AMD

Not every game is affected. Just try for yourself leaving the FPS uncapped and check if the game has frame pacing issues like stutter, tearing or extreme input lag. Normally when the game does not reach your monitor limits without AFMF, then you don't need to limit it. Remember that AFMF frames are interpolated, and do not come from the game engine rendering pipeline.

It's.....kind of a nonthing burger to limit fps as i have also tried it extensively on a 165hz monitor.

If you are getting about 90-100 fps then just playing without it will give you a better experience because the latency is lower, at least for me it's very noticable.If you are around 60-70 fps then it does offer value but you don't really have to cap fps as you should always stay within the monitor range and VRR also works. Games with framepacing problems or microstutters are a no-no, in those cases AFMF will only make the stutters more apparent.

The way i see it AFMF truly is great if you have a 240hz monitor and your PC can ouput 100 fps average on a game. Then you use frame generation to make the game extremely smooth at over 200 fps without having to put up with latency, if the base framerate is high enough then the latency hit is abysmal.

Nobody answering the question, but yes keep it roughly around 1/2 refresh rate if you want 0 tearing. But keep in mind, that by keeping it unlocked and going above refresh rate, you're reducing the latency.

​

For example:

110 fps cap --> 220 (with minimal visible tearing) = less latency

80 fps cap --> 160 (with 0 tearing) = bit more latency

​

So it's up to what you value more really.

If I were you, I'd cap my fps around 90~100, because that FPS feels quite responsive already and the FPS overhead isn't big enough to cause too much visible tearing.

I thought you cannot lock fps while AFMF is active

Unless fsr3 FG, AFMF gonna work with VRR its useless