updates and official release.
@@Oleksandr2005 yes and in some instances afmf2 is better. It's not a massive difference between the two as one would imagine. Fsr3 also utilise slightly more vram, Frame time also looks a little lower with afmf2. In Spiderman, I see more tearing with fsr3, but less ghosting than afmf2. I was expecting night and day differences, remember this is afmf2 first preview release.
Fsr3 fg is certainly better and as someone said previously it feels more like real frames, mine AFMF2 doesn’t feel like the claimed fps by amd driver at all, and Redeon chill doesn’t work on my case as well, game been tested is cyberpunk 2077, not sure if it is related to my fsr3 mod
Some games with frame generation fps say like 100 but whta i see dont feel like the game is going in 100 fps, and in some game i feel like is better without activating frame generation
AFMF gets the same data as FSR FG? it's just that AFMF generates frames at the end of the render pipeline (where the frames get sent to your display if i'm not wrong), whilst FSR FG generates frames somewhere earlier in the pipeline you can actually see this is the case by moving your camera and focusing on hud elements and seeing them having some kind of warping effect whilst turning with AFMF, whilst it doesn't happen with FSR FG
Should you use afmf 2 on games with no fsr or only fsr 1 like borderlands or the outer worlds? It is better not to use afmf 2 and limit fps at a lower fps instead?
Unfortunately AFMF not working on Cloning display and FSP method also useless because its not capturing overlay. So use AMD software or Capture card Passthrough to record.
@@karldaplush the current fps the one at the top is measured by the same msi afterburner overlay on both sides, every other stat is measured by amd's overlay on both sides
@@santaman7290 You shouldn't use MSI Afterburner since AFMF2 won't be available....viewers would get the interpretation that FSR is better when its not if you are going to use Adrenalin...
Nice work! would be great include LSFG in this comparison too!
FSR3 FG better, it feels more real frames, AFMF jitters. Still AFMF usable in slow paced games and for games without FSR3 FG.
Hello! im curious here, are FSR 3.1 FG is better than AFMF2?
FSR 3.1 is better because it is implemented in game.
@@NJTechBenchmarkcan they both be used together? Fg 3.1then afmf2
@@dimintordevil7186yes
No it doesn't
1. Anyone saying I don't feel like those are real, STOP!!! every frame is a damn 101000111 at the end of the day whether it's native or generated, so keep your feelings for when touching your toes.
2. Don't look at the big numbers, check the FPS bellow which gives the real values of FPS that the monitor is actually showing.
3. AFMF2 is ALWAYS better at a +5-12%, though FSR3 is slightly better in quality and latency since it's optimized in game.
Personal Opinion, FSR3 if exists, if not → AFMF2 (120FPS is perfect for my eyes)
I wish this was true but unfortunately it's not. Yes every frame is just 1's and 0's but if the inserted frames don't match what is represented by the original frame, you are going to notice a difference. By the logic of your statement, you would be able to add random images in place of frames and get the same experience as if you were playing the game natively and that's not how it works. Its probably easier going from 30 fps to 60 fps but when you are used to playing at 60 fps or higher, you will easily feel and see the difference using a generated frame. I'm all for the software advancing and perfecting this but at the same time, game devs need to not rely on this to make their games playable and that's what we have been seeing so far. They aren't optimizing games for the hardware and we are stuck needing this stuff just to get a playable experience. Some of us are also more sensitive to framerate than others and using this stuff isn't an option right now. I get motion sickness very easily and even the refresh rate of some LED light bulbs can make me sick. So I can 100% feel and see the difference in games and after about 20 minutes of playing, I'm about to puke. It actually sucks because I would love to use this stuff in every game.
@@jmp7624 Hey bro, for the point you brought up, I agree with you 100%. FG should have been the cherry on the pie. and not some sort of escape route to cover optimization failure. This have always been the case where something is supposedly created for a reason and turns out to be a tool for something completely different, it is sad but real . . . AI is being pushed so hard to become the future, and we can either shut it down in our minds or accept all the negatives that will come out of it.
Still, for someone like me who used to play at 21 fps and enjoy myself back in the day, I'm glad I can play the games I like ( which are few nowadays) at a 120 FPS now.
Who knows, with time this FG might actually get better if treated properly? let's stay positive. As you know we can always set it off right 😉
What about latest afmf2 vs latest fs3.1 in terms quality performance latency and artifacts ty :)
The problem with afmf is that you can clearly see frames 'wobble'. Not tearing but more like the imagine is moving. Its really strange and makes it pointless. AMD still far behind as always.
@@craigtrish2011 I agree they are behind in this aspect but I wouldn't say "as always". AMD is beating Intel in every aspect, they own the APU scene and the integrated GPU's are the best on the market, and they are only behind Nvidia on the very high end of GPU's but cost significantly less. They just have too many software features they are working on and they haven't perfected any of them whereas Nvidia just focuses on a couple of features that are specific to their hardware. AMD has the better control center, they were the first to implement overclocking in the control center and Ryzen Master, they have privacy view, FreeSync has always been way better than G-Sync, and so much else that is better than the competition. The only downside to AMD is the quality of the upscaling because its not using AI, ray tracing performance (that very few actually use), and lower performance in transcoding but they are improving that too with the new codecs being adopted.
AFMF 2 = ~ 200% Fps / increased latency a bit and "tearing" or what the name was..
And
FSR = ~ 160% Fps / better quality / same latence /
Short : FSR is better but for games where u dont need fast response is AFMF2 a good choice
I haven't noticed where AFMF 2 has given enough latency to really have a direct impact on reaction time, at least in single player games. With my 7800 XT I'm only getting a max of 7ms latency with AFMF 2 enabled (which is FAR better than the 12+ms with AFMF 1). Now, I DID try AFMF 2 with FSR 3 enabled, and if your frame rate is already high enough, the input lag isn't super noticeable on single player, I could definitely see where it would matter in multiplayer competitive, but with a single player game, the combination works pretty well.
@@Rickety you would see it in competitive games like valorant
i did use it in valo and the latency was really noticable
anyway who would want to use it in competitive games
i am getting 400+ fps in 4k in valo why do i need more fps even thought i wont be able to see it cause my refresh rate is maxed out at 240hz
@dragoonxgamer yeah, I probably wouldn't use it in competitive gaming, I'm more of a singleplayer gamer either way, but even those don't seem to NEED AFMF 2, it just adds a little sex appeal lol
@@Rickety i have used it in single player game and the latency is barely noticeable
@@dragoonxgamer nobody uses frame generators in multiplayer shooters
Besides the ghosting with things moving extremely fast I am genuinely impressed with the result
@@wolreb9331 exactly my thoughts. It shouldn't be this close, ghosting I suspect can be fixed with possibly as early as the next update, because even afmf 1 ghosting wasn't it's main issue, it was screen tearing, jitter in motion and disabling itself.
I managed to turn the cross hair off in shooters, makes Fortnite a lot more challenging 🤣. I've turned AFMF 2 on permanently, only disable it in games that have official fsr3 support. Win win in my book.
AFMF is for games not using FSR FG 3.1implemented... it's pointless to use it for games optimized to FSR 3
THIS is the ONLY and TRUE answer.
Use FSR 3.1 FG if the game has it implemented.
Use AFMF 2 if the game has not implemented FSR3.1 FG.
- 1440p and 4K = Search Mode = High.
- 1080p = Search Mode = Standard.
AFMF 2 Performance Mode is for APU's and mobile graphics cards.
Note: If you know the game will not exceed the max refresh rate of your monitor, then enable the Anti lag. If the game will exceed the max refresh rate of your monitor, then enable the Anti lag AND the Raedon Chill to cap it.
It's pointless to use any of these technologies if your system can't natively run a game over 60fps.
That's it.
@@nike2706 🚨📢"It's pointless to use any of these technologies if your system can't natively run a game over 60fps."📢🚨
Majorly important point to make right there! Should have flashing lights around it! If you're getting below 60fps and you try to use frame gen of any kind, it's going to look like absolute DOGWATER!
@@nike2706 You can't have Anti-lag and Radeon Chill enabled at the same time.
Ah. Was hoping you would do one when you run both at the same time.
Well if you do in fact want to run a game at 900 fps....
In almost any scenario i tried fluid motion 2 beats to the ground amd FSR 3.1
What are your thoughts on afmf2? . I watched this video in the slow 0.25 speed, and i still couldn't see a significant difference between afmf2 and fsr3.1. i would say panning the camera fsr3 is a little smoother. Fsr3 fg also deals with dense vegetational scenery a little better. However, in the ghost of Tsushima clip @03:07 in 0.25 speed when swinging the sword, afmf2 actually keeps the image together a little better, fsr3 the top of the sword actually seperated, that didn't happen with afmf2.
Overall afmf2 is looking like a great alternative in games that dont support fsr3. Ive turned it on and left it on. Looking forward to more updates and official release.
check frame by frame at 1:10 - 1:11, FSR is way more clear
@@Oleksandr2005 yes and in some instances afmf2 is better. It's not a massive difference between the two as one would imagine. Fsr3 also utilise slightly more vram, Frame time also looks a little lower with afmf2. In Spiderman, I see more tearing with fsr3, but less ghosting than afmf2.
I was expecting night and day differences, remember this is afmf2 first preview release.
In order to see AFMF2 effect you must use the AMD software overlay
I am using amd overlay
Fsr3 fg is certainly better and as someone said previously it feels more like real frames, mine AFMF2 doesn’t feel like the claimed fps by amd driver at all, and Redeon chill doesn’t work on my case as well, game been tested is cyberpunk 2077, not sure if it is related to my fsr3 mod
Jesus christ how did people get so thick...
"not sure if it's related to my unofficial mod I've got installed"
Latency test comparison pls
Some games with frame generation fps say like 100 but whta i see dont feel like the game is going in 100 fps, and in some game i feel like is better without activating frame generation
Make sure you're using highest refresh rate in display settings or in game (exclusive fullscreen).
Same here
its because of frame generation lag, AFMF 1 was 25MS, AFMF 2 is 10MS average
FSR Framegen is better despite less frames generated it actually has Data about each frame unlike AFMF which makes it feel better
also retains more image quality
Well, the video doesn't show the real gains from the AFMF since it should be obtained from the Adrenalin Software and not from the MSI AFTERBURNER.
AFMF gets the same data as FSR FG?
it's just that AFMF generates frames at the end of the render pipeline (where the frames get sent to your display if i'm not wrong), whilst FSR FG generates frames somewhere earlier in the pipeline
you can actually see this is the case by moving your camera and focusing on hud elements and seeing them having some kind of warping effect whilst turning with AFMF, whilst it doesn't happen with FSR FG
@@Moonistic FSR has more data vs AFMF they aren't the same
If you use Fsr 3 and afmf2 together, it will exceed dlss 3.7.
U can open both of them at the same time
I wouldn't do that😅
😆 please dont !
AFMF2 not bad 👍
Can you tell me Is there's different in Quality Of Picture Or Not I mean Which one had A Best Quality Of Picture?
What ist AFMF? never heard of it
amd fluid motion frames 2 is just fg built into the rx driver software, free fps on games that support Vulkan, OpenGL, dx11/12 api
Should you use afmf 2 on games with no fsr or only fsr 1 like borderlands or the outer worlds? It is better not to use afmf 2 and limit fps at a lower fps instead?
Dude, even on league of legends the fluid frames works good. It's crazy
This two can work together 4time the frame In some game s like cyberpunk
Hi, can you please tell me what is this program that displays all the performance information
its AMD overlay.
thanks u
Wich GPU are u using for this test?
RX 7800 Xt
better fps and lower frametimes than fsr3 wow....smh i'll take the ghosting im using a 200hz monitor I wont notice it anyway !
shouldn't we add "frame gen lag" to "frame time" while calculating latency on afmf
Maybe but I don’t notice it enough to really care for it. It’s definitely less lag than vsync so I dont even care to calculate that
How i can record with amf on?
Unfortunately AFMF not working on Cloning display and FSP method also useless because its not capturing overlay. So use AMD software or Capture card Passthrough to record.
check frame by frame at 1:10 - 1:11, FSR is way more clear
The CURRENT FPS on AFMF2 is wrong...Please edit your video....
no it isn't. afmf 2 from a driver level increases the fps but doesn't show up as current fps on other overlays other than amd's own
@@santaman7290 it is there under/below CURRENT....why would you compare the two? If its not on the same overlay....
@@karldaplush the current fps the one at the top is measured by the same msi afterburner overlay on both sides, every other stat is measured by amd's overlay on both sides
@@santaman7290 You shouldn't use MSI Afterburner since AFMF2 won't be available....viewers would get the interpretation that FSR is better when its not if you are going to use Adrenalin...
Frame interpolation not working in msi afterburn
how we ınstall 3.1 for last of us part 1 pc
wait for devs to implement in game.
mod it.
@@Yuilix how download mod where
I don't think there is fsr 3.1 mod available.
can we use both at the same time?
Yes
Bro how much will be total latency
Low bro
@@jyotismanmaji6673 20ms avg