AMD Fluid Motion Frames nearly doubles the frame rates in games, but there’s a catch – Smart Fone Video Blog

Key Takeaways

  • Gaming at native resolution is no longer necessary, as upscaling technologies like DLSS and FSR are popular among gamers for a smoother experience.
  • AMD’s Fluid Motion Frames (AFMF) is a driver-based frame generation solution that aims to improve gameplay experience by interpolating new frames for smoother gameplay.
  • AFMF is different from FSR-enabled frame generation as it can work with any DirectX 11 and 12 games and is compatible with titles that don’t have native frame generation support. However, it requires a Radeon RX 6000 or newer GPU, and there are limitations and issues that need to be addressed before it becomes a viable solution for average consumers.

Gaming at native resolution is a thing of the past now, as most gamers are taking advantage of upscaling technologies supported by their GPUs these days for a smoother experience. Existing upscaling technologies like Deep Learning Super Sampling (DLSS) and FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR) are already quite good at delivering a solid experience, but AMD is trying to step things up a bit with its driver-based frame generation solution. I say “trying” because AMD Fluid Motion Frames (AFMF) has yet to reach its final form. In fact, it’s still a ways away from being a viable solution for an average consumer.

But what exactly is Fluid Motion Frames, and how does it — if at all — improve your gaming experience? Well, I loaded AMD’s Adrenalin Edition Preview Driver for AMD Fluid Motion Frames on my PC to get the lay of the land. This is still a “Technical Preview,” meaning the tech is still in its early stages of development, and I couldn’t get answers to all my questions, but I do have a much better idea of what the hype is all about.

About this feature: AMD provided me with its Radeon RX 7700 XT GPU to test FSR 3.0 and AFMF. AMD did not see the contents of this feature before publishing.

What is AMD Fluid Motion Frames (AFMF)?

The AMD Fluid Motion Frames (AFMF) is essentially a driver-based implementation of frame generation technology that can make your gameplay experience smoother. It’s different from the frame generation technology enabled by FSR 3.0. But like regular FSR-based frame generations, AFMF doesn’t magically add more frames on the board. It essentially just interpolates a new fake/generated frame between the current and the previous frame for “smoother gameplay.”

Yes, you’ll technically see a higher number on the FPS counter, but your system still produces the same number of frames per second (sometimes even fewer) as it was without AFMF. Simply put, frame generation only makes the gameplay appear smoother on your monitor, and your system or the game isn’t seeing any boost in performance whatsoever.

AMD Fluid Motion Frames is a driver-level frame generation technology and is different from FSR 3.0-enabled frame generation.

But how is AFMF any different from the frame generation technology implemented with AMD’s FSR 3.0? Well, AMD Fluid Motion Frames interpolates the new frame without any interaction with the game itself, and this behavior is what allows it to enable frame generation in pretty much any DirectX 11 and 12 games. That’s right, AFMF isn’t tied to a few titles like AMD’s FSR 3.0, and it is even compatible with titles that don’t have native frame generation support. You will, however, need a Radeon RX 6000 or newer GPU from AMD for it to work, though. In fact, there are a few other requirements that you need to fulfill for AFMF to work, which we’ll get to in a bit.

AMD Fluid Motion Frames vs FSR-enabled Frame Generation: What’s the difference?

Typical frame generation techniques enabled by Nvidia’s DLSS and AMD’s FSR 3.0 essentially use a combination of both motion vectors from the game engine and optical flow analysis to determine the next frame and place it between two standard frames. The result of that is an “FPS boost” on the board, allowing for much smoother gameplay. In my tests with FSR 3.0 in Square Enix’s Forspoken on an RX 7700 XT GPU, frame rates jumped from 71FPS to 122FPS while playing at 1080p resolution with Ultra settings. That’s a significant improvement with Native AA FSR mode and frame generation versus a standard render with no frame generation.

FPS with (right) and without (left) AFMF in one of the scenes in Forpoken.

AMD’s driver-level frame generation implementation works similarly to regular frame generation that’s enabled by DLSS or FSR, except it can’t use motion vectors presented by the game’s graphics engine to determine where the next element would be and is hence limited to just the optical flow interpolation algorithm. The result, however, is no different from what you would get with FSR-enabled frame generation. AFMF boosted the average frames in Forspoken from 71FPS to 135FPS when rendered at 1080p with the same Ultra graphics settings. That’s almost double the frame rates on board, which is slightly higher than what you get with FSR 3.0 frame generation.

The performance boost delivered by AMD Fluid Motion Frames, however, wasn’t consistent and was only achieved with controlled settings. Let’s take a quick look at the gaming performance and the kind of experience I could get with AFMF before jumping into its requirements and limitations.

Gaming with AMD Fluid Motion Frames

Despite it being a “technical preview,” I got Fluid Motion Frames up and running pretty easily. Enabling AFMF is as simple as toggling a switch in Adrenalin software, and it works almost instantly. The driver worked very well for the most part, although there were a few occasions when it bugged out, and the Adrenalin software didn’t show up.

A screenshot showing AMD Fluid Motion Frames toggle in Adrenalin software.

AMD Fluid Motion Frames toggle within Radeon Adrenalin software.

I tried a bunch of games, including Cyberpunk 2077 (2.0 patch), Assassin’s Creed Mirage, Hogwarts Legacy, and more, and it worked as advertised to put a “higher frame count” on the board. It’s essentially just an improvement in how the games feel while playing, as opposed to an actual increase in performance, but here’s a quick look at the increase in performance I noticed with and without AFMF.


FPS without AFMF


Metro Exodus (Ultra preset)



Assassin’s Creed Mirage (Ultra High preset)



Hogwarts Legacy (Ultra preset)



Cyberpunk 2077 2.0 patch (Ultra preset)



AMD’s driver-based solution, as you can see, almost doubled the number of frames across all titles. The games, as I previously mentioned, felt better to play with smooth visuals, but I wouldn’t necessarily call it a performance improvement. In fact, I occasionally saw the original frame rates on FrameView software dip, which is to be expected since the GPU is being put to use for the extra calculations required to generate the interpolation frames.

The overall quality of the gameplay, however, was quite good, and I am also happy to report that most frame pacing and juddering issues highlighted in the initial AFMF driver release have also been fixed with a more recent release. They’re not entirely gone, but the gameplay definitely feels smoother compared to the initial version I tested a few weeks ago (on a different Radeon GPU).

An image showing two screenshots of Forspoken next to each other.

Left: Screenshot of gameplay with FSR 3.0 + Frame Generation; Right: Screenshot of gameplay with AFMF

I also tried Square Enix’s Forspoken, which is one of the two FSR 3.0-enabled titles out there right now, to see if frame generation enabled by FSR 3.0 was any better than AMD’s driver-based solution that’s more accessible to gamers, and here’s how it went.

As you can see below, the driver-based frame-generation tech ended up “adding more frames” to the board. The native AA FSR setting made the most sense to compare here to avoid taking any hit in visual fidelity. I could record 122FPS for Forspoken with the native AA FSR + frame generation setting. The same title with AFMF was able to hit 135FPS, which is only a slight but noteworthy improvement. Dropping the FSR render resolution to “Quality” mode boosted the frames to 140FPS, but I noticed a drop in the overall quality of the rendered frames compared to the ones I got with AFMF.

Upscaling/frame generation

Average FPS

1080p Native rendering (No FSR/frame generation)


FSR 3.0 “Native AA” mode without frame generation


FSR 3.0 “Native AA” mode with frame generation


AMD Fluid Motion Frames enabled (No FSR)


I wish I could do more direct FSR 3.0 frame generation and AFMF comparison, but the lack of FSR 3.0-supported titles out there right now really kept my hands tied, and I hope AMD is working with more game developers to get them on board. Both FSR-enabled frame generation and AMD Fluid Motion Frames introduce latency while gaming as you’re shown an additional interpolated frame between two original frames.

While I couldn’t capture the exact latency at the moment due to the lack of required dedicated hardware for accurate measurements, I can safely say that AMD’s Anti-Lag+ feature takes care of it for the most part, if not entirely eliminating the issue. We’re only looking at a difference of a few milliseconds of latency so that you won’t notice it casually while gaming, but I can safely say that it wasn’t high enough to affect my experience. I still won’t recommend using any frame-generation tech while playing fast-paced, competitive titles, so keep that in mind.

The games, however, were entirely unplayable with lots of frame pacing issues and latency when I enabled both FSR 3.0 frame generation and AMD Fluid Motion Frames together just for laughs. It’s not the intended use case, so I don’t recommend doing that. It’s only recommended that you either enable FSR-enabled frame generation or AFMF to see an improvement in your gaming experience.

AMD Fluid Motion Frames limitations

Before the conclusion, I’d like to highlight a few limitations that AMD has in place to ensure you can use its Fluid Motion Frames feature as intended:

  • AFMF can only add frame generation to DirectX 11 and 12 at the moment, meaning it won’t work with Vulcan, for instance.
  • You’ll also need a Radeon RX 6000 or 7000 series desktop graphics card for it.
  • AMD also says that you must run the games on fullscreen mode with HDR and VSync disabled.
  • AMD also recommends a base performance of 60FPS in games before enabling AFMF.
  • AFMF also has trouble handling the UI elements in a game, and you’ll notice artifacts and distortions while, say, panning or moving through a scene. This is particularly noticeable in the case of elements like quest markers, crosshairs, and more.
  • Currently, you can only see the FPS boost in games using AMD’s Adrenalin software overlay. Other monitoring programs, like Nvidia FrameView, MSI Afterburner, etc., only report/monitor the base FPS count. AMD appears to be aware of the current issues caused by AFMF, and that’s probably why this feature is still being served as a “technical preview” instead of shipping it with a stable driver.

Closing thoughts

It’s too early to pass a full verdict on AMD’s Fluid Motion Frames as it’s still in development and is only meant for enthusiasts who want to try the latest technology. Heck, I’d say it’s too early to pass a verdict on even FSR 3.0 frame generation technology, as we’ve only seen it in two games for now. But I like what AMD is doing here with its Fluid Motion Frames tech, as it brings frame generation to more titles, including the older ones that will never receive an in-game boost with FSR or DLSS frame generation.

It’s still a ways away from being a viable solution for an average consumer, as I previously mentioned, but it’s a step in the right direction for what appears to be a helpful feature that brings frame generation to more games with just a flick of a toggle. I’ll continue to keep an eye on AFMF advancements to see how this feature evolves over time, so stay tuned. It’ll likely be a while before AMD ships this feature as a part of a stable driver update, but you can use FSR 3.0 frame generation in the meantime, which, as we saw in Forspoken‘s performance benchmarks above, delivers a good boost in performance that’s comparable to Nvidia’s DLSS.

** (Disclaimer: This video content is intended for educational and informational purposes only) **

By smartphonejunkie