Don’t Call It Fury: R9 Nano Is AMD’s Latest Fiji-Based Graphics Card

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Nice card, I like it. Could pick it up instead of a Fury X, depending on how the stock perf. holds up.

I still think they should drop the Radeon branding and stick to Fury, though. It's a much stronger name.
Click to expand...

The Fury branding and for that matter the Rage Branding were around before the Radeon branding. I would love to see another card using Rage in its name though. 😀

As for the pricing, that's kind of a sticking point. They cant price it a whole lot lower than the Fury X because it probably performs similarly to the Fury X most of the time. It was more expensive to produce since they needed to get everything to work in such a small package. They cant price it too close to the Fury because it probably performs similarly to, or out performs the Fury, and that would hurt sales of the lower card. Finally, there's no other ITX card that's as fast. Yes you could get 2 ITX 970's, but they would take space that you more than likely dont have. Since its an ITX board. How many double PCI-E x16 slot ITX boards have you seen? Want an answer? None. Because it doesnt fit in the ITX spec. MATX is another story however. Long and short of it is... You want tiny? You pay.
Click to expand...


Pretty much nailed it right there.

It's a full spec Figi GPU that has a lower power draw. AMD claims it performs on par with the standard fury wiht the lower power draw.

this card is for two type of people.
- those who value the compact size and still want high end performance
- those who value reduced power draw, yet still want high end performance.

For everyone else, there are other options.
Fury is for those who want a tradditional cooling solution
Fury X is for those who want the most performance possible, with no concern for power draw.
 
Their mistake was in getting top-performance Fury X chip and limiting it in software. The thing is as expensive as it's big brother, but limited out of the box. If it delivers less performance in benchmarks, people will complain (they already are) that the card is too expensive for what it gives, even though you could get a lot more performance by "unlocking" the TDP, which most people who buy the card won't.

I understand their intentions here, but it may not work in the market.
 


if they had left the TDP unchanged, then its really just a Fury.
The power is reduced to keep heat generation and power consumption down.

anyone complaining about the TDP can simply opt for the Fury X card. This card is not intended for people who would prefer the much hight power draw for the very last bit of performance.

we'll see when the reviews come out. So far all we know is what AMD is claiming. After seeing the perfomance gains the company has achieved with the last generation GPUs and the latest APUs, I'm willing to give AMD the benifit of the doubt for now.

 
a very interesting looking card. should be pretty high performing yet very small and lower power for those smaller itx builds.

should make for some pretty beast portable gaming boxes if someone was so inclined. sure it is expensive but when has smaller EVER been cheaper in the tech world?
 


True but I think his point is that AMD is pulling their normal marketing trickery. They are comparing it to a GTX 970 but pricing it like a GTX 980Ti.

And a lot of MiniITX builds have cases designed to take a GTX 980Ti, unless you want just a super small setup.

I hate this kind of marketing and I also think the pricing is absurd personally. And After Market partner could make one with a existing Fury chip and charge hundreds less.
 
I wonder on whats stated here ?

''AMD’s Robert Hallock, who acknowledged that the various AMD GCN-class GPUs support different feature levels of DirectX 12. This has been spun into allegations that AMD doesn’t support “full” DirectX 12. In reality, Intel, Nvidia, and AMD all support DirectX 12 at various feature levels, and no GPU on the market today supports every single optional DirectX 12 capability.''
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/207598-demystifying-...


so are they saying it will me next gen gpu,s that will get complete support ?? lots of getting worked up/hyped on something that maybe 1- 2 good years before it anything close to mainstream -

or you buy these cards today just to find it may not fully support dx12 then your looking for another card ??
 
You would have to run the fan at 100% to keep this thing from throttling. The size is very interesting. I'm waiting for their 16/32gb version to buy though. 4gb not enough for my 3x1600 setup
 
I've been fan of mini-ITX for a few years as I've been trying to make my desktops smaller and smaller, but so far, using integrated graphics. I applaud AMD for making a card that's at least somewhat mini-ITX friendly (If it were really mini-ITX friendly, it would take up only one slot and consume less than 100W...). I would still be tempted to make a small gaming system using one of these if I can find a mini-ITX case that is small enough and not the typical "cube" layout.
 
I guess all the Nvidia fanboys don't understand what this card is aimed at or just don't understand how to read English.

It's for Mini ITX builds!

Can't SLI 970's for that.
 
Underpowered and overpriced, I really don't know what AMD higher ups were thinking!
Click to expand...
THEY'RE ATI EXECS THEY'RE TRYING TO KILL AMD CPU's AND TAKE OVER AMD INTO A GPU COMPANY. why do you think AMD CPU's took a massive nose dive when AMD bought ATI and fired 50% of their staff and executives and replaced them with ATI clowns who can't even get drivers right & made GPUs only competent at a minimum for typical office work stations.

all of AMD's GPU budget should be going into mobile cpu's.

wasteful and disgraceful way to run a business into the ground, when AMD bought ATI they should have cleaned ATI's house out of every one useless and holding up & ****ing up ATI before merging imo.
 
Wonder if anyone gonna make a gtx 980 Mini ITX as it TDP is 165W
Click to expand...

Problem is the design. With the standard GDDR layout - as in not stacked, it takes up a significant amount of surface area which requires a larger PCB design. That's why the 970 can get away with an ITX version - with only 4GB it doesn't have the same space requirements.
 


So we have to wait for pascal then.
 
I don't understand why everyone is fixed on its a itx build card ?? if the price gets right and the claimed performance is there. I'd look at it just for all the case space savings and the air flow you get from that - how many threads do you see about that ''will it fit'' ? I bet this card will all around .. i'll take a 6-8 inch card equal performance to one that's 10-13 inch any day

then if the overall power savings and usage is claimed to be cut by 30% over older R9's ???

you got this card starting out at 650$ ? well if it can hold between the 980 and the 980 ti and we know how amd cards do or seem to do better at higher resolutions I don't see much of a issue there .. also most times amd prices drop after a few months and level out properly [opinion]

 
I am actually looking at this now and I am finding it hard to believe that they somehow made the part have more SPUs and the same clock as the R9 Fury X yet use less power and run as cool as a Fury, which both out have a MUCH better cooling design.

I am willing to bet it wont perform as well as people want as it will be throttling a lot. I don't see how a single fan and small heatsink will be able to keep this GPU within the 175W TDP without dropping the GPU clock by quite a bit.
 
'' I am willing to bet it wont perform as well as people want '' how many time do we see that ?? I do see for Linux amd is falling real short there . with the fury from reviews at phoronix .. that's hard on switch os users to see something like that

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd-r9-fury&num=1

theres some sub articles that go with that one .. I like to get a card that able to cover all I do and not just excel at a few thing overall - one thing about these amd cards is os support - I got drives with xp Linux vista and 7 so now a days AMD is out for the most part wile at least the poor old gtx 960 covers them all [ big brothers t970 and 980's don't support xp ] I'm in a rual area and folks don't do change and hang on to things till dead, completely dead

its hard to find hardware that maintains a universal use . and that's where I got to give NVidia credit
 
i was hoping it would be cheaper so I could afford one then OC the shit out of it with an aftermarket Cooler and get a fury X (kind of) well back to my original plan...
 
For that price you can buy 2 gtx 970 and put them in SLI. Just sayin'
Click to expand...

More like just trollin. It specifically says "for Mini-ITX". Let's see you fit even 1 GTX 970 in the same space. Let's not even mention that you'd have to purchase a very expensive, high wattage sfx power supply. Heat and power consumption would also be an issue, as two 970s would consume much more power, generate more noise, and would release more heat.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom