First R9 Nano Water Block Announced, Available Next Week

[kcarbotte]

AMD's Radeon R9 Nano has only been available for a day, but there's already a water cooling solution available for pre-order. Aqua Computer, based in Germany, has announced a full cover, single-slot water block for the pint-sized flagship.

First R9 Nano Water Block Announced, Available Next Week : Read more

 

[jimmysmitty]

So buy a Nano for the price of a Fury X then turn it into a Fury X with a water block turning it into probably a $750+ GPU...

I am not sure what to say really.

 

[hannibal]

Don't say anything! Just bring on you money and smile ;-)
Nano is nice and interesting niche product and this something for even smaller user base. But this has some meaning. In 2016 both companies (AMD and Nvidia) will bring out new devices in 14 to 16nm with HBM2 and we will see more small factor graphic cards. In that situation it may be possible that water cooled variations of those can have market, so this is a prototype of what is coming next year maybe in bigger scale!
But at this moment... don't say anything and enjoy the show!

 

[kcarbotte]

So buy a Nano for the price of a Fury X then turn it into a Fury X with a water block turning it into probably a $750+ GPU...

I am not sure what to say really.

Its still shorter, and it should manage a better overclock.
This card is meant for a very specific niche market.

 

[norseman4]

There are 3rd party water-blocks for the Fury X as well, and both convert the card to a svelte single slot.

In any event, watercooling isn't a mainstream endeavor and some people will not get a video card unless they can custom-loop it. Eh, some of the results look really good, and their performance is a bit better, but it's not for me at this time.

 

[jimmysmitty]

So buy a Nano for the price of a Fury X then turn it into a Fury X with a water block turning it into probably a $750+ GPU...

I am not sure what to say really.

Its still shorter, and it should manage a better overclock.
This card is meant for a very specific niche market.

How exactally would the exact same GPU die manage a better overclock than the other? According to AMD that water block on the Fury X should be able to handle two Fury X GPUs.

Either way it is the oddest thing to do. But still that is up to that user to decide if they feel it is worth spending the extra money of all the parts, a decent rad + Pump + this block would probably push to about $200, on top of the GPU.

If the Nano was priced lower it wouldn't be so bad but because it is priced the same as the Fury X it just makes no sense to buy it. And this doesn't fit the "niche" market with a water block. Most cases that would support a custom loop for your GPU would also support a full sized GPU.

 

[Rhinofart]

I love the AuquaComputer Heatsinks. I have one for my 290x. Almost as heavy as my 10 year old kid, but looks awesome, and performs fantastically. Heatkiller GPU X3

 

[kcarbotte]

So buy a Nano for the price of a Fury X then turn it into a Fury X with a water block turning it into probably a $750+ GPU...

I am not sure what to say really.

Its still shorter, and it should manage a better overclock.
This card is meant for a very specific niche market.

How exactally would the exact same GPU die manage a better overclock than the other? According to AMD that water block on the Fury X should be able to handle two Fury X GPUs.

Either way it is the oddest thing to do. But still that is up to that user to decide if they feel it is worth spending the extra money of all the parts, a decent rad + Pump + this block would probably push to about $200, on top of the GPU.

If the Nano was priced lower it wouldn't be so bad but because it is priced the same as the Fury X it just makes no sense to buy it. And this doesn't fit the "niche" market with a water block. Most cases that would support a custom loop for your GPU would also support a full sized GPU.

That was a little too vague.
meant to say it will overclock better witht he waterblock than it would with just the stock cooler.

even with the waterblock, the Nano draws less power than a Fury X.

Like I said, this is a niche product. It's not going to make sense for a lot of poeple, and the water blocks are going to be even less popular.

 

[jimmysmitty]

So buy a Nano for the price of a Fury X then turn it into a Fury X with a water block turning it into probably a $750+ GPU...

I am not sure what to say really.

Its still shorter, and it should manage a better overclock.
This card is meant for a very specific niche market.

How exactally would the exact same GPU die manage a better overclock than the other? According to AMD that water block on the Fury X should be able to handle two Fury X GPUs.

Either way it is the oddest thing to do. But still that is up to that user to decide if they feel it is worth spending the extra money of all the parts, a decent rad + Pump + this block would probably push to about $200, on top of the GPU.

If the Nano was priced lower it wouldn't be so bad but because it is priced the same as the Fury X it just makes no sense to buy it. And this doesn't fit the "niche" market with a water block. Most cases that would support a custom loop for your GPU would also support a full sized GPU.

That was a little too vague.
meant to say it will overclock better witht he waterblock than it would with just the stock cooler.

even with the waterblock, the Nano draws less power than a Fury X.

Like I said, this is a niche product. It's not going to make sense for a lot of poeple, and the water blocks are going to be even less popular.

We have no numbers to support the idea that Nano will draw less power than Fury X if it was set to the same clock speed and power limits. I don't see how since it is essentially the same GPU. Power Tune is built into the drivers so even a Fury X could benefit from it. In fact both support TFR so it can keep the clock lower to stay at say 60FPS.

We would have to wait and see numbers from a independent review before we would be able to tell.

And yes, it would use less power if you kept the same thermal limits but why would you keep the same thermal limits on water cooling?

 

[kcarbotte]

So buy a Nano for the price of a Fury X then turn it into a Fury X with a water block turning it into probably a $750+ GPU...

I am not sure what to say really.

Its still shorter, and it should manage a better overclock.
This card is meant for a very specific niche market.

How exactally would the exact same GPU die manage a better overclock than the other? According to AMD that water block on the Fury X should be able to handle two Fury X GPUs.

Either way it is the oddest thing to do. But still that is up to that user to decide if they feel it is worth spending the extra money of all the parts, a decent rad + Pump + this block would probably push to about $200, on top of the GPU.

If the Nano was priced lower it wouldn't be so bad but because it is priced the same as the Fury X it just makes no sense to buy it. And this doesn't fit the "niche" market with a water block. Most cases that would support a custom loop for your GPU would also support a full sized GPU.

That was a little too vague.
meant to say it will overclock better witht he waterblock than it would with just the stock cooler.

even with the waterblock, the Nano draws less power than a Fury X.

Like I said, this is a niche product. It's not going to make sense for a lot of poeple, and the water blocks are going to be even less popular.

We have no numbers to support the idea that Nano will draw less power than Fury X if it was set to the same clock speed and power limits. I don't see how since it is essentially the same GPU. Power Tune is built into the drivers so even a Fury X could benefit from it. In fact both support TFR so it can keep the clock lower to stay at say 60FPS.

We would have to wait and see numbers from a independent review before we would be able to tell.

And yes, it would use less power if you kept the same thermal limits but why would you keep the same thermal limits on water cooling?

The single 8-pin PCI-e connector is the limiting factor.
Even with all the power limitations pulled back, this card is still limited to 250w power draw.

 

[jimmysmitty]

So buy a Nano for the price of a Fury X then turn it into a Fury X with a water block turning it into probably a $750+ GPU...

I am not sure what to say really.

Its still shorter, and it should manage a better overclock.
This card is meant for a very specific niche market.

How exactally would the exact same GPU die manage a better overclock than the other? According to AMD that water block on the Fury X should be able to handle two Fury X GPUs.

Either way it is the oddest thing to do. But still that is up to that user to decide if they feel it is worth spending the extra money of all the parts, a decent rad + Pump + this block would probably push to about $200, on top of the GPU.

If the Nano was priced lower it wouldn't be so bad but because it is priced the same as the Fury X it just makes no sense to buy it. And this doesn't fit the "niche" market with a water block. Most cases that would support a custom loop for your GPU would also support a full sized GPU.

That was a little too vague.
meant to say it will overclock better witht he waterblock than it would with just the stock cooler.

even with the waterblock, the Nano draws less power than a Fury X.

Like I said, this is a niche product. It's not going to make sense for a lot of poeple, and the water blocks are going to be even less popular.

We have no numbers to support the idea that Nano will draw less power than Fury X if it was set to the same clock speed and power limits. I don't see how since it is essentially the same GPU. Power Tune is built into the drivers so even a Fury X could benefit from it. In fact both support TFR so it can keep the clock lower to stay at say 60FPS.

We would have to wait and see numbers from a independent review before we would be able to tell.

And yes, it would use less power if you kept the same thermal limits but why would you keep the same thermal limits on water cooling?

The single 8-pin PCI-e connector is the limiting factor.
Even with all the power limitations pulled back, this card is still limited to 250w power draw.

Then it would be impossible to get the same performance numbers, no? If it cannot pull the same power then it cannot push the same performance unless Fury X is capable of a much lower power draw.

 

[kcarbotte]

So buy a Nano for the price of a Fury X then turn it into a Fury X with a water block turning it into probably a $750+ GPU...

I am not sure what to say really.

Its still shorter, and it should manage a better overclock.
This card is meant for a very specific niche market.

How exactally would the exact same GPU die manage a better overclock than the other? According to AMD that water block on the Fury X should be able to handle two Fury X GPUs.

Either way it is the oddest thing to do. But still that is up to that user to decide if they feel it is worth spending the extra money of all the parts, a decent rad + Pump + this block would probably push to about $200, on top of the GPU.

If the Nano was priced lower it wouldn't be so bad but because it is priced the same as the Fury X it just makes no sense to buy it. And this doesn't fit the "niche" market with a water block. Most cases that would support a custom loop for your GPU would also support a full sized GPU.

That was a little too vague.
meant to say it will overclock better witht he waterblock than it would with just the stock cooler.

even with the waterblock, the Nano draws less power than a Fury X.

Like I said, this is a niche product. It's not going to make sense for a lot of poeple, and the water blocks are going to be even less popular.

We have no numbers to support the idea that Nano will draw less power than Fury X if it was set to the same clock speed and power limits. I don't see how since it is essentially the same GPU. Power Tune is built into the drivers so even a Fury X could benefit from it. In fact both support TFR so it can keep the clock lower to stay at say 60FPS.

We would have to wait and see numbers from a independent review before we would be able to tell.

And yes, it would use less power if you kept the same thermal limits but why would you keep the same thermal limits on water cooling?

The single 8-pin PCI-e connector is the limiting factor.
Even with all the power limitations pulled back, this card is still limited to 250w power draw.

Then it would be impossible to get the same performance numbers, no? If it cannot pull the same power then it cannot push the same performance unless Fury X is capable of a much lower power draw.

I don't recall saying it would perform the same.

I said the Nano is a niche product that will be interesting to a very select group.
most people will think it's a waist, and to those people it would be. Nano is designed to get the best performance in the smallest package. There's water blocks being made for anyone who wishes to make use of them.

for everyone else, there's the Fury and Fury X.

 

[jimmysmitty]

So buy a Nano for the price of a Fury X then turn it into a Fury X with a water block turning it into probably a $750+ GPU...

I am not sure what to say really.

Its still shorter, and it should manage a better overclock.
This card is meant for a very specific niche market.

How exactally would the exact same GPU die manage a better overclock than the other? According to AMD that water block on the Fury X should be able to handle two Fury X GPUs.

Either way it is the oddest thing to do. But still that is up to that user to decide if they feel it is worth spending the extra money of all the parts, a decent rad + Pump + this block would probably push to about $200, on top of the GPU.

If the Nano was priced lower it wouldn't be so bad but because it is priced the same as the Fury X it just makes no sense to buy it. And this doesn't fit the "niche" market with a water block. Most cases that would support a custom loop for your GPU would also support a full sized GPU.

That was a little too vague.
meant to say it will overclock better witht he waterblock than it would with just the stock cooler.

even with the waterblock, the Nano draws less power than a Fury X.

Like I said, this is a niche product. It's not going to make sense for a lot of poeple, and the water blocks are going to be even less popular.

We have no numbers to support the idea that Nano will draw less power than Fury X if it was set to the same clock speed and power limits. I don't see how since it is essentially the same GPU. Power Tune is built into the drivers so even a Fury X could benefit from it. In fact both support TFR so it can keep the clock lower to stay at say 60FPS.

We would have to wait and see numbers from a independent review before we would be able to tell.

And yes, it would use less power if you kept the same thermal limits but why would you keep the same thermal limits on water cooling?

The single 8-pin PCI-e connector is the limiting factor.
Even with all the power limitations pulled back, this card is still limited to 250w power draw.

Then it would be impossible to get the same performance numbers, no? If it cannot pull the same power then it cannot push the same performance unless Fury X is capable of a much lower power draw.

I don't recall saying it would perform the same.

I said the Nano is a niche product that will be interesting to a very select group.
most people will think it's a waist, and to those people it would be. Nano is designed to get the best performance in the smallest package. There's water blocks being made for anyone who wishes to make use of them.

for everyone else, there's the Fury and Fury X.

But my point was that it seems pointless when most mITX cases that would support a custom water loop for this will probably also support a full sized GPU and then it would make me wonder why I would spend upwards of $800 bucks water cooling a GPU that wont perform as well as say a 980Ti in that case as I could easily build that setup in a mITX setup.

The only people I see this for are the more die hard AMD fans that want to water cool it to try to overclock it beyond what Fury X can handle but again with the limited power draw how high would that even be?

 

[kcarbotte]

So buy a Nano for the price of a Fury X then turn it into a Fury X with a water block turning it into probably a $750+ GPU...

I am not sure what to say really.

Its still shorter, and it should manage a better overclock.
This card is meant for a very specific niche market.

How exactally would the exact same GPU die manage a better overclock than the other? According to AMD that water block on the Fury X should be able to handle two Fury X GPUs.

Either way it is the oddest thing to do. But still that is up to that user to decide if they feel it is worth spending the extra money of all the parts, a decent rad + Pump + this block would probably push to about $200, on top of the GPU.

If the Nano was priced lower it wouldn't be so bad but because it is priced the same as the Fury X it just makes no sense to buy it. And this doesn't fit the "niche" market with a water block. Most cases that would support a custom loop for your GPU would also support a full sized GPU.

That was a little too vague.
meant to say it will overclock better witht he waterblock than it would with just the stock cooler.

even with the waterblock, the Nano draws less power than a Fury X.

Like I said, this is a niche product. It's not going to make sense for a lot of poeple, and the water blocks are going to be even less popular.

We have no numbers to support the idea that Nano will draw less power than Fury X if it was set to the same clock speed and power limits. I don't see how since it is essentially the same GPU. Power Tune is built into the drivers so even a Fury X could benefit from it. In fact both support TFR so it can keep the clock lower to stay at say 60FPS.

We would have to wait and see numbers from a independent review before we would be able to tell.

And yes, it would use less power if you kept the same thermal limits but why would you keep the same thermal limits on water cooling?

The single 8-pin PCI-e connector is the limiting factor.
Even with all the power limitations pulled back, this card is still limited to 250w power draw.

Then it would be impossible to get the same performance numbers, no? If it cannot pull the same power then it cannot push the same performance unless Fury X is capable of a much lower power draw.

I don't recall saying it would perform the same.

I said the Nano is a niche product that will be interesting to a very select group.
most people will think it's a waist, and to those people it would be. Nano is designed to get the best performance in the smallest package. There's water blocks being made for anyone who wishes to make use of them.

for everyone else, there's the Fury and Fury X.

But my point was that it seems pointless when most mITX cases that would support a custom water loop for this will probably also support a full sized GPU and then it would make me wonder why I would spend upwards of $800 bucks water cooling a GPU that wont perform as well as say a 980Ti in that case as I could easily build that setup in a mITX setup.

The only people I see this for are the more die hard AMD fans that want to water cool it to try to overclock it beyond what Fury X can handle but again with the limited power draw how high would that even be?

Because you can't envision a reason to buy this card, you don't fit in that niche.

With a TDP of a 175w, this card can be used in a lot of cases that would fit a larger card, but can't fit the power supply required to manage it.

Over clocking is not the only reason to water cool your computer. Many people will do it for the looks. Not to mention water cooled components run cooler in gereral, and keeping your components cool will extend thier lifetime.

Let's not forget about extremely small cases that offer little to no airflow. Wait, don't leave out the modders, who make completely costomized systems from PCs built into desks, and things that aren't designed to be computers, like RC cars for example.

I can think of at least half a dozen reasons to water cool a graphics card that don't involve overclocking at all. Just because you can't see why, doesn't mean there aren't reasons for people to buy it.

 

[rdc85]

..... Many people will do it for the looks. ...

haha, quite true...

sometimes it just because "We can.."

 

[Haravikk]

I'm not sure I see the point of this; an all-in-one cooler would make more sense, or a variant of the card with an integrated all-in-one cooler, as these are great in space limited systems where a half-length card would be right at home.

But DIY water cooling loops are really for bigger systems, in which case, why get the Nano? A bigger card with a bigger water block will be cooled more effectively, as well as run faster in the first place.

I dunno, I just don't get this. I'm sure someone can probably squeeze custom liquid cooling into a small system, but you're talking niche within niche.

 

[youssef 2010]

@jimmysmitty: This is the most powerful ITX graphics card in the world. If you are thinking of building a watercooled mini ITX system, this is the most powerful GPU you can get.

We'll have to wait and see how it sells before we call it a success or a failure

 

[jimmysmitty]

@jimmysmitty: This is the most powerful ITX graphics card in the world. If you are thinking of building a watercooled mini ITX system, this is the most powerful GPU you can get.

We'll have to wait and see how it sells before we call it a success or a failure

The Fury X is only 1 inch longer and considering that with a custom loop you need a rad, pump and reservoir it would be easier to build a mITX system with a Fury X than a Nano with a custom loop.

 

[rdc85]

I'm not sure I see the point of this; an all-in-one cooler would make more sense, or a variant of the card with an integrated all-in-one cooler, as these are great in space limited systems where a half-length card would be right at home.

But DIY water cooling loops are really for bigger systems, in which case, why get the Nano? A bigger card with a bigger water block will be cooled more effectively, as well as run faster in the first place.

I dunno, I just don't get this. I'm sure someone can probably squeeze custom liquid cooling into a small system, but you're talking niche within niche.

all-in-one cooler cannot perform as good as proper custom loop, and some people don't do it for performance..
they just do it because of they like it (kind of hobby),

and mITX with custom WC is not that rare.. (some people even make their own custom casing)..
and yeah it is niche within niche..

and btw AMD what the h*ll with that price....