Yup hdr is now working, thanks amd for my free upgrade
But in all seriousness, it does work well for improving motion fluidity and is without a doubt the best FSR 3 FG experience I have tried yet even compared to the official integrations. Based on my experience with nvidias frame gen, nvidias is still quite a bit ahead but that's to be expected given their lead in time, experience and using a hardware approach.
I'll defo be using this for when my base fps is 60 but doubt I'll use it for fps lower than that (same as with nvidias frame gen except I would be willing to drop to base 50 fps for nvidias frame gen since it handles it better and the fake fps output feels/looks more like how it really would if it were native fps value)
I understand people are a little protective on their "stuff" but the tribalism around dlss is just bonkers, sure it's a good system and it works really well, but you are restricted in hardware choice which is anti-consumer, and even more so when you want to use the latest iteration of dlss which is restricted to the newest hardware only.
Now I know AMD FMF is hardware restricted (7x00 and 6x00 series only) but FSR3.0 works on everything including the nVidia 2x00 series and AMD RX 580 series cards and up which is pretty damn impressive, coupled with the fact Sony, Apple and Microsoft and many other hardware manufacturers are signed up to use AMD FSR3.0 this is only good for the consumer in the long run.
nVidia can continue to improve DLSS and lock it behind expensive purchases while the masses enjoy advanced features across multiple platforms. Look at gsync/freesync, sure gsync is better but it was so expensive in comparison freesync just won.
If you want the best and a viable option then there is no alternative but to pay up to get that better/premium experience or decide that you won't use xyz features enough to justify the extra cost. Personally AMDs FSR 2 is a no go for me so I'm effecitvely locked into nvidia now and if I wasn't then I would have to substantially sacrifice graphical settings in order to hit said fps, even if I had a 4090 level gpu (running at 3440x1440 144hz and 4k)
Ultimately I don't see this being a problem with how nvidia do things, it's how they do their business and clearly given their value and market share, it's working very well for them, they are providing a service which they own and continuously work on where as with amd, their business practice is to be open source and let the community charge on with it and realistically, the main reason they "embrace" this path is because whether we like it or not, they are always last and their solutions simply aren't as good as evidenced, it would be suicide for them as a company to try and charge and lock features down especially when the adoption rate is pretty slow, with the way amd are doing things, they don't get as much slack because "it's free [even though they advertise it on the box so it is being sold as part of the gpu package but I digress....] and everyone can use it", can you imagine what people/sites would say if they locked down features and started charging exactly the same as nvidia?
