Former AMD FSR Lead Fuels Fresh Questions Over RDNA 2 and RDNA 3 Support as FSR 4 Remains Locked to RX 9000
AMD’s handling of FSR 4 support on older Radeon generations is once again under the spotlight after former FSR lead Colin Riley responded to a question with a meme implying he could not openly explain the situation. In the exchange shared on X, Riley replied with the familiar “big trouble” reaction image when asked why FSR 4 still does not officially run on RDNA 2 and RDNA 3 cards. On its own, that does not confirm a technical or business reason, but it does add fuel to a debate AMD has never clearly resolved in public. Riley’s X profile identifies him as an “Ex FSR Lead at AMD” who shipped FSR 2, FSR 3, and FSR 4.
— Colin Riley 🎗 (@domipheus) April 22, 2026
What is officially confirmed is that AMD still positions FSR 4 as an RX 9000 series feature. AMD’s own FSR page says its machine learning based FSR upscaling is available exclusively on Radeon RX 9000 series graphics cards, and the original Adrenalin 25.3.1 release notes were even more explicit, stating that support for FSR 4 was exclusive to Radeon RX 9070 series cards at launch. AMD later expanded FSR 4.1 through newer drivers, but continued to frame that support around RX 9000 series GPUs rather than RDNA 2 or RDNA 3 products.
That exclusivity is exactly why users keep pushing the issue. Radeon RX 6000 and RX 7000 owners have spent months asking why AMD has not enabled any official FSR 4 path for earlier RDNA generations, especially since community workarounds and modding tools have repeatedly suggested at least partial functionality is possible. OptiScaler community pages and related reports show ongoing experimentation with FSR 4 on RDNA 3 and even RDNA 2 in unofficial setups, including references to INT8 paths and compatibility workarounds. None of that is the same as official AMD support, but it does explain why the silence has become more frustrating for Radeon users.
This is where the comparison with NVIDIA keeps resurfacing. NVIDIA has generally kept newer DLSS revisions available across multiple older RTX generations, even when the most advanced features remain limited by hardware. AMD, by contrast, has drawn a much harder line around FSR 4 and RX 9000 series cards. That may be due to quality targets, support burden, product positioning, performance consistency, or some internal combination of all 4, but AMD has not publicly provided a clear explanation. Riley’s meme post does not answer the question, yet it strongly suggests there is an answer he does not feel free to share.
From a market perspective, this has become a messaging problem as much as a technology problem. Even if AMD has valid reasons for restricting official FSR 4 support, the lack of direct communication is creating a vacuum that gets filled by workarounds, speculation, and frustration. That is especially risky because RDNA 2 and RDNA 3 still represent a large active install base, and many of those users are exactly the kind of enthusiasts who follow image quality improvements closely and notice when new features appear artificially gated.
For now, the clearest factual picture is simple. AMD officially supports FSR 4 and FSR 4.1 on RX 9000 series hardware. Unofficial community methods continue to show some level of functionality on older Radeon cards. And a former AMD FSR lead has now responded to the question in a way that implies the real reason is sensitive enough that he would rather not state it outright. That does not prove wrongdoing or deliberate market manipulation, but it absolutely keeps the controversy alive.
If AMD wants to put this issue to rest, the company likely needs to do something it has avoided so far: explain clearly whether RDNA 2 and RDNA 3 are technically unsuitable for official FSR 4 support, or whether the restriction is mainly a product strategy decision.
Do you think AMD should officially bring FSR 4 to RDNA 2 and RDNA 3 even as an experimental mode, or keep it exclusive to RX 9000 if that is the only way to guarantee quality?
