R9 Nano Or GTX 980?

[stl522013]

The Title sums it up. Which is better for gaming?

 

[Dulith1118]

980......... but note that if u have a small case would suggest the nano..
and the nano does thermal throttle under max load with its cooler... so 980 for sure

 

[RCFProd]

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Nano/1.html

https://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Nano/images/bf4_2560_1440.gif
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Nano/images/batman_ao_2560_1440.gif
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Nano/images/gta5_2560_1440.gif
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Nano/images/dai_2560_1440.gif
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Nano/images/metro_lastlight_2560_1440.gif
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Nano/images/farcry4_2560_1440.gif
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Nano/images/crysis3_2560_1440.gif
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Nano/images/acu_2560_1440.gif

^ In all of the benchmarks shown in the links above the R9 Nano is slightly better. However I believe that the GTX 980 used in the test is a GTX 980 at stock speed, you easily get a 10 fps improvement if you overclock the GTX 980 so I would still opt for the GTX 980.

 

[shortez]

R9 Nano is just a downgraded R9 Fury and R9 Fury has basically the same performance as GTX 980 so I am pretty sure that GTX 980 is better than R9 Nano.

Another thing to note is that R9 Nano gets hot meaning that it thermal throttles a lot.

 

[stl522013]

Thanks.

 

[kwa-e]

R9 Nano is just a downgraded R9 Fury and R9 Fury has basically the same performance as GTX 980 so I am pretty sure that GTX 980 is better than R9 Nano.

Another thing to note is that R9 Nano gets hot meaning that it thermal throttles a lot.

AMD wouldn't sell a card that throttles itself at stock speed.

It may reach high temps but it's still all within specification. (If it does throttle you need to get yourself some case fans.

 

[NightAntilli]

I would definitely get the Nano... All the benchmarks posted previously were before the Crimson driver. The gap is bigger right now. There's no real reason to go for the GTX 980.

 

[RCFProd]

I would definitely get the Nano... All the benchmarks posted previously were before the Crimson driver. The gap is bigger right now. There's no real reason to go for the GTX 980.

There is one reason, and that is NCIX's must have price for the GTX 980 AMP! Omega Edition (415 dollars):
http://pcpartpicker.com/part/zotac-video-card-zt9020210p

Plus overclock that GTX 980 and you'll see identical results. I don't know about HBM but It's potential is not being used right now.

 

[jerdle]

Lots of falsehoods in this thread.

Okay, first off, the nano always outperforms the 980.

Next, the nano doesn't get thermal throttled. Short of removing the fan that's rarely going to happen. The nano has a different type of throttling from the 980/all other gpus: Power throttling. Not heat.

When you overclock a normal gpu, you increase its performance by increasing its core speed. With a nano, you increase its performance by increasing the amount of power it's allowed to draw.

At the same price range, the nano is the better pick over the 980. That said, in the USA, the Fury is available for the same price as a nano and slightly outperforms it, making that the best choice.

 

[RCFProd]

Video Card: Zotac GeForce GTX 980 4GB AMP! Omega Edition Video Card ($414.99 @ NCIX US)
Total: $414.99
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-01-25 09:32 EST-0500

Video Card: PowerColor Radeon R9 Nano 4GB Video Card ($479.99 @ Amazon)
Total: $479.99
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-01-25 09:32 EST-0500

Video Card: Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury 4GB Video Card ($506.98 @ Newegg)
Total: $506.98
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-01-25 09:32 EST-0500

Right now the GTX 980 is best price/performance. It will most likely not even last a week for that price but the Zotac GTX 980 is a steal right now.

 

[jerdle]

At 87% of the price, the 980 is a better price/performance by a couple of % points. (though that doesnt impact the performance still being better on the nano) And the price / performance at that point is only in the 980s favor so long as we're talking about 1080p. At this level of gpu that's not a given. These are 1440p class cards after all.

That is where the 980s msrp should be. To make it competitive with the 390x and r9 fury/nano (@ 1080p)

 

[Creme]

At the same price, the R9 Nano is better no question.

 

[mcnumpty23]

my opinion neither of them is worth the price premium over a gtx970 but thats just me not willing to pay a whole lot more for a little more performance

 

[sammy sung]

Every review I've read on the Nano refers to an obvious throttle at load. You're more or less taking a Fury, downing the specs minisculely to accommodate the pcb and slapping a far less adequate cooler on it. Though it's still minimal

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-r9-nano-review,13.html

 

[RCFProd]

R9 Fury is the obvious choice in the same price range. I mean, even with most Mini-ITX cases/motherboards you can still easily fit an R9 Fury, so we must be talking about REALLY small PC's if the Nano fits better than a Fury.

 

[jerdle]

Mcnumpty, the nano is a premium fury x chip, not a fury chip. It's just not given as big of a power allowance as the fury x, which is why the fury x outperforms it.