AMD Radeon R9 NANO preview

Denial

2015-08-27 14:01

I think the core clock should be up to 1000 mhz in chart on the first page. 100 Mhz kinda slow lol. Also the fact that this doesn't have an HDMI 2.0 connector is kind of stupid, especially considering its essentially being sold as a HTPC card. If the $650 pricing rumor is true, it's garbage. If it's priced at like $450, it will be perfect. Regardless its pretty clear that HBM is going to have a big impact on smaller formfactor systems, which is pretty cool. I can definitely see OEM's putting these in VR boxes when that catches on. Edit: Hilbert, Anandtech basically confirms the price at $650. Did you hear the same? I don't think this card is worth it at all at $650.

#5148593

Lane

2015-08-27 14:02

Little error in your table: "Core clock: Up to 100 mhz".. oups, Denial was 30sec faster

#5148598

fantaskarsef

2015-08-27 14:14

Up to 1000Mhz? Reminds me of the reference 290's 'up to XXX' boost, which it wasn't able to keep at average loads and case setups. Don't forget, smaller setups tend to heat up quicker than big ones, if not done right. Which brings me to the next point, the cooler exhausts heat into the case too (according to the screenshot), so you need decent case ventilation! That's why you get a smaller card, so you can ramp up your case fans... One thing I saw also, on two seperate slides, you gotta love them teasing you with not needing the 900D... if I'd have a 900D (which I do have coincidentally) I wouldn't buy a nano anyway, cheaper, equally performing alternatives for the same price are available if you have the space. To me personally, I'd not get a nano if I don't need a nano card. Somehow I don't trust the nano's claims... small, fast, but not hot, and quiet, and energy saving, on a small pcb? We shall see if this little package works out once HH posts his review (and I do bet he got one of those cards 😀)

#5148601

Hilbert Hagedoorn

Administrator

2015-08-27 14:16

Edit: Hilbert, Anandtech basically confirms the price at $650. Did you hear the same? I don't think this card is worth it at all at $650.

I am also hearing the same signals on the 650 price bracket, but I cannot see it happening as AMD would not sell these cards at such a price. It might be marketing, send out the word of a 650 USD product, then at launch a say 499 USD sales price would sound cheap or at least reasonable right ? We'll have the final answer close to release date in a week or so.

#5148608

Denial

2015-08-27 14:23

I am also hearing the same signals on the 650 price bracket, but I cannot see it happening as AMD would not sell these cards at such a price. It might be marketing, send out the word of a 650 USD product, then at launch a say 499 USD sales price would sound cheap or at least reasonable right ? We'll have the final answer close to release date in a week or so.

$500 is definitely more reasonable. I think if AMD wanted to put a dent in Nvidia sales they'd hit $450, but it would probably be tough to do with a full size Fiji part. That and it would most definitely cannibalize 390x sales. $650 though, is just way too high, especially because the Fury X nearly fits in the same size package. Like why would I buy a Fury Nano when I can buy a Fury X and just get a slightly bigger case?

#5148614

Lane

2015-08-27 14:34

Let say the performance look to be between the 390x and Fury... I can understand the small factor, but on the end, pricing it as the FuryX seems not really appealing. I can understand, if the performance is close of the Fury (non X), that the price could be close of it ( a different version with the small factor added ) but not over it.

#5148635

IceVip

2015-08-27 15:15

http://media.giphy.com/media/10jRHyuxV1FsvC/giphy.gif so cute

#5148638

Vaper

2015-08-27 15:24

Some of us oldtimers will buy it 🙂 Well i can see myself buying this, but that depends on case design that will support cards this small , then peoples like me, oldtimers, does not care so much abaut price, it will be all abaut design witch it is offered in. So well my surch for a good case for the nano has begun, and oldfashin as i am, it would have to look like it could be in a hifi rack, or we see what those special mods comes up with. Well i was not supprised of the asking price, it would been a bigger failiour asking 400$ for it and not be abel to supply it.

#5148640

WhiteLightning

Moderator

2015-08-27 15:26

16DBA wow thats a breakthrough!

#5148645

Hari_Seldon

2015-08-27 15:35

16DBA wow thats a breakthrough!

"16 dBA Quieter than radeon R9 290X Graphics" (42 vs 58 dBA?)

#5148662

kinggavin

2015-08-27 16:08

I am also hearing the same signals on the 650 price bracket, but I cannot see it happening as AMD would not sell these cards at such a price. It might be marketing, send out the word of a 650 USD product, then at launch a say 499 USD sales price would sound cheap or at least reasonable right ? We'll have the final answer close to release date in a week or so.

the strix fury is 460 uk pounds on overclockers uk thats like 690 us dollars the usa there prices are lot cheaper than what we pay , uk europe australia the price probably convert to 650-690 dollars

#5148680

Ryu5uzaku

2015-08-27 16:29

the strix fury is 460 uk pounds on overclockers uk thats like 690 us dollars the usa there prices are lot cheaper than what we pay , uk europe australia the price probably convert to 650-690 dollars

That uk pounds includes VAT most likely remove that and see how many dollars you get.

#5148683

Fender178

2015-08-27 16:32

I don't understand the pricing of the card. $650 which is the same price as the Fury-X. To me the Nano is a Watered down version of the FuryX. To me this makes the standard Fury useless.

#5148713

larsbaby

2015-08-27 17:26

Can someone explain to me why this card would appeal to those looking for a HTPC setup? I could understand 4k capability but with the HDMI 2.0 missing that's not the case, so why would I be tempted by one over say a card costing £50.

#5148722

AMDJoe

2015-08-27 17:37

Can someone explain to me why this card would appeal to those looking for a HTPC setup? I could understand 4k capability but with the HDMI 2.0 missing that's not the case, so why would I be tempted by one over say a card costing £50.

DisplayPort is 4K is available from the card. I'm pretty sure that I saw Club3D tease its Displayport to HDMI 2.0 adapter a couple of weeks back. The card is tiny so if you're after a mini-ITX with the best performance possible then the Nano is the best choice.

#5148728

Lane

2015-08-27 17:43

"16 dBA Quieter than radeon R9 290X Graphics" (42 vs 58 dBA?)

290x standard cooler was mesured at 43dbA in the guru3D review, so 43 -16 dba... 970-980-980TI are at 41.. Sound mesurement will differ depending who do it and how .. The guy who have attain 58 db have surely put the micro on the gpu itself.. or set the fan at 100% lol . A road ( with dense traffic cars ) limited at 60kmh produce ~ 60 dba at 7.5m...

#5148739

Lane

2015-08-27 17:57

Can someone explain to me why this card would appeal to those looking for a HTPC setup? I could understand 4k capability but with the HDMI 2.0 missing that's not the case, so why would I be tempted by one over say a card costing £50.

Its appealing for micro PC; mini ITX setup... why will you take a gpu like that for watch only movies ... any ARM based TV set op will do it. And for the HDMI.. DP > HDMI connectors lol.

#5148750

Yakk

2015-08-27 18:16

With AMD not being able to manufacture enough Fury X cards to satisfy demand, it makes sense the Nano is priced where it is. Too bad is so high, but I'm pretty sure AMD will sell everyone they can make (which won't be enough by a long shot). These are most probably the very best binned GPUs AMD have on hand, very impressive looking little card!

#5148760

AMDFreeSync

2015-08-27 18:24

AMD this is why you losing money because your market team don't think. R9 Nano is $649 GTX 970 is $329 Two GTX 970 SLI comes out to $658 which destroy the R9 Nano, Fury & Fury X by $11 more. NVidia is laughing there ass off right about now. Right now & the only GPU from AMD has the best bang for your buck is R9 390 which has 8GB of vram & $329. I can buy the Nano but I can also buy two 390 GPU which I can get 16gb of vram as well. use your head like people do.

Q1- Will the R9 Nano be offered as a reference model only or will AIBs be allowed to offer custom models? Yes, 3+ months later. Q2- Can you talk a little about overclocking on the Radeon R9 Nano? Sort of, because of board power, it may be limited. Targeted at power efficiency. Can overclock, increase power limit, increase clock, but limited by 175W total board power. Wide engine ran at low speed for more efficiency. Up to 1000MHz means it optimizes the frequency based on needs and applications. ~900MHz for gaming. FurMark would likely be lower. 500MHz Memory, can’t modify it officially, won’t be officially supported to be overclocked either. Q3- In your hot chips 2015 presentation, you showed the Fiji chip has 4 ACE Engines compared to 8 as shown in the previous slides, is it actually 4 ACEs on Fiji? Q4- Price? $649 Throttled at 85C. ~75 C at typical loads. 175W board power. Cooler looks less than it actually is. More efficient and advanced than it looks. Fans mounted into shroud No 3D CAD drawing for Nano. Can’t remove shroud without removing fan, though fan mounts can be made! Not enough cooling? FAR FROM TRUTH Dedicated heatpipe for VRM’s. Industry first for OEM. Fins are horizontal. Helps exhaust air out the back of the card and maintain positive air pressure even with an axial solution. Hybrid vapor chamber/heatpipes, Flattened heatpipes on the whole underside of the heatsink. Vapor chamber over ASIC itself. September 10th availability

#5148761

rl66

2015-08-27 18:25

just a small thing noticed: last pict show the AMD Nano, with AMD ram... on an Intel platform (despite sticker have been removed)... i would have expected an AMD CPU for this pict... lol :infinity: