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

[thor220]

They arent bad cards by no means and slightly outperform the 980 Ti and slightly underperform the Titan X, Ither generally cost more from what i can tell. but AMD DOES NEED BETTER PRICING and better CPUs. (If it becomes a monoply, ill switch to console and get a non gaming laptop and go full linux.) the "Nano" should be cheaper than Ither the Fury X or the standard Fury not more, cuz i know damned well that that cooling solution is cheaper than ither. (This is simply my percieved opinion guys)

HOWEVER thats not to say i wouldnt be tempted to buy a "Nano" for my Mid-tower machine cuz it STILL faster than my 970 and I dont like liquid cooling (Yeah unusual i know) or the the Size of the "standard FURY" ..... IF the PRICE was LOWER! (Mid $500 range would be fair.)

COMON AMD STOP SCREWING AROUND!

You didn't read the article, it's designed for mini-ITX builds. It's not meant to be price competitive with cards that it doesn't even compete against.

 

[jimmysmitty]

They arent bad cards by no means and slightly outperform the 980 Ti and slightly underperform the Titan X, Ither generally cost more from what i can tell. but AMD DOES NEED BETTER PRICING and better CPUs. (If it becomes a monoply, ill switch to console and get a non gaming laptop and go full linux.) the "Nano" should be cheaper than Ither the Fury X or the standard Fury not more, cuz i know damned well that that cooling solution is cheaper than ither. (This is simply my percieved opinion guys)

HOWEVER thats not to say i wouldnt be tempted to buy a "Nano" for my Mid-tower machine cuz it STILL faster than my 970 and I dont like liquid cooling (Yeah unusual i know) or the the Size of the "standard FURY" ..... IF the PRICE was LOWER! (Mid $500 range would be fair.)

COMON AMD STOP SCREWING AROUND!

You didn't read the article, it's designed for mini-ITX builds. It's not meant to be price competitive with cards that it doesn't even compete against.

Doesn't justify the pricing though. $650 for a GPU that is for a specific market? Problem is people want to use it for a non-specific market and since I linked two other ways to do mini-ITX, including a GTX 970 the same size as the Nano, there are other options. This is aimed at people who want a smaller build size but most of the mini-ITX cases offer room for a full sized GTX 980Ti so why would you buy a card with a lower TDP and lower cooling capacity?

 

[thor220]

For that price you can buy 2 gtx 970 and put them in SLI. Just sayin'

Sli in a mitx board ? Do you even comprehend for what segment of market these cards are made for ?

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.

All the mini-ITX builds that do support full sized graphics cards like the 980 Ti make sacrifices in other areas. The Fury Nano is going to consume less power and thanks to it's small size, not restrict airflow or features. It's great that you want to stuff a huge graphics card in a tiny case but unfortunately that only makes it a space heater with poor airflow.

 

[thor220]

They arent bad cards by no means and slightly outperform the 980 Ti and slightly underperform the Titan X, Ither generally cost more from what i can tell. but AMD DOES NEED BETTER PRICING and better CPUs. (If it becomes a monoply, ill switch to console and get a non gaming laptop and go full linux.) the "Nano" should be cheaper than Ither the Fury X or the standard Fury not more, cuz i know damned well that that cooling solution is cheaper than ither. (This is simply my percieved opinion guys)

HOWEVER thats not to say i wouldnt be tempted to buy a "Nano" for my Mid-tower machine cuz it STILL faster than my 970 and I dont like liquid cooling (Yeah unusual i know) or the the Size of the "standard FURY" ..... IF the PRICE was LOWER! (Mid $500 range would be fair.)

COMON AMD STOP SCREWING AROUND!

You didn't read the article, it's designed for mini-ITX builds. It's not meant to be price competitive with cards that it doesn't even compete against.

Doesn't justify the pricing though. $650 for a GPU that is for a specific market? Problem is people want to use it for a non-specific market and since I linked two other ways to do mini-ITX, including a GTX 970 the same size as the Nano, there are other options. This is aimed at people who want a smaller build size but most of the mini-ITX cases offer room for a full sized GTX 980Ti so why would you buy a card with a lower TDP and lower cooling capacity?

These's a card that already does that in AMD's lineup at around the same price called Fury so yeah.....

 

[Vosgy]

My first question would be, "does this card suffer from the same lack luster performance at 1080p as the Fury X?"
Second, "will my mITX case fit a full sized GPU anyway?"
Third, "what percentage of the PC market is in mITX atm?" (they are indeed gaining in popularity, but the boards are quite expensive with few features)

Still as people have said, you want a mITX for 1440p-4K, in a http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=25_1720&products_id=30034 I would not hold it against you for considering it.

 

[basroil]

Wonder if anyone gonna make a gtx 980 Mini ITX as it TDP is 165W

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.

You do realize that the 980 and 970 are more or less pin compatible and both use the same GDDR5 layout? Hell, some manufacturers have the same underlying board for both! A 980 mITX edition is certainly possible, only real issue right now is cooling the damn thing (though mini-vapor chamber+ very good fan routing might work)

 

[jimmysmitty]

For that price you can buy 2 gtx 970 and put them in SLI. Just sayin'

Sli in a mitx board ? Do you even comprehend for what segment of market these cards are made for ?

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.

All the mini-ITX builds that do support full sized graphics cards like the 980 Ti make sacrifices in other areas. The Fury Nano is going to consume less power and thanks to it's small size, not restrict airflow or features. It's great that you want to stuff a huge graphics card in a tiny case but unfortunately that only makes it a space heater with poor airflow.

You must not look at the mITX cases very well then. Most have the GPU next to a side panel with its own separate air flow so even the Nano wont change it much.

The Nano is also a 175W TDP part. Do you really expect it to keep the same consistent speed as a Fury let alone a Fury X with less cooling and a lower TDP?

And my point is that a proper mITX case and design will be fine.

http://www.corsair.com/en-us/obsidian-series-250d-mini-itx-pc-case

The Corsair 250D can fit a H100i so the CPU itself will be more than taken care of and has its own air vents and the GPU will pull its own air in as will the PSU. The only fan is to pull cool air in to cool other components that don't run as hoot and the back of the GPU.

Again the price is hard to justify unless you plan to find a case that can only fit the Nano.

And the fact that AMD is comparing it to the GTX 970 in performance, with their normal cherry picked marketing, tells me that it probably will maybe keep up with the GTX 980 at best and fall to the 980Ti in most cases due to the clock speed dropping to stay within the 175W TDP.

 

[teamninja]

Well here is the thing currently nearly ALL mini itx cases can hold a full length graphics card... if you put all the components together... it will work just almost perfectly fine if you have ever checked out falcon northwest tiki... UNLESS you throw out the power supply making it an external one it might make sense... nice twp but goes up in gaming and lower performance

 

[Esteban_cameeeL]

This was interesting for me, until I saw the price tag

 

[hasten]

Have any of you guys built an itx machine? I have an AIO CPU with a full size 960 in a sg05 with a ton of room to spare ( no drive trays but an itx vid card wouldn't help that). nearly every itx case for enthusiasts supports full length cards. If not its half height required, which the nano does not fulfill. AMD is once again very late to the game with a fairly useless card which costs more than a 980ti. Shouldn't be news.

 

[hasten]

For that price you can buy 2 gtx 970 and put them in SLI. Just sayin'

Sli in a mitx board ? Do you even comprehend for what segment of market these cards are made for ?

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.

All the mini-ITX builds that do support full sized graphics cards like the 980 Ti make sacrifices in other areas. The Fury Nano is going to consume less power and thanks to it's small size, not restrict airflow or features. It's great that you want to stuff a huge graphics card in a tiny case but unfortunately that only makes it a space heater with poor airflow.

You must not look at the mITX cases very well then. Most have the GPU next to a side panel with its own separate air flow so even the Nano wont change it much.

The Nano is also a 175W TDP part. Do you really expect it to keep the same consistent speed as a Fury let alone a Fury X with less cooling and a lower TDP?

And my point is that a proper mITX case and design will be fine.

http://www.corsair.com/en-us/obsidian-series-250d-mini-itx-pc-case

The Corsair 250D can fit a H100i so the CPU itself will be more than taken care of and has its own air vents and the GPU will pull its own air in as will the PSU. The only fan is to pull cool air in to cool other components that don't run as hoot and the back of the GPU.

Again the price is hard to justify unless you plan to find a case that can only fit the Nano.

And the fact that AMD is comparing it to the GTX 970 in performance, with their normal cherry picked marketing, tells me that it probably will maybe keep up with the GTX 980 at best and fall to the 980Ti in most cases due to the clock speed dropping to stay within the 175W TDP.

Elaborating on my previous post, I got an h80 in an sg05 which is much smaller than the 250d. Have to use an sfx psu, but no worries with the current state of sfx. I would be able to fit my spare 970 in it if I had a smaller rad. The case is designed to draw ambient air on the gpu, and intake from the front. Even with the rad restricting flow the rig is very cool. These itx cards are completely unnecessary - a 600w sfx gold could run a titan x build without sweating.

 

[wkwilley2]

Seems like everyone is missing the point of this card. You try to stick 2 970's in a mini ITX case and let me know how that works out for you. I agree that it is pricey, but if you want the absolute best gaming graphics in a mini ITX form factor, this is THE way to go.

I do wish though that they would go the same route with a lower binned card, like a 380, that way it is more accessible to the market. Not many people drop 650 clams on a video card, much less those that are building/running a mini ITX rig.

 

[rgd1101]

Off topic post deleted.

 

[Quixit]

Radeon Nano sounds like a small radiator. Otherwise it looks like a solid product, shame about the price.

 

[littleleo]

For a mid tower this is a great deal for AMD users you get a smaller card throttled down 10% to 20% and has it's OC disabled, no water cooling. All for the same price as the regular over clock-able Fury X with water cooling, which also fits in some of the Mini-ITX cases, what's not to love. All the AMD fan boys should be out buying this card right now! Oops I mean when it comes out in Sept. or Oct. or when ever this card eventually comes out.

 

[junkeymonkey]

''Doesn't justify the pricing though. $650 for a GPU that is for a specific market''

for what I read from AMD is its still atx standard and with that it should fit any atx board and case - if you look at the bracket and pci-e blade it the same as a full sized card - amd claime they could make it smaller but kept the size to atx ???
so they say

 

[jimmysmitty]

''Doesn't justify the pricing though. $650 for a GPU that is for a specific market''

for what I read from AMD is its still atx standard and with that it should fit any atx board and case - if you look at the bracket and pci-e blade it the same as a full sized card - amd claime they could make it smaller but kept the size to atx ???
so they say

But it is targeting a specific market, smaller designs such as mITX designs. No case designer makes a case with a dual GPU slot just for a short card like this. Most are designed to take a 12' GPU, normal for most high end GPUs.

Tha is why I see this as an over priced product. The Fury is decent, still a bit higher priced than I would like but well within the range of where it competes. The Fury X is the same. But the Nano? Everything AMD promised was that the Nano would deliver R9 290X class performance with almost half the TDP. Now it is supposed to be near the Fury and have just 100W less.

It feels like it is going to be another over hyped product.

 

[junkeymonkey]

ya - we all know how amd like to shoot its self in the foot - why I had to jump there ship overall - kinda like I posted about driver support on page one --

it about like amd only want to support 8 and 10 butn with NVidia there newest 960 still gets supported down to xp with a latest driver then NVidia still gives dvi-I on there top cards amd don't and so on ---

I would figure if selling something to the masses it needs to be ready to support the masses I look at my needs and will I choose a $650 amd card that limits me a lot or $650 on a NVidia card that got me still well covered ?? hmmmmm I guess i''ll gp NVidia ? sorry AMD

its like they want a proprietary system of things these days

 

[littleleo]

Maybe they want to add it to the XBox and PS4. The card is targeted at AMD fanatics that will believe this is a great deal and buy anything AMD says. The problem is the segment seems to be shrinking.

 

[hst101rox]

"In more demanding situations, the clock speed will drop to keep the power draw below 175 W" Oh great, in other words, performance will drop in more demanding situations. Of course, it will generally lose 10% of its max performance, but hey AMD finally got something right since the Fury fiasco. If it beats the GTX 970 for $650...then...RIGHT...I'll get the GTX 970 3.5GB for....that's right a whopping $300 less.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121912

Suppose you could disable the clockspeed limiter for this GPU. It would run hotter but better performance.

 

[jimmysmitty]

"In more demanding situations, the clock speed will drop to keep the power draw below 175 W" Oh great, in other words, performance will drop in more demanding situations. Of course, it will generally lose 10% of its max performance, but hey AMD finally got something right since the Fury fiasco. If it beats the GTX 970 for $650...then...RIGHT...I'll get the GTX 970 3.5GB for....that's right a whopping $300 less.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121912

Suppose you could disable the clockspeed limiter for this GPU. It would run hotter but better performance.

The problem is, what is too hot for it? It is targeting a 85c temp so if it is hitting 95c and was not made for it it would have internal limiters that would still throttle it to save the GPU from damage.

And I doubt that cooler could take much more power than 175W TDP.

 

[hst101rox]

It would probably help some. Maybe it can handle full clocks without getting past 85C usually. Reviews will hopefully disable the clock limiter and see how it behaves. Yea I'm sure it'll throttle once it gets near 100C or lower.

 

[junkeymonkey]

Responsibility for cooling the card falls to the R9 Nano’s new open air cooler, an aggressive design that has been specifically tailored to allow the card to effectively dissipate 175W of heat in such a small space. The overall design is best described as a combination open-air and half-blower hybrid; the design is technically open-air, however with only a single fan AMD has been able to align the heatsink fins horizontally and then place the fan in the center of the heatsink. The end result is that roughly half of the heat produced by the card is vented outside of the case, similar to a full blower, while the other half of the heat is vented back into the case. This reduces (though doesn’t eliminate) the amount of hot air being recycled by the card.

That said, AMD is rather confident in their design and tells us that the R9 Nano should never thermally throttle; the card’s thermal throttle point is 85C, meanwhile the card is designed to operate at around 75C, 10C below the throttling point. Similarly, AMD is promising that R9 Nano will also be a quiet card, though as this is far more relative we’ll have to see how it does in testing.

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


so they claim its got a new cooler design that another article claimed 80c max target ???

 

[jimmysmitty]

I think THG should take a Fury X and limit the power in CC to 175W TDP and see how it performs. From what I seem AMD says Nano should be 30% faster than the 290X. Well Fury X is about 25-30% faster than the 290X so if that is true the Nano would make Fury X almost pointless.

 

[junkeymonkey]

ya, but look up a fury and fury x all gone but one or two one sapphire and a asus ? like they were pulled for this nano release ???? I just don't get AMD's game plan anymore sometimes it just don't add up [opinion] but then you look at NVidia with the 980 titan then released the 980 ti and pissed some guys off [lol]