discussion The R9 Nano Performance Review Comment Thread

['47 Knucklehead]

Spot on review, as usual, guys!

You even dug down into details that I pay attention to (and judging from some of the comments over at "that other place", are totally missed by them) ... like HDCP 2.2 and 8-pin power.

:thumb:


It's a good card, but given some of the features that it lacks, it is too expensive. If it had those features, then maybe you could justify its price. But regardless, from where I stand, it's a card that has an amazing form factor that just isn't needed given the current state of cases and power supplies out there.

Having said all that, I will restate what I've said before. The whole Fiji line of cards pretty much just showcases what is possible with HBM and what will be possibly the form factor, power, and thermal of the next release of cards in 2016 ... from both AMD (or should I say RTG ... Radeon Technology Group) and nVidia.

 

[Squeetard]

Gah, why use a full fledged fury chip only to have to throttle it half to death? Me thinks they could have saved users some money by taking lesser binned chips and parking a few things for the power savings and kept the performance the same.

 

[Dave Baumann]

The static leakage component of 28nm is sizable so disabling units doesn't necessarily save that much power. This configuration comes out as better perf/w and hence better overall performance for a Nano like solution.

 

[10e]

Outside of the price and the coil whine it is a very compelling card. If it were $50-$100 cheaper it would be very tasty.

I am curious to see what it's like in the real world, and how supply will flesh out too. Trying to supply higher quality binned ASICS is very sensitive to production refinements, so I think until some revisions are done, retail/e-tail supply will be rather sparse.

For me the regular R9 Fury X is more than small enough, and being a water cooler lover type I would just get a block for it and spec out my radiators and fans to handle the extra TDP from the card.

Great review SKY.

 

[Squeetard]

The static leakage component of 28nm is sizable so disabling units doesn't necessarily save that much power. This configuration comes out as better perf/w and hence better overall performance for a Nano like solution.

Fair enough, but I'm talking perf/$. Those are binned fury chips are they not?

 

[dARqSyDE]

$650USD and I even included a Canadian equivalent this time ~$1000 *golf clap*

Actually, both NCIX(Canada) and CC both have the Nano on preorder at 890-900.

Still...yeaarrrgh....dat price.

 

[SKYMTL]

Gah, why use a full fledged fury chip only to have to throttle it half to death? Me thinks they could have saved users some money by taking lesser binned chips and parking a few things for the power savings and kept the performance the same.

There will always be sacrifices. For example, look at what happens when disabling parts of the chip on the Fury in GTA. Even though the Nano operates at substantially lower clocks in that game, the two cards run neck and neck. Regardless of how many items are disabled, the fact remains that the die itself doesn't "shrink" and even disabled parts can still contribute to, as Dave says, static leakage.

 

[SKYMTL]

Woooooo!

Search results for r9 nano - NCIX.com

Canada Computers | Computers, Computer Parts, Computer Componets, Hardware & Accessories

 

[Fudd Rucker]

Given this trend.. low end cards will be starting at 300$ in the next few years..

 

[SKYMTL]

For anyone interested I posted our video review in the first page of the written review.