• 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.

AMD Radeon R9 Nano coming next week

Status
Not open for further replies.

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

Soldato
Joined
9 Nov 2009
Posts
24,966
Location
Planet Earth
Avenged7Fold said:
For all we know the TDP figure is at 675MHz under 'reasonable load' but the card can go up to 1000MHz if the application is requires it and temperature allows.
Click to expand...

900MHZ.

Edit!!

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9564/amd-announces-radeon-r9-nano-shipping-september-10th

While R9 Nano has a 1000MHz boost clock, even with AMD’s binning 175W is a relatively harsh power limit for such a powerful GPU, and consequently the R9 Fury X the R9 Nano is expected to power throttle under normal circumstances. AMD tells us that the typical gaming clock will be around the 900MHz range, with the precise value depending on the power requirements of the workload being run.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:

Mtom

Mtom

Mtom

Associate
Joined
4 Nov 2013
Posts
1,437
Location
Oxfordshire
Avenged7Fold said:
Rather than low voltage chips being binned, i believe these cards are actually the dregs of the Furyx chips that couldn't reach stability at their specified voltage and the nano is a way to sell off these chips at a more stable lower clock. I also think the TDP figure is probably at a conservative clock and that the maximum clock is dependant on temperatures. TDP has always been a conservative estimate with the definition being vague, i would treat it no different to the static pressure stats on fans (some are way off, some are accurate some are plain wrong and so comparisons between them are irrelevant).

If the yields on teh Fx chips are as low as the stock levels, then it would make sense that AMD put the 'not quite there' chips to good use somewhere.

For all we know the TDP figure is at 675MHz under 'reasonable load' but the card can go up to 1000MHz if the application is requires it and temperature allows.
Click to expand...


Well in my opinion, its not the Nano uses so much less power, its the Fury X uses way too much.
My friend has an X and could go down to -40 on the power limit before it started dropping the clock.
Also the Fury Strix just uses 225W, which is 50W less also than the X, and runs nicely on 1GHz..and as far a i know cut down chips don't use less power than full chips. So i think the Nano will be fine, it could turn up, that you need to push up the power limit in AB for it to maintain the clocks thus it will use closer to 200W, but i think it will work fine.
 

r7slayer

r7slayer

r7slayer

Soldato
Joined
2 Oct 2012
Posts
3,246
Mtom said:
Well in my opinion, its not the Nano uses so much less power, its the Fury X uses way too much.
My friend has an X and could go down to -40 on the power limit before it started dropping the clock.
Also the Fury Strix just uses 225W, which is 50W less also than the X, and runs nicely on 1GHz..and as far a i know cut down chips don't use less power than full chips. So i think the Nano will be fine, it could turn up, that you need to push up the power limit in AB for it to maintain the clocks thus it will use closer to 200W, but i think it will work fine.
Click to expand...

This doesn't mean it's using that much power. It's how much power is available! It's like you a have 8GB of ram, this doesn't mean your system is suddenly always utilising this amount. It's just available to the system. This is probably why your friend can drop the power limit so much before it has any impact. Its restricting how much power is available to the card so its getting to the point where the power limit is not enough for it to maintain its operating frequency and has to down clock.

We also don't know how much room is left for over clocking seen as it was a main point made by AMD about the card being a over clockers dream.

Also the cut down fury has less shaders which is why its using less power and is able to run at 1Ghz with less power. 1Ghz on the fury is not the same as 1Ghz on the Fury x lol. Like 1Ghz is not the same on the 980Ti vs FX.
 
Last edited:

Mtom

Mtom

Mtom

Associate
Joined
4 Nov 2013
Posts
1,437
Location
Oxfordshire
r7slayer said:
This doesn't mean it's using that much power. It's how much power is available! It's like you a have 8GB of ram, this doesn't mean your system is suddenly always utilising this amount. It's just available to the system. This is probably why your friend can drop the power limit so much before it has any impact. Its restricting how much power is available to the card so its getting to the point where the power limit is not enough for it to maintain its operating frequency and has to down clock.

We also don't know how much room is left for over clocking seen as it was a main point made by AMD about the card being a over clockers dream.

Also the cut down fury has less shaders which is why its using less power and is able to run at 1Ghz with less power. 1Ghz on the fury is not the same as 1Ghz on the Fury x lol. Like 1Ghz is not the same on the 980Ti vs FX.
Click to expand...

Cut down chips usually not better but worse in power consuption usually.
 

r7slayer

r7slayer

r7slayer

Soldato
Joined
2 Oct 2012
Posts
3,246
Mtom said:
Cut down chips usually not better but worse in power consuption usually.
Click to expand...

Really? clock for clock? I didn't see the same for TitanX vs 980Ti.

If anything the cut down chips give the card more power to use from my assumptions and conservations. Not that they are using more power clock for clock.

I'm not sure how cut down chips can be worse in power consumption lol just dosn't make any sense to me. shaders/cuda cores are the GPU processing cores which are what use significant amount of power. Less of these means less power used.

It's why im baffled by the Nano and many others too.
 

mmj_uk

mmj_uk

mmj_uk

Caporegime
Joined
26 Dec 2003
Posts
25,666
Mtom said:
Cut down chips usually not better but worse in power consuption usually.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily if they disabled the leakiest parts of the chip, it only takes 1 stream processor to be faulty for the die to be assigned to Fury Pro and they may disable 300 stream processors in the leakiest parts of the chip, whereas if that 1 stream processor works it'll make Fury X grade regardless of how leaky the chip is - particularly with the massively overkill liquid cooling system.
 

Boomstick777

Boomstick777

Boomstick777

Soldato
OP
Joined
2 Jan 2012
Posts
11,987
Location
UK.
r7slayer said:
Really? clock for clock? I didn't see the same for TitanX vs 980Ti.

If anything the cut down chips give the card more power to use from my assumptions and conservations. Not that they are using more power clock for clock.

I'm not sure how cut down chips can be worse in power consumption lol just dosn't make any sense to me. shaders/cuda cores are the GPU processing cores which are what use significant amount of power. Less of these means less power used.

It's why im baffled by the Nano and many others too.
Click to expand...

That is true in the case of the 980 Ti, less shaders actually allow it to clock higher (Within it's power / heat target) which negates the few extra cores the TX Has, on the custom cooler 980 Ti's. Under water though the TX pulls ahead again as it can stretch it's legs. Non REF 980 Ti >> Vanilla Titan X all day long.

With Nano, I am assuming they are binned, lower power chips. Lower target clock of 1000mhz with dynamic turbo so it might not stay at 1000Mhz for demanding games etc, probably closer to 900Mhz to stay within TDP. I'm sure I read somewhere that custom Fury cards are coming in the future, so fully enabled chip with custom coolers at some point.
 

Davedree

Davedree

Davedree

Soldato
Joined
27 Mar 2010
Posts
3,069
I couldn't wait any longer and I gave Amd a chance, bought myself a 970 to keep me going until next year. Amd failed with Fiji they better make up for it next year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom