R9 Nano Review Thread

Discussion in 'AMD Flavor' started by KickAssCop, Sep 10, 2015.

  1. KickAssCop

    KickAssCop [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,561
    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2003
  2. Ocellaris

    Ocellaris Ginger @le, an alcoholic's best friend.

    Messages:
    18,802
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    *R9 Nano Fair Review Thread
     
  3. Brent_Justice

    Brent_Justice Moderator

    Messages:
    17,756
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2000
    Thank you for making this. I have read Ryan's review (pcper) so far, and will read all of them throughout today.

    A few points I will make, based on Ryan's review so far.

    Clock Range

    First, I do not see the dynamic clock speed as an issue. In our own paper launch article I spelled out that we have to think about how the dynamic clock speed works, and to not think of it as throttling. The Nano doesn't "throttle." Instead, it dynamically keeps the clock speed in a range locked to the TDP. So far, the testing I have seen, supports that fact. The range Ryan got, is what was reported to us by AMD. AMD quoted to me the range should be 800-950MHz. This is correct according to his testing. Therefore, the clock speed range is not in question.

    A sound issue

    Ryan detected a coil whine issue - http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...w/Noise-Testing-SFF-System-Build-Temperatures

    The Case Size Issue

    My question, and issue, is the fact that Fury X can fit in some of these cases AMD is targeting for Nano. There are mATX and ITX cases that can fit full-size video cards.

    The Fury X is a small video card itself however, just like the Nano, granted you need room for the rad/fan, but an mATX case will have that space, and most ITX cases will as well, cramped yes, will it work? Yes.

    I have seen ITX builds on youtube with Fury X working inside. I have seen mATX and ITX builds with full-size cards as well.

    In Ryan's own review, he admits the case he used for testing supports a Fury X and a full size PSU.

    http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...w/Noise-Testing-SFF-System-Build-Temperatures

    So my question is, why Nano when you can Fury X in the same case?

    If your answer is power, I remind you that case supports a full-size PSU, and others might as well. Even if it didn't, you could still probably find a powerful small PSU.

    Price Price Price

    Since Nano is the same price as Fury X, and you can put Fury X in most of these cases (I admit there are some that it probably won't fit in) then the price does not make sense. The Nano should be a bit cheaper.

    Performance Comparison

    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.

    The 970

    Finally, yes the small 970 is slower, but it is also a LOT cheaper. On a price vs. price comparison alone, they are not comparable.

    I will be reading more reviews now.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2015
  4. HOOfan_1

    HOOfan_1 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    503
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2009
    Sits right between a 390X and the non-X Fury. $230 and $120 more respectively. Uses less power, is cooler, but also louder.

    I don't get Tweaktown's conclusion that this makes the Fury and Fury-X pointless.

    The Nano only makes sense if you absolutely MUST have a case that doesn't support a full size GPU, meaning you don't care about wasting money.

    If your case fits a full size GPU, the Fury X, the Fury, the 980Ti the 980, and the 390X all make much more sense for the money.
     
  5. zaniix

    zaniix Gawd

    Messages:
    895
    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    I predict they will make 10 of these for the 40 total people in the world that would even consider trying to use it..

    AMD said "look what we can do" and built an okay product that almost nobody needs or wants.

    The fact that is also seems to have a coil whine just seems unfathomable considering the kinds of cases this is made for would typically be so small they are limited on sound dampening.

    Even with unlimited budget of someone elses money I would never even consider this card.
     
  6. KickAssCop

    KickAssCop [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,561
    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2003
    Here are my observations.

    1) I am impressed by the performance out of this card. I expected it to perform worse than a 980 so given that, I think packing this much performance in such a small form factor is a feat in itself.

    2) The card is noisy as sin. It is making noise higher than a 980 Ti with custom cooling and beating or matching 980 Ti reference cooling (which is also noisy as fuck all). For a quiet small PC, it is a complete deal breaker and mentioned in every review I have read.

    3) The price is ridiculous but I think that horse has been beaten to death. It is such a small market that anyone who buys this doesn't have money in their minds as a concern. I am not one of those people so for me this card is pointless to begin with.

    4) The card throttles. Whether you call it dynamic or whatever, I am never going to see the 1000 MHz advertised speed unless I overclock or set speed in AB but even then I am not guaranteed the 1000 MHz.

    5) Minor nitpick but no backplate? Seriously? Fury X gets it for 649 and Nano doesn't. lol

    AMD PR was unnecessarily idiotic is my observation.

    My verdict. Decent card for custom PC builders. For everyone else, they need their brains checked before they shell out the cash. If the fan were silent, I would even say that the 649 tag MAY be justified in a nice small box next to my 4K TV. Oh wai... that only has HDMI input.
     
  7. Brent_Justice

    Brent_Justice Moderator

    Messages:
    17,756
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2000
    The no HDMI 2.0 part is a very important fact considering the market this card is aiming at. More so than Fury X or Fury.

    Granted there is a supposed adapter for DP to make that happen, but I haven't seen one yet.
     
  8. Brent_Justice

    Brent_Justice Moderator

    Messages:
    17,756
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2000
    The problem there is really a marketing issue, AMD markets the clock speed wrong. Instead of an "Up To" clock AMD should state a Base clock like NVIDIA. In that case, anything above the base clock would be considered a boost clock.

    For example, saying the Nano has an 800MHz base clock, then in testing you get 825MHz and upwards, you would see it as and think of it as boosting beyond the base clock, just like NVIDIA GPU Boost. NV was smart when it created GPU Boost, it is the perfect way to think about the clock speed. AMD's description is always going to make you think it is throttling under the advertised speed.
     
  9. Flopper

    Flopper [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,642
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    The KING of small factor builds.
    Best card performance in the small factor market.
    Godlike.

    When is the Hardocp review out? oh you guys didnt do fair reviews and Kyle has beef with AMD guys, sry forgot. But I dont care about what Kyle or Brent thinks anyhow or what reviews they do anyhow and that is why I write this to just clarify I dont care about that at all. :)
     
  10. Ocellaris

    Ocellaris Ginger @le, an alcoholic's best friend.

    Messages:
    18,802
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Fixed.
     
  11. HOOfan_1

    HOOfan_1 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    503
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2009
    The Small Form Factor Market has decided to build cases that fit full size cards.

    AMD has built a Tech Demo that they are offering up for sale. It only fits the niche of SFF builds that don't support full sized cards, in the niche of people that want SFF cases.
     
  12. Brent_Justice

    Brent_Justice Moderator

    Messages:
    17,756
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2000
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2015
  13. Remon

    Remon Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    352
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2014
    So, now that we know it performs very well, it's the size (which was already known) that is wrong...
     
  14. SilverSliver

    SilverSliver Beat It To Deformation

    Messages:
    11,117
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    This is not 2002 where small form factor cases were shite and didn't fit any real video cards. This is 2015. Plenty of good SFF cases have been made that accommodate full length cards and even WC loops. With no HDMI 2.0, tremendous amount of noise for a SFF HTPC type build and the stupid price - what was AMD thinking? What was the market for this?
     
  15. demingo

    demingo Trump is My President!

    Messages:
    2,703
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    One of the major flaws I see with these reviews is they all test the card in a rather large case (for a SSF).

    This brings two issues:

    #1. It opens up comparisons to full size cards, which makes the Nano look to be significantly overpriced.

    #2. It does not properly test the "target" for the Nano. If it is intended to truly function in tiny cases where a full size card would not fit, I want it tested in such a small space to see how it handles heat. I think you might end up seeing some serious throttling if you actually put it in a case where you need something that small.
     
  16. shad0w4life

    shad0w4life Gawd

    Messages:
    690
    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Guru mde sure to use a really hot case. And it showed it beating a 980 quite easily which is neat. So not sure how these oc'ed 970s are going to do but 980 is pretty lackluster if there's any heat.
     
  17. Digital Viper-X-

    Digital Viper-X- [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,691
    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2000
    What i find interesting is how much power they can save with dynamically clocking the card, without losing too much performance.
     
  18. Brent_Justice

    Brent_Justice Moderator

    Messages:
    17,756
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2000
  19. cyclone3d

    cyclone3d [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,007
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Looked at a few of the reviews..

    Really bad coil whine is still not enough of a factor to not give it a high "award"???

    All they had to do to get rid of the coil whine was better coils or stick some dampening glue on the coils. At the price point this thing should have had absolutely no coil whine.

    One thing I will say is that even my 7970s have a bit of coil whine, but only when running 3dmark in a few lower tests that get 1600+ fps. I cannot imagine having a system that makes that noise while gaming.

    Oh.. and the vrm temps on the back of the board???? :eek:
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2015
  20. DeadSkull

    DeadSkull [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,482
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    Wow....this card is a beast in some titles. Nano needs a water AIO STAT !!!!!

    I can see why it's so expensive, AMD must have culled some of the best Fury chips for the R9 Nano.


    THIS THING OVERCLOCKS??!!

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2015
  21. thedocta45

    thedocta45 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,325
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Well as bunch of reviews, and the verdict is in.

    Generally slower than a 980 and faster than a 970.

    100 bucks more than a 980 and 300 more than a 970.

    And judging by the Fury X market we can expect the price to jump 100 to 150 if it sells as well as the Fury X.

    That being said AMD has some serious balls releasing a tech demo/proof of concept card into the retail channel.
     
  22. demingo

    demingo Trump is My President!

    Messages:
    2,703
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    I don't trust the Guru review one bit. They never once mention what case they used for testing and the only picture of the card in case they have up is massive.

    http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_nano_review,12.html

    If that's what they consider the target case for this card they are out of their minds. That thing would fit a full size card easily and get much better performance for the dollar.

    I stand by my statement of not seeing single review where the form factor of the card was necessary.
     
  23. HOOfan_1

    HOOfan_1 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    503
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2009
    It performs very well for a $430 card...but they are charging $650 for it, so it is the price that is the problem.

    The mention of SFF cases fitting full sized cards is merely pointing out that the small size of the card is basically not a relevant excuse for spending $650 on a card that performs no better than a $430 card.
     
  24. zaniix

    zaniix Gawd

    Messages:
    895
    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    I agree. I know the PCper guys seemed confused as to the purpose of this card on the first podcast where they previewed it.

    I know some people like small cases, but we have so many options that can fit a normal sized card. You can't praise them for building something we do not want or need. I am tired of hearing how it is amazing they put so much power in such a small card because it doesn't matter.
     
  25. demingo

    demingo Trump is My President!

    Messages:
    2,703
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    My one request for the potential future [H] review would be that they throw it in a case small enough to not be able to fit a full size card or even a Fury X. I'm really curious to see how it handles heat and power draw in the form factor it's aimed at.
     
  26. demingo

    demingo Trump is My President!

    Messages:
    2,703
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    See, I was really looking forward to this card. I want to build a tiny PC about the size of a gaming console to stick in my entertainment center. I had hoped this card could fit that build well as it would give me the size/power I want to get great image quality out of a small form factor. AMD really botched this launch and it seems they picked review sites who weren't willing to test the thermal limits in such a small enclosure.
     
  27. DeadSkull

    DeadSkull [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,482
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    You haven't seen TomsHardware review then. Toms' put the Nano in a closed case for core clocks and temperature testing.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-nano,4285-10.html
     
  28. Yakk

    Yakk [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,811
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2010
    The first thing that comes to mind for me is a refreshed MacPRO with Dual Fiji cards. Seems like the perfect fit! Price can pretty much be whatever, and a big missed marketing opportunity lost for AMD.

    Nice little card, it creates a lot of build possibilities. The price... Well it's not a price of consider buying no matter what the performance is. And frankly if supply is as limited as the Fury X, I'd expect the price to climb even higher.
     
  29. demingo

    demingo Trump is My President!

    Messages:
    2,703
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    #1. Tom's shows significant clock drops in the closed case

    #2. The comparison benchmark data was taken from the open air test bench run, not the closed care real world.


    I'm not sure why people are having such a difficult time understanding that performance inside a closed case that is heated up can differ from an open air test bench.
     
  30. SilverSliver

    SilverSliver Beat It To Deformation

    Messages:
    11,117
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    What makes me laugh is the editors choice award, despite them admitting it's overpriced, has loud coils, loud fan and can't even do the 4k/60hz living room that a SFF PC like this is targeting.

    Is it small and relatively fast? Sure. It fails every other metric, though.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2015
  31. Flopper

    Flopper [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,642
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Fixed it for ya :D
     
  32. shad0w4life

    shad0w4life Gawd

    Messages:
    690
    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Faster than 980 when in a hot case..... Read the reviews
     
  33. linuxdude9

    linuxdude9 Gawd

    Messages:
    597
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2004
    So if you raise the powertune on this card, I assume it will stick to 1000mhz as long as you can cool it, np?
     
  34. Digital Viper-X-

    Digital Viper-X- [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,691
    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2000
    generally, at 1080p, it is on par or slower than a 980, and in most cases that are higher resolution than 1080p, it is faster than the 980 by a good 10% or so (with a few exceptions) .

    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?
     
  35. Armenius

    Armenius I Drive Myself to the [H]ospital

    Messages:
    17,902
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    So it is a decent card that is priced out of its market segment like everyone has been arguing? Color me surprised :rolleyes:. Would probably be a good buy if it was priced around $450 US, small nagging issues aside.
     
  36. zaniix

    zaniix Gawd

    Messages:
    895
    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    I don't know the answer to your question, but if you had the room to cool it, what would be the point of having it? It only makes sense if it is in a case so small you can't use anything else in which case your cooling ability is going to be seriously limited
     
  37. spintroniX

    spintroniX Gawd

    Messages:
    958
    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    it seems like the card packs quite a wallop for such a small size... but dat price doe

    if AMD dropped prices on the Fury line by 50 - 100 i'd be all over it, but NOOOOOOO
     
  38. drklu

    drklu 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,178
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2013
    Yeah pretty unfortunate they limited their potential customer base with the price. I'm sure a lot of people would be all over this thing if it was around the ~$500 mark. Now only people who must have a card this size and want most of the power will be picking this card.
     
  39. DrakonSan

    DrakonSan Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    339
    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    They already have that. It's called the Fury X. It costs the same and offers better performance. The Fury X even fits in most high end enthusiast SFF cases. SFF gaming evolved to incorporate 500w+ PSUs and full sized GPUs while reducing total volume. This product is a year late

    I wanted this to be so much more competitive. I'm waiting for AMDs Zen/DDR4 offerings before my next upgrade and this has me looking to green and blue more and more.
     
  40. DPI

    DPI Nitpick Police

    Messages:
    10,956
    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2013
    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