Sunday, July 12th 2026
AMD FSR Multi-Frame Generation With Up to 8x Mode in Development
AMD has reportedly been testing a new and highly anticipated FSR multi-frame generation (MFG) technology for its Radeon RX GPUs. This information comes from a third-party software called RadeonTuner, which allows access to Radeon driver settings without using the AMD Software: Adrenalin Edition application. RadeonTuner has revealed that AMD is already incorporating preliminary support for multi-frame generation into its Radeon drivers, though the feature remains hidden until the software is finalized. According to the tool's developer, AMD often places placeholders for features like this well in advance of their release, indicating that the company is extensively testing the multi-frame generation feature with options for 1x to 8x variants, which are expected to be available once the feature is fully developed.
One user attempted to enable the multi-frame generation feature using the latest driver installation and a Radeon RX 9060 XT graphics card to see if it could work with any game. However, the user discovered that the feature is currently non-functional, as AMD has not yet released the necessary model to support multi-frame generation at any setting. This suggests that only the placeholder for the feature has been included, with no underlying driver support to make it operational. Even when testing games that frequently receive FSR updates, such as Forza Horizon 6, Pragmata, Resident Evil 9, Crimson Desert, and Death Stranding 2, the feature could not be activated. It seems we are still months away from the final release of multi-frame generation support.
It's worth noting that AMD is late to the MFG game, as NVIDIA has already released its DLSS Dynamic MFG feature with up to 6x generation capability, and Intel has been offering XeSS MFG with a 4x setting for several months as part of the XeSS 3 release. Additionally, AMD GPUs currently lack hardware-based flip metering for frame pacing, relying instead on software pacing to maintain consistent frame generation. Therefore, it makes sense for MFG to be included in the current Radeon RX 9000 series and potentially in future RDNA 5 / UDNA GPU IP if they incorporate dedicated hardware-based flip metering for frame pacing.
Sources:
Chiphell, RadeonTuner
One user attempted to enable the multi-frame generation feature using the latest driver installation and a Radeon RX 9060 XT graphics card to see if it could work with any game. However, the user discovered that the feature is currently non-functional, as AMD has not yet released the necessary model to support multi-frame generation at any setting. This suggests that only the placeholder for the feature has been included, with no underlying driver support to make it operational. Even when testing games that frequently receive FSR updates, such as Forza Horizon 6, Pragmata, Resident Evil 9, Crimson Desert, and Death Stranding 2, the feature could not be activated. It seems we are still months away from the final release of multi-frame generation support.
78 Comments on AMD FSR Multi-Frame Generation With Up to 8x Mode in Development
It's sad to see AMD copy yet another useless Nvidia feature instead of making something truly unique to Radeon.
Taking DLSS MFG with a native FPS of around 120 as an example, a 2x increase adds 2ms, and then each additional 1x adds around 1ms of latency, native FPS drop. This means that the latency from FG itself barely exists, and the latency is almost entirely caused by the decrease in native FPS.
the total system latency will be reduced due to reflex, further offsetting the non-FG latency advantage. Comparing mfg 3x 180fps to native 180fps, the latency increases by 13ms, while the latency difference caused by the gap in native frame rates is 10ms, so the extra latency brought by 60fps input and mfg 3x output is 3-4ms.
Reflex plays an important role, so even though MFG relies on calculating the next frame and is expected to bring 16.7ms of latency at 60fps, the actual latency of MFG is far below this value.
Although MFG introduces some latency, DLSS slashes latency significantly, leading to an overall reduction in latency. Without these technologies, you could not play AAA RT at 4k 240hz. Visual quality, resolution, and smoothness have all improved compared to the past, and latency is also lower than before.
I would greatly prefer to drop resolution and setting for real frame.
60 FPS will probably still be the main target, so frame gen would definitely be useful on 120 Hz screens (and HDMI 2.2 with 240 Hz support should be out by then).
Where it does seem to add value is if you're playing single player games where responsiveness isn't prioritised, or enabling RT or running 4K where rendering every frame natively is massively demanding. I guess FG/MFG has its uses, as long as you're happy to live with the trade offs. A mate of mine runs a high refresh rate 4K tele and he's proper into RPGs/story driven titles. According to him, FG can work really well in some titles as long as the FG implementation is on point. Other titles still have pretty poor FG support and you can end up with visual artefacts, judder/stutter, etc... the sort of stuff that breaks the immersion. Me personally, I'm still smooth sailing at native in all types of games.
I don't mind FG as another tool in the toolbox. Thats all it should be, a tool! The issue was never the tech but the marketing fluff that came with it. It shouldn't be used to make small native performance gains look like front page massive generational jumps or definitely not to justify significantly higher GPU prices. If that sort of marketing works on the mainstream market, you can bet it will further reduce the pressure to deliver proper native perf with future Generations. Imagine that convo with some average joe and his mate dave popping into his local store with the sales guy saying "yes sir, you read that correctly, these new cards are 8x faster"... Joe and Dave would lose their butter chucking minds lol.
In my example earlier with LSFG 4x for emulation locked at 30, it's only a positive (presuming no distracting artefacts, which is my experience), as you can't increase the framerate / lower the latency, so the game feels identical while looking 4x smoother.
These features certainly have utility, can be used with effectively no downside, and of course are always optional anyway.
Who wouldn't just desire more base FPS, of course that's what everyone would want, I'd still rather have FG tech as an option in the menu rather than not.
Please, leave me alone.
While I fully respect your opinion, please excuse me if I also wish to express mine. Will you let me? Please? :)
Secondly, I don't think that 120 FPS only exists for lower latency. I agree that it is a major point, but smoothness contributes hugely to a game's experience too. If I could have 60 FPS or 120 FPS (with no other changes to latency or image stability) then I would pick 120 every time.
EDIT: I accidentally said lower when I meant higher.
FG is a complicated business, as it depends on what you want to do with it.
A fast-paced game where the game has to react instantly, or a more relaxed approach where a tenth of a second doesn’t matter?
Or even a film or animation, where everything is ‘pre-programmed’ and you can’t ‘feel’ any difference at all at more than 30 fps.
I think we can all agree that FG has its uses, just not in situations where every millisecond counts. Every frame that gets ‘squeezed in’ is one that delays my response and makes the gameplay feel sluggish.
However, if I’m happy with the response at 30–60 FPS, why not make use of the technology?
That said, it would be far more interesting to keep the FPS (more) constant – in other words, an average of 120 FPS without the usual outliers in the 1% range from 60 to 180 FPS. Which can sometimes feel like stuttering.
It would have been better if the industry had been steered into a more positive direction in terms of graphics and technological advancements over these "fake frames."
And smoothness is good, I just (personal opinion) think the responsive controls is the bigger gain. Even stuff like rpgs, menus are just much faster. I have gotten addicted to 120 fps rendered. Plus, the artifiacts defeat the purpose of smoothness.
Anything that is optional, by default doesn't bother me. But when I see Lego Batman putting FG as part of requirements.. plus seeing how well Monster Hunter Wilds and BL4 perform. DLSS might be a curse because developers will just phone it in.