These days it's worth looking into why certain questions are asked "frequently" and if the information can be strutured better in the first place. I also suspect no one is really asking much these days, people just bounce.
FAQs are a relic of an older time than that. They date from Usenet groups & mailing lists and similar back when connectivity and storage were expensive and content would expire unless you archived it locally, so you might not know your question has been answered many many times. So FAQ posts appeared and were reposted periodically (even if there were no new updates) so new users would catch them and users that have been away for a while can easily catch up if their have been recent major changes.
They are a bit less relevant for web hosted content, where a frequently asked question implies your content needs an update or a rearrange because the information wasn't easily findable elsewhere.
Also, they have evolved from their original form and are often no longer questions that have been asked on that site but common questions that come up elsewhere, or questions that the author otherwise expects people to ask, at which point the definitely should be worked into other documentation instead IMO. Having said that, a FAQ is easier to put together, can perhaps be done by someone who doesn't have direct write access to the main documentation, and if the information is the sort of thing people should know that you don't want to waste space with to keep other information concise. In this way they can be a useful “background primer” for the relatively uninitiated without padding the main information, but that isn't _really_ a FAQ apart from the name (the name sticks because some people will look for a FAQ before looking for, for instance, a tutorial).