AMD Radeon R9 Nano coming next week

Boomstick777 · 27 Aug 2015 at 01:05

Mtom said:
Guys calm down, the $649 price is bogus. Amd recently don't tell the price until the very last moment. Before the release the FX was rumoured at $900...they will tell the real price before release...so i think this will be 9th of Sept.

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Plus OFC,Wccftech clickbait!!

Yeah maybe. Should find out for real tomorrow?

Ash0787 · 27 Aug 2015 at 01:24

between the tessellation and the drawbacks of current HBM and more driver revisions ( and fury possibly being designed for DX12 ) the 970 does do quite well in some cases, despite the raw performance metrics of the fury x being higher, especially if you look at older software rather than just the new ones commonly used for benchmark

For me I found that the fury x hasnt been enough of an upgrade from the 780Ti so I eventually will have 2 fury x to compensate

JediFragger · 27 Aug 2015 at 01:24

Mtom said:
Guys calm down, the $649 price is bogus. Amd recently don't tell the price until the very last moment. Before the release the FX was rumoured at $900...they will tell the real price before release...so i think this will be 9th of Sept.

You're right, it's gonna be higher

_Alatar_ · 27 Aug 2015 at 04:27

bru said:
So if the media are under embargo for performance data until the 10th of September, just what are they announcing tomorrow. I mean surely we've had the product announcement already when they showed us the FuryX.

They're announcing that the media is allowed to repost their marketing slides for some clicks.

This way the only material out there will be AMD's own for a couple of weeks. They pretty much did the same thing with the fury X. It's a clever strategy, the problem is that it can backfire (at least in the enthusiast circles) if you've overhyping your product like AMD's *cough* 0xAF *cough* 4K *cough* benches might be doing.

Tute · 27 Aug 2015 at 07:24

Lol, $649.

I'm interested but it needs to be sub-£400 to keep me so. Otherwise it's just another badly priced AMD card to go alongside the rest of the Fury range.

JediFragger · 27 Aug 2015 at 07:38

At this rate the Furyx2 is gonna be £2k!!!

AMD needs a good slap to bring it out of its current state of mind...

JediFragger · 27 Aug 2015 at 08:01

http://www.kitguru.net/components/g...and-launch-date-of-amd-radeon-r9-nano-leaked/

£509 in the UK!!!!!!!!!! :eek:

Yaayuh! · 27 Aug 2015 at 08:19

JediFragger said:
http://www.kitguru.net/components/g...and-launch-date-of-amd-radeon-r9-nano-leaked/

£509 in the UK!!!!!!!!!!

LMAO!

nVidia be rolling around at this point.

Silent_Scone · 27 Aug 2015 at 08:24

Not only that but 3 month disclosure on AIBP only selling vanilla products. After that three months, then what? Better custom partner cards?

Oh decisions...Considering the FuryX has been around awhile now, paying £500 for this card is nuts. It's not even that difficult to fit a FuryX in a small enclosure.

~Mike~ · 27 Aug 2015 at 08:28

JediFragger said:
http://www.kitguru.net/components/g...and-launch-date-of-amd-radeon-r9-nano-leaked/

£509 in the UK!!!!!!!!!!

What are AMD smoking?

UTmaniac · 27 Aug 2015 at 08:36

JediFragger said:
http://www.kitguru.net/components/g...and-launch-date-of-amd-radeon-r9-nano-leaked/

£509 in the UK!!!!!!!!!!

ROFL Harris!

Tetsu · 27 Aug 2015 at 08:36

Jesus. I got money sat there with AMD Nano written on it but AMD basically pricing it like they don't want to sell it.

Seanspeed · 27 Aug 2015 at 08:54

JediFragger said:
http://www.kitguru.net/components/g...and-launch-date-of-amd-radeon-r9-nano-leaked/

£509 in the UK!!!!!!!!!!

They're just quoting Wccftech, so it's not 'confirmation' or anything.

It's just too ludicrous to be true, if you ask me. No way the performance will get anywhere close to justifying that kind of price.

fs123 · 27 Aug 2015 at 09:13

They can't justify the $649 price unless the performance matched a FuryX which is unlikely.

Another possibility is that volume on these will be so low that they will sell all even at that price.

Ash0787 · 27 Aug 2015 at 10:04

its more expensive that the ******* fury x hahahahahahahahaa

just get a slightly larger MITX case to fit two 120mm CLC radiators = profit,
or do what linus did and run the cpu at stock or with a special air cooler

mmj_uk · 27 Aug 2015 at 10:50

Well I did predict £450 minimum.

30% more performance than a 970 (at 4K) for twice the price, dat performance per dollar.

I've been saying for weeks that it makes no sense Nano being a full fat Fiji, they either needed to cut it down and match GTX970 for price or it was always going to be such a ridiculous price that nobody would buy it. AMD seem to have completely lost the plot under Lisa Su.

Not to mention you'll need to buy a HDMI 2.0 cable because AMD are too cheapskate to license it themselves.

JediFragger · 27 Aug 2015 at 11:09

mmj_uk said:
Well I did predict £450 minimum.

30% more performance than a 970 (at 4K) for twice the price.

Problem is, it's gonna be a LOT closer at 1080p...

Marine-RX179 · 27 Aug 2015 at 11:19

JediFragger said:
Problem is, it's gonna be a LOT closer at 1080p...

But surely if anyone was using this card on a 1080p display, they would be using things like SuperSampling or VSR?

JediFragger · 27 Aug 2015 at 11:22

Marine-RX179 said:
But surely if anyone was using this card on a 1080p display, they would be using things like SuperSampling or VSR?

True, I keep forgetting about that feature!!

Killer7xx · 27 Aug 2015 at 11:33

£509 makes me think that AMD are not even marketing this as a real mainstream card. For that price it would only be people who are interested in building extremely small systems who would buy it.