The AMD Radeon R9 Nano Review: The Power of Size
by Ryan Smith on September 10, 2015 8:00 AM ESTTotal War: Attila
The second strategy game in our benchmark suite, Total War: Attila is the latest game in the Total War franchise. Total War games have traditionally been a mix of CPU and GPU bottlenecks, so it takes a good system on both ends of the equation to do well here. In this case the game comes with a built-in benchmark that plays out over a large area with a fortress in the middle, making it a good GPU stress test.
Yet again the R9 Nano has a solid lock on 4th place here, trailing the other two Fiji cards and then the GTX 980 Ti. The card does slightly better than average against the R9 Fury, coming within 96% of the performance of its sibling even at 3840x2160 at Quality settings.
Size-wise and power-wise, the R9 Nano is also consistently in the lead. Against the GTX 970 Mini this is anywhere between 11% and 22%, while against the GTX 980 it’s a much smaller 2-10% lead.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
284 Comments
View All Comments
Oxford Guy - Tuesday, September 15, 2015 - link
I'll leave you to ponder this.Gunbuster - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
What a great little card for a miniature $3000+ boutique HTPC. Oh wait, no HDMI 2.0 for 4K.Asomething - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
you know you can add a passive dp-hdmi adapter right? its hard to find one that supports dp 1.2 but they exist. if $3000 plus an extra $30 is too much maybe dont make a $3000 HTPC.Gunbuster - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
Did you mean the fabled DP to HDMI 2.0 active converter that AMD keeps saying the channel will have "soon"Also once soon arrives we will have to see how well it actual works and if it introduces any input lag.
Fallen Kell - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
No, you can't buy a passive dp-hdmi adapter that supports proper HDMI 2.0+HDCP 2.2 that is needed for proper video content playback. These devices still do not exist. Parade Technologies has made an announcement on a chip/device to do this job, but they do not make end-user/consumer goods (think AMD/Nvidia when they do not make a reference card) and simply sell the chips to a vendor that makes the devices. They announced the product August 10th, 2015. It will be a good 4-6 months still before we see a vendor decide to make a product that uses that chip.ThomasS31 - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
So GTX980 Performance for GTX980Ti price... well.Some will probably interested in it... but this is "mispositioned" atm.
rhysiam - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
Kind of missing the point there I think. It's also slower and more expensive than a Fury (nonX), so if you don't want/need a small card then of course the Nano makes no sense whatsoever.The whole point of this card is it's size and (relative for AMD) efficiency, but naturally you need to either pay a little more or accept lower performance at the same price-point... that's the tradeoff.
TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
but, if efficiency and size is a major selling point, why choose this over the 970 mini, which is half the price and uses less power?This makes the nano's market people who want a small mini itx card (so a HTPC case, as most itx gaming cases can take full size cards), which is efficient, but can't fathom buying an nvidia card, despite using less power while still performing well, and are willing to fork over 980ti levels of cash for 980 performance, to drive a 4k or 1440p displayport monitor (as there is no hdmi 2.0 on nano, so 4k tvs are out, and 1080p would favor the 970).
That's, like, a niche of a niche of a niche of a niche. Not really a major money making market for AMD.
przemo_li - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
But less performance too.I do not get why people get distracted with "energy efficiency" at all.
Its KING OF THE JUNGLE gpu. It's all about performance.
TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
When you are building a small HTPC, which is the market AMD is aiming for with the nano, efficiency is very important. All that heat has to go SOMEWHERE. a lower consumption part won't produce as much heat. If you want a KING OF THE JUNGLE gpu, why are you looking at nano, and not titan x or fury x?