• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Radeon Nano thread

bru said:
Allowed the PCB to be smaller, which the Nano certainly is considering the size of the actual GPU.
Click to expand...

This.

Back to your past on the mini 970 if a 980 chip can go on one of those without causing heat of power issues then why not. I don't think nvidia will do it tho.
 
I don't think they would do it either, I mean with the performance of the 970 being so close to the 980 anyway, for the niche market these cards are for the currant 970 mini's fit the bill nicely.
 
I think the Fury-Nano will be a significantly faster card than the GTX 970 with a 175 Watt TDP, there is an apparent leak in here somewhere that have it pulling 160 Watts in Heaven 4.

I think Boom Posted it.
 
humbug said:
I think the Fury-Nano will be a significantly faster card than the GTX 970 with a 175 Watt TDP, there is an apparent leak in here somewhere that have it pulling 160 Watts in Heaven 4.

I think Boom Posted it.
Click to expand...

But faster in FPS or FPI. :p:D:p

In all seriousness, I would expect it to be faster than the 970 and 390, but it might very well have trouble against the 980 and 390x. I just can't get over the leaks being at 4K, I mean its no surprise as that is where the architecture really excels and it really does. But the Nano is billed as a HTPC, that means 4K TV's with HDMI 2.0.

For gods sake and ours, AMD get yourselves together.
 
bru said:
But faster in FPS or FPI. :p:D:p

In all seriousness, I would expect it to be faster than the 970 and 390, but it might very well have trouble against the 980 and 390x. I just can't get over the leaks being at 4K, I mean its no surprise as that is where the architecture really excels and it really does. But the Nano is billed as a HTPC, that means 4K TV's with HDMI 2.0.

For gods sake and ours, AMD get yourselves together.
Click to expand...

Given what we know about Fiji it is a little concerning these test were done at 4K.

But you know what, if its at least as fast as 390X/980 at 1440P it has my interest at the right price.
 
LoadsaMoney said:
390s smash em as well, and going by your prices, even they will be cheaper, and have more vram.

Overclocked 390X with 8GB vram, £360

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-361-SP

How the hell is the slower Nano going to sell at £379 and up, and with less vram. :confused:
Click to expand...

Like the name suggests I'd imagine the small form factor will be its selling point, it's an area that AMD haven't been very good at so far. 390X performance in a tiny/cooler running package will have a market, if anything it's the standard Fury that is a bit pointless compared to 390X.
 
Last edited:
RavenXXX2 said:
Why superstar? Because it's small. Yes gaming enthusiasts crave tiny cards with average performance, if anything it's a niche card for those that want sff and will be priced as such. This thing will be doa over £400.
Click to expand...

Who cares about g.e biggest market is mid kinda range and also people are moving to smaller cases so nano with proper pricing and availability can have huge sales
 
Martini1991 said:
It's your money, but seems like an absolutely pointless move, may's well upgrade your CPU end.
Click to expand...

I am thinking about finally going Intel but i can't afford to do Motherboard + CPU + GPU and i get the feeling the GPU isn't going to last until 16nm GPU's.
 
humbug said:
I am thinking about finally going Intel but i can't afford to do Motherboard + CPU + GPU and i get the feeling the GPU isn't going to last until 16nm GPU's.
Click to expand...

Then Fury Nano's not going to help it last if we're expecting performance parity with your already existing card :p
Fury Nano's going to be at the very least 350 quid (At a complete guess)
 
I have one of those Asus ITX 970s, it does not have heat issues, overclocks well and performs similar to a full size GTX 780 with a triple fan cooler

A R9 390 can beat this card however, so a 390X would beat it by far, so if the Fury Nano can beat a 390X then it would beat my card by a significant amount.

However, a Fury X has been shown to fit inside mini itx cases and perform well in that situation.
 
Martini1991 said:
Then Fury Nano's not going to help it last if we're expecting performance parity with your already existing card :p
Fury Nano's going to be at the very least 350 quid (At a complete guess)
Click to expand...

I can't just hope this one lasts into late 2016, i doubt it will
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom