AMD begins to ship Radeon R9 Nano to partners, images hit the web

[humbug]

All I meant was with my comment, is that Im not so sure if you consider the overall package that a 290x is faster than a 970.

You have to factor in, Nvidia driver support over the last 6-9 months HAS been far superior to the 290x. The 970 is far newer. Game Works titles etc etc etc.

At around 1080p too the 970 is the faster card.

Even a 390 @1200 beats a 970 @1400+. Since a 390x > 970 the advantage will stretch. Just compare the 970 to the 390x reviews which is basically a 290x on the latest drivers.

This ^^^

The 390 and there in the 290 is faster, never-mind the 290X / 390X

At 1440P the performance of the 390X is the same as the GTX 980.

 

[mururoa]

This ^^^ At 1440P the performance of the 390... overclocked well ahead in most games[/QUOTE]

 

[humbug]

No it's not, not even vs. reference GTX 980 at stock. Overclock vs. overclock, it's upwards from 10% slower, a lot more in some titles.

http://m.hardocp.com/article/2015/0...x_gaming_8g_overclocking_review/#.VbQfSHBpurU

[H] are pretty useless these days, or at least they pretend to be a bit dumb, they talk about overclocking and not going too high because of TDP limits not knowing that AMD's GPU's have a +50% powerplay for LN2 benching. they have no idea about what they are doing and never overclock AMD GPU's properly. 1.25v is pathetic, thats stock on my factory OC'ed 290, try 1.3 or higher.

They are also using 5 Games, 3 of of which are Nvidia titles, 4 of the games are known to favour Nvidia some heavily.
i use [H] to see where the few games AMD do worst in are. they always deliver for that question.

Despite all this there isn't all that much in it, Considering the low clocks on the Gaming, the 1515Mhz clocks on the 980 and a list of games in which the results lean toward Nvidia skewing it in its favour the 390X did incredibly well, i didn't think would be as quite fast as the 980 OC vs OC in an even balance of about 15 Games +

I'm not so sure now, i think it might just be

 

[Tute]

Not to be unkind to AMD, because I always like to support the underdog. But.. If this is priced higher much higher than a GTX 970, what is the point? Yeah HBM is nice, but if the performance doesn't beat the competition, how can it occupy higher price points and expect to sell?

I think AMD's new stack is decent, from the 380, 390, 390X Fury and Fury X, but the pricing is all wrong. I guess if stock had been plentiful pricing might have settled a bit lower by now, but at current pricing, doesn't Nvidia seem the better option?

I.e:

Fury X at over £500, against ref and custom cooled GTX 980 Ti's from £499 with a game. Mini ITX GTX 970 from £250 plus game, even with the gimped memory it still has good performance for it's price. what if Nano comes in at £300 or worse closer to £400? Where does it fit in the stack..

I totally agree with you, it seems to me like AMD are trying to hike prices based purely on "BUT OMG YOU GET HBM MEMORY YEAH" despite the fact that benchmarks indicate that NVidia seem to be winning the price/performance war.

I'm still hoping someone at AMD HQ has an epiphany and hacks some money off to make their cards more competitive but I can't see it until 20/16nm.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

If you want a powerhouse SFF pc get the FuryX as it isn't exactly a big card in itself (just under 8 inches with the power cables on the top, opposed to the Nano at 6 inches with the power cable on the back.)

The 950 is a good shout for the HTPC crowd, it could be a right stonking card for HTPC use, although in a different performance bracket entirely.

I was just browsing the Anandtech forums now and noticed this post made yesterday:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37583963&postcount=34

GM200 does not have GM206's fixed function HEVC 8/10bit hardware decoder.

http://us.download.nvidia.com/XFree86/Linux-x86/352.21/README/supportedchips.html

GeForce GTX 960 1401 F

GeForce GTX TITAN X 17C2 E
GeForce GTX 980 Ti 17C8 E

As you can see, GM206 is Feature Set F while GM200 is Feature Set E like GM107 and GM204.

http://us.download.nvidia.com/XFree...vdpausupport.html#vdpau-implementation-limits

VDPAU Feature Set F

GPUs with VDPAU feature set F support all of the same VdpDecoderProfile values and other features as VDPAU feature set E. Feature set F adds:

VDP_DECODER_PROFILE_HEVC_MAIN:

That means the GTX960 and GTX950 will be better for media usage too!!

Why would Nvidia drop such a feature with the GTX960 launching earlier??

Edit!!

It might the GM206 is the latest Maxwell GPU then??

 

[Davedree]

[H] are pretty useless these days, or at least they pretend to be a bit dumb, they talk about overclocking and not going too high because of TDP limits not knowing that AMD's GPU's have a +50% powerplay for LN2 benching. they have no idea about what they are doing and never overclock AMD GPU's properly. 1.25v is pathetic, thats stock on my factory OC'ed 290, try 1.3 or higher.

They are also using 5 Games, 3 of of which are Nvidia titles, 4 of the games are known to favour Nvidia some heavily.
i use [H] to see where the few games AMD do worst in are. they always deliver for that question.

Despite all this there isn't all that much in it, Considering the low clocks on the Gaming, the 1515Mhz clocks on the 980 and a list of games in which the results lean toward Nvidia skewing it in its favour the 390X did incredibly well, i didn't think would be as quite fast as the 980 OC vs OC in an even balance of about 15 Games +

I'm not so sure now, i think it might just be

They did use 1.3v in their 2nd test. At that voltage just like Hawaii it reaches it's limits on air cooling, or without having a 100% fan. Scaling from a whopping 1150 -1180 whilst using 0.05v more. However the r9 390/x with it's respin inc better coolers and bios/drivers have impressed me with their performance when compared to a 970/980 but still cannot compete with the 980 especially when overclocked (although their are gameworks situations involved too). The fact remains if you already own a 290/x then Grenada is meh and Nano looks to perform in the same bracket too.

I'm holding out for Nano like I said from the start but it will be compared to the gigabyte 970 itx before I make my mind up.

 

[David Bisset]

Not to be unkind to AMD, because I always like to support the underdog. But.. If this is priced higher much higher than a GTX 970, what is the point? Yeah HBM is nice, but if the performance doesn't beat the competition, how can it occupy higher price points and expect to sell?

I think AMD's new stack is decent, from the 380, 390, 390X Fury and Fury X, but the pricing is all wrong. I guess if stock had been plentiful pricing might have settled a bit lower by now, but at current pricing, doesn't Nvidia seem the better option?

I.e:

Fury X at over £500, against ref and custom cooled GTX 980 Ti's from £499 with a game. Mini ITX GTX 970 from £250 plus game, even with the gimped memory it still has good performance for it's price. what if Nano comes in at £300 or worse closer to £400? Where does it fit in the stack..

Yeah being worse performance for the price really crippled nVidia over the last few years!

Honestly right now with the exception of the 980Ti vs FuryX I still see nVidia as the worse value option through the whole range.

 

[IT Troll]

The 950 is a good shout for the HTPC crowd, it could be a right stonking card for HTPC use, although in a different performance bracket entirely.

Skylake graphics will have enough for pure HTPC use. Most importantly HDMI 2.0 for 4K @ 60Hz and HEVC/H.265 decoding.

The ultra low voltage variants can probably be run with passive cooling.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Skylake graphics will have enough for pure HTPC use. Most importantly HDMI 2.0 for 4K @ 60Hz and HEVC/H.265 decoding.

The ultra low voltage variants can probably be run with passive cooling.

AFAIK,AMD Carrizo also supporrs this too,but won't come in socketed form.

 

[humbug]

They did use 1.3v in their 2nd test. At that voltage just like Hawaii it reaches it's limits on air cooling, or without having a 100% fan. Scaling from a whopping 1150 -1180 whilst using 0.05v more. However the r9 390/x with it's respin inc better coolers and bios/drivers have impressed me with their performance when compared to a 970/980 but still cannot compete with the 980 especially when overclocked (although their are gameworks situations involved too). The fact remains if you already own a 290/x then Grenada is meh and Nano looks to perform in the same bracket too.

I'm holding out for Nano like I said from the start but it will be compared to the gigabyte 970 itx before I make my mind up.

The MSI Gaming has a much better cooler, 1.35v is easy for me on a PCS+ 24/7 so i don't see why is wouldn't be on theirs.

GTX 980 pushed to the max (over 1500Mhz), the Gaming isn't, GameWorks... and yet still there isn't much in it, the 980 is also £80 more and only has half the VRAM.

 

[truther]

The MSI Gaming has a much better cooler, 1.35v is easy for me on a PCS+ 24/7 so i don't see why is wouldn't be on theirs.

GTX 980 pushed to the max (over 1500Mhz), the Gaming isn't, GameWorks... and yet still there isn't much in it, the 980 is also £80 more and only has half the VRAM.

I just got a brand new 980 strix for £230 (280 buy it now and next day delivery, and £50 ebay voucher . price war has finished and NVidia destroyed amd, and I was an amd fan up until furys

(and yes its a 980 not a 970)

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I just got a brand new 980 strix for £230 (280 buy it now and next day delivery, and £50 ebay voucher . price war has finished and NVidia destroyed amd, and I was an amd fan up until furys

(and yes its a 980 not a 970)

I made a profit on my HD5850 after two years of owning it and it meant my GTX660 cost me £35 with a copy of Metro:Last Light which was worth £25 at least.

Nvidia is worse value for money since the HD5850 paid for itself and destroyed my £10 GTX660.

Yet the replacement Maxwell card has cost me 12X more than my GTX660 which means,Maxwell sucks when compared to Kepler for value for money.

But the Maxwell card was £30 cheaper than an R9 380 meaning,AMD sucks since it costs more.

But then for £30 more,I could have got an R9 290 which destroys the card I got so now Maxwell sucks regarding value for money.

See,I can also use absurd logic to justify my purchases.

Plus buying off Ebay never counts unless it is from a proper UK based store with a warranty that is worth something.

Otherwise,I think OcUK and most shops suck since I bought stuff much cheaper on there at times.

Its like comparing horses to oranges.

 

[humbug]

I made a profit on my HD5850 after two years of owning it and it meant my GTX660 cost me £35 with a copy of Metro:Last Light which was worth £25 at least/

Yes,Nvidia is worse value for money since the HD5850 paid for itself and destroyed my £10 GTX660 which was replaced by a £120 GTX960 clearance card which was cheaper than a new R9 380.

See,I can also use absurd logic to justify my purchases.

lol

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

lol

I expanded it. Basically he/she is boasting they got a cheap GTX980 off Ebay.

Using their logic,the GTX980TI sucks in terms of value for money and the Titan X megasucks.

Next,we will have people saying a Nvidia GTX980TI sucks in terms of value for money since their mum bought them an AMD Fury or R9 390 for their birthday and it cost them nothing.

 

[Gregster]

This could be a great card but it does need to come in at the right price or it will be a fail.

 

[bloodkil]

What's all this damn arguing about... this is getting nowhere...

Just because you got a deal on one GPU doesn't suddenly mean another one is crap value for money...

 

[ALXAndy]

This could be a great card but it does need to come in at the right price or it will be a fail.

I think once stock hits Fury prices will drop any way. I would say £450 for the X and £400 for the non X would be about bob on.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

This could be a great card but it does need to come in at the right price or it will be a fail.

I hope so for the sake of AMD too,since this has the most interest apparently of all the Fury cards.

But I expect another pricing fail at launch sadly.

If they can get more or less trading blows with a GTX980,they could price it between £300 to £400(maybe around £350ish),although I don't think people will be happy.

 

[bloodkil]

I mean, I just paid £315 for a 290X Lightning and don't even slightly regret it as it is one stonking great card.

 

[humbug]

I expanded it. Basically he/she is boasting they got a cheap GTX980 off Ebay.

Using their logic,the GTX980TI sucks in terms of value for money and the Titan X megasucks.

Next,we will have people saying a Nvidia GTX980TI sucks in terms of value for money since their mum bought them an AMD Fury or R9 390 for their birthday and it cost them nothing.

Daft isn't it.....

I don't care much that the GTX 980 is a few FPS faster @ 1500Mhz +, there isn't much in it.

I'm just amazed that this 2 + year old architecture can keep up with Nvidia's brand new all singing and dancing Maxwell.....

Personally i think the Hawaii refresh cards are too expensive, but given what they can do compared with the significantly more expensive competition its look positively good value.

Perhaps a damning indictment on both sides.