R9 Nano Review Thread

shad0w4life said:
Faster than 980 when in a hot case..... Read the reviews
Click to expand...

After looking at a few more reviews it looks like it does trade blows with the 980 and does pull ahead in a closed system. Which is impressive given the size of the unit.

Still if I had 700 bucks to blow on a video card I for a SFF I would probably get a Fury X, and if I had a full size case I would probably pickup a 980 TI.

Its a cool card, but I don't think its anything more than a proof of concept.
 
thedocta45 said:
After looking at a few more reviews it looks like it does trade blows with the 980 and does pull ahead in a closed system. Which is impressive given the size of the unit.

Still if I had 700 bucks to blow on a video card I for a SFF I would probably get a Fury X, and if I had a full size case I would probably pickup a 980 TI.

Its a cool card, but I don't think its anything more than a proof of concept.
Click to expand...

Depends on the SFF case though. There are many that don't fit anything bigger than a 970 itx.

The only real criticism is the lack of HDMI 2.0, since this is targeted at the htpc market mostly.
 
DPI said:
So has anyone found a review where it was actually tested against an OC'd 970-ITX? That's the only question I see mattering
Click to expand...

From what I recall from a PC Guru review an OC'd 970-ITX still comes in under a 980 stock, so its probably faster than the R9 Nano.

If you want to look at a cost to performance delta the 970 ITX is probably a better buy.
 
Remon said:
Depends on the SFF case though. There are many that don't fit anything bigger than a 970 itx.

The only real criticism is the lack of HDMI 2.0, since this is targeted at the htpc market mostly.
Click to expand...

I think you would be hard pressed to find 5 SFF cases that wont fit a Fury X, and will fit a R9 Nano.

I know Lan-Li makes one.
 
Anantech review had the Nano in a controlled environment and in a smallish case.

It did well against the GTX 980 and 970 mini. It should, it cost 200-300 more dollars.

But in most all reviews was still slower by a good margin compared to GPUs of the same price, that's where the real money is, literally.

Ive read 3 reviews and they all say about the same thing.....interesting card but not for the price.
Everyone is hammering the logic that this card is a 4K- living room-SFF card, when it doesn't even have the proper connector (HDMI 2.0) for the TV it's meant to drive.

Me, if I want a SFF PC, I'm going to use a Corsair 250D case and a big PSU and a big GPU........I could use a 980Ti in that case and spend the same money for the GPU and get better performance.:D
 
Remon said:
Depends on the SFF case though. There are many that don't fit anything bigger than a 970 itx.

The only real criticism is the lack of HDMI 2.0, since this is targeted at the htpc market mostly.
Click to expand...

If you're really going for a case so small it can't fit anything other than a Nano, I don't really see the point, to be honest.

If that's the case (no pun intended), why not get something like the Zotac MAGNUS EN970? It's even more compact and has HDMI 2.0. And it looks pleasing and not fiddly. And the specs are very decent for the space.

I just don't see the point of intentionally choosing a SFF case that doesn't fit anything but tiny tiny GPUs, and for what? You'll just be at the mercy of OEMs for component choices.
 
Brent_Justice said:
...There are mATX and ITX cases that can fit full-size video cards...
Click to expand...
Everyone is talking like cases are some sort of naturally occurring phenomenon, so cards need to be designed to fit them, but really it's more that cases can only be made so small and still fit whatever hardware is popular. Thus, with smaller hgh-end cards becoming available, I have no doubt that case manufacturers will make even smaller cases suited towards those cards.

This is how the industry is moved forward, just like how MiniITX itself was the nichest of niche products when it was first created, with no cases available for it, but now it's relatively common.
 
trandoanhung1991 said:
If that's the case (no pun intended), why not get something like the Zotac MAGNUS EN970? It's even more compact and has HDMI 2.0. And it looks pleasing and not fiddly. And the specs are very decent for the space.
Click to expand...

And it's much slower.
 
thedocta45 said:
From what I recall from a PC Guru review an OC'd 970-ITX still comes in under a 980 stock, so its probably faster than the R9 Nano.

If you want to look at a cost to performance delta the 970 ITX is probably a better buy.
Click to expand...

Obviously 970-ITX is a better buy. Just curious what the performance delta actually is for that whopping extra $330 for the Nano. If it's like 5% then WTF
 
DPI said:
Obviously 970-ITX is a better buy. Just curious what the performance delta actually is for that whopping extra $330 for the Nano. If it's like 5% then WTF
Click to expand...

77408.png


5%? hahaha yeah right
 
Much better than I expected. I think that will find its niche like the Titan series.
 
wantapple said:
77408.png


5%? hahaha yeah right
Click to expand...

How long did it take you to find the cherry tree?

From the reviews I've seen, I'm not impressed. I expected the power savings to be much, much higher to justify the price. And this is from a guy that thought this card might have a market for corporate/compute loads (which hold up well, but not for the power consumption).

Edit: One thing I wanted to comment on for people who complain that it's priced the same as the Fury X. My response is, Intel does the same thing with the 6700 and the 6700t. They sell virtually the same chip, binned it, undervolted it, and downclocked it, and sold it for the same price. This card is meant for the same target audience, but those who want a high-end video card. I think complaining about this card is about as worthwhile as complaining about the 6700t.
 
Last edited:
DPI said:
Obviously 970-ITX is a better buy. Just curious what the performance delta actually is for that whopping extra $330 for the Nano. If it's like 5% then WTF
Click to expand...

The performance delta is probably around 20-30% on average based on a quick look, so that 300 bucks nets you 20-30% better performance, take into account overclocking and you might get it down to 15-25% taking into account the Nano OC advantage.

Still its 300 bucks which inflates the cost about 50% for what we could call a 25% gain on average. So if you have the money to spend, and can't fit it in the case I would get it.

Alternately, you could spend 100 bucks on a new case that could fit the 980TI or Fury X and just get one of them, or buy a 980 and break even.

The high price of the unit is really going to hamper its sales numbers.

However, the Nano chips are probably high preforming Fiji chips, so the supply is going to be more limited than the Fury X.
 
Limited time only. Nano purchasers are being gifted the following tools to get more performance out of their cards.

LobotomyTools.png


Jokes aside. Card is actually available for purchase on the egg.
 
Last edited:
The more I read, the more I'm impressed with this little card.

Now I'm curious to see what happens with this little card going single slot under water.
 
thedocta45 said:
You end up with a Fury X.
Click to expand...
He said single slot.

It wouldn't give any reasonable performance gains, but it would be worth it to get rid of the noisy air cooler. Still, that means $650 for the card and an extra $100-$200 for a water block, fittings, hose... (assuming you already have a pump, reservoir and radiator)
 
One thing so far I have not seen talked about is that Fury X at $649 is no where near 980 Ti performance, form factor aside. Therefore, Nano is even less powerful to 980 Ti, form factor aside. With the Nano being even farther apart from 980 Ti in performance, speaking strictly from a performance basis, form factor aside, it makes even less sense at the price it is asking...

Brent if we take your words (speaking strictly from a performance basis) then the 980Ti makes no sense to a 295x 2 or Crossfire 290x for $649 unless your bias to Nvidia products as I am sure two non-ref 290x's clocked at 1020mhz factory would take care of your beloved 980Ti for under $649 dollars..
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
Seriously, if this card was priced at 980 (or within 5-10% of it) I would have picked one up for FreeSync, but what's the point of saving $200 on a Freesync vs Gsync Monitor, only to spend it on a GPU that offers me the same performance?
Click to expand...

If you want a do a 3-monitor setup. Actually seeing that this card performs better than a 980 most of the time for anything above 1080 is pretty damn impressive. It also saves 81 watts off of the Fury X or anything around 290X on down. It's basically the most efficient card to do a 3 monitor set up on.

This exactly what I wanted to see. I said if it performed closer to a 980 than a 970 then it was worth it. It's worth it for niche cases when you need to fit within not only the case but want the lowest power possible without sacrificing tons of performance. I think it hits it.
 
thedocta45 said:
I think you would be hard pressed to find 5 SFF cases that wont fit a Fury X, and will fit a R9 Nano.

I know Lan-Li makes one.
Click to expand...

There's also many HTPC mATX cases that don't have space for that fan. It's not just the that though it's also power. It's a single 8 pin. There are quite a bit of HTPC cases that come with PSU's that cannot accommodate a larger card be it a 980 or a Fury X.
 
fanboy said:
One thing so far I have not seen talked about is that Fury X at $649 is no where near 980 Ti performance, form factor aside. Therefore, Nano is even less powerful to 980 Ti, form factor aside. With the Nano being even farther apart from 980 Ti in performance, speaking strictly from a performance basis, form factor aside, it makes even less sense at the price it is asking...

Brent if we take your words (speaking strictly from a performance basis) then the 980Ti makes no sense to a 295x 2 or Crossfire 290x for $649 unless your bias to Nvidia products as I am sure two non-ref 290x's clocked at 1020mhz factory would take care of your beloved 980Ti for under $649 dollars..
Click to expand...
Except a single 980 Ti is 26% faster than a 290X and only 10-15% slower than a 295X2.
 
kac77 said:
There's also many HTPC mATX cases that don't have space for that fan. It's not just the that though it's also power. It's a single 8 pin. There are quite a bit of HTPC cases that come with PSU's that cannot accommodate a larger card be it a 980 or a Fury X.
Click to expand...

Find a few of these cases.

Edit: Why even bother bringing up HTPC it only has HDMI 1.4?
 
Last edited:
fanboy said:
Brent if we take your words (speaking strictly from a performance basis) then the 980Ti makes no sense to a 295x 2 or Crossfire 290x for $649 unless your bias to Nvidia products as I am sure two non-ref 290x's clocked at 1020mhz factory would take care of your beloved 980Ti for under $649 dollars..
Click to expand...

According to number [H] got, the 295x2 wasn't that much faster than 980Ti...can you even get teh 295x2 anymore...and if you can, can you get it for $650? From most reviews, the 295x2 was faster than 290x crossfire, so my guess is that there is not a big gap between 290x Crossfire and 980 Ti
 
Last edited:
How in the world did it end up that Tom's was the only site that did a proper comparison article (including an overclocked ITX 970)?
 
HM, well im not so happy, performance is as good as i expected, but it does not tick the silent mark.

But well it was that limitedaccess guy on this forum that made me realise that 175w, is just to much.

But its a sign of things to come, but well i guess im not so happy.

It just have to need less power, and i recon we have to wait for 14/16nm,

Edit_:

I still wish you brent would understand this, you keep talking abaut the fury x can fit and so on, but its a wooping 275w And i do think 175w is to much, dam it, but that is how it is.
.
 
Last edited:
DPI said:
So has anyone found a review where it was actually tested against an OC'd 970-ITX? That's the only question I see mattering
Click to expand...
Well not really the test that matters is a review benchmarked in a closed m-itx case against a 970. See how those clocks last after an hour, it still probably be faster but yeah if you can get a 970 to hold an oc then the gap becomes small. Granted in the mitx world you can only run a single card so a halo card would be very appealing, except the lack of hdmi 2.0 makes it really weird considered the dp to hdmi adapter doesn't exist yet. Then again that's why i wouldn't oc a 970 keep the card quiet for this living room product.

Personally outside of the noise and no hdmi 2.0 what i find stupid about the product is the position of the 8 pin connector.
 
maboblivion said:
people whining the card doesn't do hdmi 2.0 for 60fps when hardocp clearly showed no single video card does 60fps @ 4k.
Click to expand...

That's your justification? Really?

How about single cards getting 40fps @ 4k in high end titles? How about games that get 60fps @ 4k? There are plenty of games that do. Rocket League does 60fps @ 4k with a single 980Ti. So do games like World of Warships. How about if you decide to use more than one card for the more demanding games? But, hey, fuck that right?

That's literally the dumbest rationalization of having an HDMI port but not using 2.0 on a card of this caliber.
 
Semantics said:
Personally outside of the noise and no hdmi 2.0 what i find stupid about the product is the position of the 8 pin connector.
Click to expand...

Why is that ?, that one is placed perfect, and that is becouse the Nano is shorter than most itx mb, and it also allows for as slim cases as the card is high.
 
I know there are smaller case then mine but I honestly don't understand where this Mini-ITX niche actually exists unless you are building a HTPC.

The specs in my signature are actually an old build but I was able to fit a Titan X in just fine.

In reality you need a case that is just longer by what 4 inches ? To what person does that matter?

All of this sounds like pure non sense to me. Especially who is going to spend $650.00 and then get a MiniITX case for $50 that can't fit other video cards?
 
Banko said:
I know there are smaller case then mine but I honestly don't understand where this Mini-ITX niche actually exists unless you are building a HTPC.

The specs in my signature are actually an old build but I was able to fit a Titan X in just fine.

In reality you need a case that is just longer by what 4 inches ? To what person does that matter?

All of this sounds like pure non sense to me. Especially who is going to spend $650.00 and then get a MiniITX case for $50 that can't fit other video cards?
Click to expand...

Well the price isnt so bad, guys like me and im not alone , has been around since the beginning of the pc era. We want it small, stylish and quiet, costs is just a thing, cases that is used are expensive as hell , same goes for psu, and well we pay a lot extra to get a fast cpu with low power. Typical for this niche is 45w.

But the Nano, is just to powerhungry. It is extreamly difficult to cool 175w in a quiet way. AMD does use a quite good cooler, but it is just not good enough,

Personaly i have to see what thoose guys that are way better than me and as fanatic as me when it comes to this niche, can they cool the Nano silently,
 
Last edited:
Snus said:
Personaly i have to see what thoose guys that are way better than me and as fanatic as me when it comes to this nice, can they cool the Nano silently,
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that kind of defeat the point of it being so small?

Only thing I could find (that isn't compatible) that is not something completely custom is:
http://www.arctic.ac/us_en/accelero-s3.html - that's only 135W and is very large compared to the Nano

I am more concerned about the coil whine issue.
 
thedocta45 said:
Find a few of these cases.

Edit: Why even bother bringing up HTPC it only has HDMI 1.4?
Click to expand...

Probably because I haven't rushed out to buy a 4K TV? You know this is really kind of stupid. You would have swore the moment that Fury debuted without HDMI 2.0 that everyone immediately ran out to buy a 4K TV (never mind that there really isn't much in the way of content for it). I don't have a single bit of media content that can take advantage of it and I just bought a 1080 TV not that long ago and have no plans in the near future for a 4K TV.

As for the cases that can't:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811154052

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811154079

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811154085

This is just top 3. Now before you respond I would suggest you look at the requirements for the Nano and something like the Fury X or even the 980 very closely before responding.
 
fanboy said:
One thing so far I have not seen talked about is that Fury X at $649 is no where near 980 Ti performance, form factor aside. Therefore, Nano is even less powerful to 980 Ti, form factor aside. With the Nano being even farther apart from 980 Ti in performance, speaking strictly from a performance basis, form factor aside, it makes even less sense at the price it is asking...

Brent if we take your words (speaking strictly from a performance basis) then the 980Ti makes no sense to a 295x 2 or Crossfire 290x for $649 unless your bias to Nvidia products as I am sure two non-ref 290x's clocked at 1020mhz factory would take care of your beloved 980Ti for under $649 dollars..
Click to expand...

A single powerful card is always better than two weaker ones. Relying on SLI or Crossfire support sounds like a nightmare to me.
 
$40 cases WITH included PSUs??? I think people who are going to spend $650 on this graphics card will be getting better cases than those...

and the PSU's in those are not even powerful enough for the Fury Nano
 
kcthebrewer said:
Wouldn't that kind of defeat the point of it being so small?

Only thing I could find (that isn't compatible) that is not something completely custom is:
http://www.arctic.ac/us_en/accelero-s3.html - that's only 135W and is very large compared to the Nano

I am more concerned about the coil whine issue.
Click to expand...

Well it kinda does, but a littel history lesson is provided bye :

limitedaccess said:
You guys should keep in mind that system and component power usage is much higher than the 8800GT days and even more so than the 9800pro days. For the longest time market demands simply focused all effiency gains in more performance. GPU power usage basically peaked only somewhat recently at the 250w-300w range for the highest end.

The 8800GT had a TDP of 105w for a card that was considered relatively to be the higher end (or at least mid-high). By comparison nowadays the GTX 960 has a 120w.

The 9800pro had a TDP of 47w. By comparison this is lower than the GTX 750 (not Ti, regular 750) which is at 55w.

Just for fun if you remember back to the FX 5800, with its terrible reputation of being extremely power hungry and noisy, that only came in at 189w. While nowadays a 175w Fury Nano or 160w (although realistically it is higher) GTX 980 are being marketed as a "lean" card.
Click to expand...

After cards needed more and more w, it got impossibel to build a small stylish and quiet rig, i was hoping the Nano would make that possibel again, coolers like u linked to was just one trick we used, preferd cases was cases like u find on http://www.quietpc.com/htpccases.

So well i need a whiskey, im not so happy right now.
 
Last edited:
kac77 said:
Probably because I haven't rushed out to buy a 4K TV? You know this is really kind of stupid. You would have swore the moment that Fury debuted without HDMI 2.0 that everyone immediately ran out to buy a 4K TV (never mind that there really isn't much in the way of content for it). I don't have a single bit of media content that can take advantage of it and I just bought a 1080 TV not that long ago and have no plans in the near future for a 4K TV.

As for the cases that can't:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811154052

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811154079

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811154085

This is just top 3. Now before you respond I would suggest you look at the requirements for the Nano and something like the Fury X or even the 980 very closely before responding.
Click to expand...

The Nano has been billed by AMD as built for 4k, if its really a HTPC card it would have had HDMI 2.0.

I am not talking about what you have in your house, I could care less if you have a 4K TV it doesn't matter.

At 1080p your going to get much of the same experience out of a 970 as you would out of a Nano.

As for the cases.

First none of those cases are all MicroATX and could probably fit any video card.

Second why are you wasting time linking 40 dollar cases with generic 300 and 250W power supplies? The Nano used over 300w as part of a test bench system on the pcper reveiw, so good luck not bricking the system.

Third you would have to be some sort of retard to spend 40 bucks on a case with a generic PSU and then spend 700 on a video card and probably 400 on a free sync monitor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top