AMD Radeon R9 Nano 4 GB

[Dieinafire]

No more a joke than you or your comments...

Considering my comment was hilarious amd must be the biggest joke in town........... Oh wait they have been for years.

 

[nem]

Dual vapor chamber very nice, only coil whine be little disapointing but some people are repoting have the limit to 60fps helps to keep without coil whine , btw mostly gpus today have some of coil whine just see youtube , mostly the nvidias gpus 970 but even the 980ti have coil whine.. so i think have a good case too could help.. :/

 

[Folterknecht]

There is a difference between a little coilwhine above 200 FPS and an army of crickets taking over your PC. Reports of AMD branded crickets are all over the web since the NDA for Nano was liftet, it wasn't only Wizzard who has been attacked.

14:55

 

[the54thvoid]

Chimes in with all the other reviews. It performs as expected, which is good but is a noisy little device. I have no requirement for a SFF but if I did, I'd choose a few that allowed standard size cards (case in review does). I could never buy this over a Fury X though, the SFF PR is lost on me personally given how small the Fiji PCB is anyway.
I know some AMD die hard will provide a list, so I'll go out on a limb and say, how many cases does this specific card fit in, I.e., cases for cards that don't do full length. Remember, some SFF also require half height cards.
Fury X is the better implementation.

 

[john_]

Project Cars is as always hilarious. It should be renamed to Nvidia Cars.

Ryan at PCPerspective says that a retail Nano that he bought didn't had any coil whine. Of course I don't know if someone can trust PCPer. I mean in the past they where in bed with Nvidia BIG time. They might have changed beds lately.

Nice review as always. I can't find the Crossfire numbers. WE DEMAND CROSSFIRE

 

[the54thvoid]

Project Cars is as always hilarious. It should be renamed to Nvidia Cars.

Ryan at PCPerspective says that a retail Nano that he bought didn't had any coil whine. Of course I don't know if someone can trust PCPer. I mean in the past they where in bed with Nvidia BIG time. They might have changed beds lately.

Nice review as always. I can't find the Crossfire numbers. WE DEMAND CROSSFIRE

Crossfire Nano? Hmm, there goes the SFF. There is a Fury X crossfire review in yesterday's (or day before) review round up. Scaling is as expected, 70+%.

 

[Ubersonic]

I don't understand the point, it's a less powerful Fury that you can put in a HTPC, but it can't do 4K output to a TV, and it's just as overkill for 1080p as a GTX970 mini but 2x the price...

 

[john_]

Crossfire Nano? Hmm, there goes the SFF. There is a Fury X crossfire review in yesterday's (or day before) review round up. Scaling is as expected, 70+%.

Just for fun and also it could give us an idea of a Fury X2.

 

[Octopuss]

Something has been puzzling me for months if not longer. Why do you put SO high scores in reviews when there are several, often serious looking, downsides to that particular product? How can Nano get score of 9 and highly recommended, when it's overpriced as hell and then some (especially the whine)?

 

[Maban]

Something has been puzzling me for months if not longer. Why do you put SO high scores in reviews when there are several, often serious looking, downsides to that particular product? How can Nano get score of 9 and highly recommended, when it's overpriced as hell and then some (especially the whine)?

Can you find a higher performing card that size?

 

[the54thvoid]

Just for fun and also it could give us an idea of a Fury X2.

@btarnur seemed to hint that the dual Fiji will be Nano based. It certainly makes sense for power requirements and cooling capacity.
I still want Asus the make the Ares Fury X, full fat Fiji with water block.

 

[pr0fessor]

Looking at the conclusion with 9.0 made me laugh. With 9.1 it would be Editors Choice. This is rather looking like an unfair review. Well 9.0 is also a good value. If I had the money by now, I would buy this card right away. The price is high, but good cards are expensive. I really think this card deserves more than a nine.

 

[W1zzard]

Looking at the conclusion with 9.0 made me laugh. With 9.1 it would be Editors Choice.

Awards are not tied to scores. Without coil noise fail and lower price it would be Editor's Choice.

Go build a high-end sff gaming PC, which card are you going to use?

 

[pr0fessor]

Awards are not tied to scores. Without coil noise fail and lower price it would be Editor's Choice.

Go build a high-end sff gaming PC, which card are you going to use?

I would take definitely take the Nano, but OK, I'm not an expert. Coil noise is annoying, but not that annoying for downgrade this card to an usual or average card.

 

[buggalugs]

Looks pretty good. Not having HDMI 2.0 is a disaster for this card......what were they thinking.......Its still a good card though.

 

[GorbazTheDragon]

Nice to see they have somewhat caught up to Maxwell in terms of performance/watt. Really impressive what HBM does at 4k. But yeah, it's disappointingly expensive.

If I was building a high end SFF machine I would be going for a 980 at this point. For NV the really simple response to the Nano would just be a SFF 980, but I'm holding out for pascal, should be a really good jump over maxwell.

 

[Ebo]

Actually I dont thin the price is too high, seen in the light that its made for a small amount of buyers in mind with SSF cases, NOT for the masses, you have enough to choose from.

People have a tendency to want max preformance but wont pay the price, well in my mind..get used to it, prices is going one way and thats up with both Pascal and Artic Island using HBM2 on their highend cards. HBM2 will still be a fairly new tech when those cards come out next year and be in small numbers....so if you want the goodies, you have to pay the price.

You choose the product for what you is a fair price, just dont blame us thats willing to go above and pay more for the best tech thats out there, thats my 2 cents.

 

[the54thvoid]

I would take definitely take the Nano, but OK, I'm not an expert. Coil noise is annoying, but not that annoying for downgrade this card to an usual or average card.

9 isn't a bad score nor does it reflect on it's performance. It's an overall score and down marking for just bad engineering (coil whine) is very reasonable. Likewise- the price marks it down. If you're going to defend the Nano's pricing you'd better think long and hard about how long Nvidia had it in the ass for their pricing. So the build BoM for Nano must be lower than Fury X? Performs worse, runs louder, costs more because AMD want to charge more for it (Nvidia style pricing psychology).
The better AMD seems to get with their (overall) performance, the closer to Nvidia they become in pricing schemes. Ouch. Let's hope either Nvidia or AMD outright win the next round, otherwise they'll both stick it to us at a high cost.

 

[Lionheart]

Thanks for the review, glad you got a sample.

I see this card more as an air cooled Fury X (obviously down clocked)

This launch could of benefited AMD so much more if they changed a few things for eg.

- $600 USD for Fury X would make it look more competitive to the GTX 980 Ti @ $650 USD
- Not even bother with the Nano labeling & just call it a Fury X air cooled version, extra 6pin power connector to avoid GPU throttling @ $550 USD
- Normal Fury priced @ $500 USD
- HDMI 2.0 (Seriously did AMD cheap out on this?)
- Devoid of coil whine ( How is this steal a thing, it's just as annoying as lag)

But I guess I have to factor in costs of the Fiji GPU itself, HBM, yields, supply, AMD are desperate for $ Dosh $ & the fact that Lisa Su wanted to change the perception of how ppl view AMD being the cheaper solution, can't blame her really.

 

[rtwjunkie]

I would take definitely take the Nano, but OK, I'm not an expert. Coil noise is annoying, but not that annoying for downgrade this card to an usual or average card.

Since when is 9 out of 10 "average"? There are a number of cards, including Nvidia cards in the last year that scored in the 8's. I thought it was fair based on the noise, lack of HDMI 2.0 and coil whine. It's the awesome factors it had that brought the score UP to a 9.0.

 

[P-40E]

Hopefully the price goes down. I just do not see this selling well at that price. Taking advantage of people that use form factor cases is just wrong. The card is less powerful than the Fury X, So it should not be priced the same as the Fury X.

 

[Frick]

Something has been puzzling me for months if not longer. Why do you put SO high scores in reviews when there are several, often serious looking, downsides to that particular product? How can Nano get score of 9 and highly recommended, when it's overpriced as hell and then some (especially the whine)?

It's scoring on the internet, there is no rhyme or reason to anything here.

 

[Prima.Vera]

Seriously. Checkout that Performance / $ chart. lol. Who in the right mind will buy this for a normal gaming desktop over the 980 TI for the same price??

 

[Steevo]

I would take definitely take the Nano, but OK, I'm not an expert. Coil noise is annoying, but not that annoying for downgrade this card to an usual or average card.

I moved my computer down the hall to get rid of a little coil whine, and my new fans with an odd timbre to them. Its not noisy at all, but the sound mix during gaming is annoying, and the fans are just off pitch enough that I find it irritating if its right next to me.

50 foot HDMI cable is worth it.

 

[Tsukiyomi91]

load & peak usage power consumption is quite competitive against the 980Ti but I wouldn't recommend this card for those who are building micro towers or those Steam Box as it's coil whine & poor thermal would be a problem. it's also expensive for something that has the same price as the Fury X & 980Ti. If I were to build another rig, I would opt for the R9 Fury X since it's a full-on watercooled card & performance is as good as the 980Ti across 1440p & 4K games, though the 980Ti is the more appropriate choice of card for high end single GPU system.