DELETE

[Marie Rose]

R9 Nano or Rx 580 2048sp for CS2? I play at 720p. I own both of these already.
Just a matter of testing them but I am waiting for parts.

[PowerPCFan]

17 minutes ago, Marie Rose said:

R9 Nano or Rx 580 2048sp for CS2? I play at 720p. I own both of these already.
Just a matter of testing them but I am waiting for parts.

Watch benchmarks on YouTube. Search for a RX 570 because the 2048SP version is basically an RX 570. It can be overclocked to perform like an RX 580 though. 

 

I'd go RX 580 2048SP because (IIRC) its newer. 

 

I attached some benchmarks below. They're all from different YT channels but it should be fine. 

 

R9 Nano benchmarks: 

 

 

RX 570 Benchmarks: 

 

 

RX 580 Benchmarks: 

 

[Marie Rose]

Just now, PowerPCFan said:

Watch benchmarks on YouTube. Search for a RX 570 because the 2048SP version is basically an RX 570. It can be overclocked to perform like an RX 580 though. 

 

I attached some benchmarks below. They're all from different YT channels but it should be fine. 

 

R9 Nano benchmarks: 

 

 

RX 570 Benchmarks: 

 

 

RX 580 Benchmarks: 

 

I have done this for the past 2 weeks, I know but just asking here if anyone has experience of r9 nano on cs2. Could not find any videos on it.

[PowerPCFan]

2 minutes ago, Marie Rose said:

I have done this for the past 2 weeks, I know but just asking here if anyone has experience of r9 nano on cs2. Could not find any videos on it.

hmm. Not sure. If you already have both, why can't you test it? 

 

You can compare other games - for example, if you can find Fortnite benchmarks for both cards and the RX 580 performs way better, then chances are it will be better in CS2. Not always true though. 

[Marie Rose]

Just now, PowerPCFan said:

hmm. Not sure. If you already have both, why can't you test it? 

Waiting for cpu cooler, case, fan hub and fans to arrive and I will do testing when parts arrive as I noted above at start.
I will post results here when my testing is done.

[Marie Rose]

R9 Nano runs on 06.2023 legacy drivers (not touching modded ones.) So that might hurt the performance of CS2.
RX500 Series still gets drivers from AMD.

[jaslion]

The 2048sp would be my pick since modern driver supprot

[Marie Rose]

Just now, jaslion said:

The 2048sp would be my pick since modern driver supprot

Yeah drivers make wonders happen, I mean look at intel arc.

[podkall]

@8tg r9 nano was mentioned

[8tg]

6 minutes ago, podkall said:

@8tg r9 nano was mentioned

Witnessed 

 

the r9 nano should outperform a 2048sp substantially, though as mentioned this may come down to driver optimizations, if the legacy drivers for the nano handle it well, all is well

But current optimizations for the rx 580 (570) may prove better, I doubt it but it's possible 

[Marie Rose]

5 minutes ago, 8tg said:

Witnessed 

 

the r9 nano should outperform a 2048sp substantially, though as mentioned this may come down to driver optimizations, if the legacy drivers for the nano handle it well, all is well

But current optimizations for the rx 580 (570) may prove better, I doubt it but it's possible 

This was my hunch about the whole thing specs wise. Will provide answers to this post later when all parts have arrived.

[podkall]

7 minutes ago, 8tg said:

Witnessed 

 

the r9 nano should outperform a 2048sp substantially, though as mentioned this may come down to driver optimizations, if the legacy drivers for the nano handle it well, all is well

But current optimizations for the rx 580 (570) may prove better, I doubt it but it's possible 

I'm still surprised at the nano's specs though, while it only has half the 580's VRAM, it has substantially more memory bandwidth:

 

[Marie Rose]

4 minutes ago, podkall said:

I'm still surprised at the nano's specs though, while it only has half the 580's VRAM, it has substantially more memory bandwidth:

 

That's HBM baby! Kinda like VTEC in a Honda from car world. LOL!

[8tg]

I can go shove my r9 nano into the test pc when I get home and try cs2, though that will be on linux instead of Windows 

[Marie Rose]

12 minutes ago, 8tg said:

I can go shove my r9 nano into the test pc when I get home and try cs2, though that will be on linux instead of Windows 

Sure thing please do! Test 1080p low and 720p low and then high all with 4x msaa! Remember to join a match or run a match without bots solo.

[8tg]

1 hour ago, Marie Rose said:

Sure thing please do! Test 1080p low and 720p low and then high all with 4x msaa! Remember to join a match or run a match without bots solo.

stand by, gonna kill two birds with one stone here and use nics pc to test this while i change their power supply

installing cs2 on here rn

[8tg]

Alright, R9 nano and an 11400F on Ubuntu

 

1080p low pulled 90-100fps on average on Dust II when smoke is onscreen

out of smoke it sits between 120-140

 

no stutter or anything else of note, i dont think this is hitting the card hard at all

 

1080 max settings sees it drop to 60fps in smoke, and 70-80 when out of smoke

i died early into that round so you get the spectator pov

 

720p max settings sees the framerate jump to 100+ again

 

though 720 looks kinda toastery in general, i am playing on a 4k tv so its painful

 

i dont think cs2 would tap the vram of the nano that easily? so this should mostly come down to drivers

the small change between all low (4x msaa) and max settings in 1080p feels indicative of that, theres a framerate change for sure, but its nothing crazy

 

so this is lower than an RX580 though results may vary, this is an AMD card on linux and specifically on Unity which is dogshit

[Marie Rose]

6 hours ago, 8tg said:

Alright, R9 nano and an 11400F on Ubuntu

 

1080p low pulled 90-100fps on average on Dust II when smoke is onscreen

out of smoke it sits between 120-140

 

no stutter or anything else of note, i dont think this is hitting the card hard at all

 

1080 max settings sees it drop to 60fps in smoke, and 70-80 when out of smoke

i died early into that round so you get the spectator pov

 

720p max settings sees the framerate jump to 100+ again

 

though 720 looks kinda toastery in general, i am playing on a 4k tv so its painful

 

i dont think cs2 would tap the vram of the nano that easily? so this should mostly come down to drivers

the small change between all low (4x msaa) and max settings in 1080p feels indicative of that, theres a framerate change for sure, but its nothing crazy

 

so this is lower than an RX580 though results may vary, this is an AMD card on linux and specifically on Unity which is dogshit

Huge thanks for this, great job! Yeah on a 4k screen I can imagine 720p looking like ass. I just play on that for better response times, latency and fps. I will run the same tests on the rig when I have all the parts! Love the R9 Nano tho, Great card. 

[8tg]

9 hours ago, Marie Rose said:

Huge thanks for this, great job! Yeah on a 4k screen I can imagine 720p looking like ass. I just play on that for better response times, latency and fps. I will run the same tests on the rig when I have all the parts! Love the R9 Nano tho, Great card. 

Trying this on a different machine with a CPU bottleneck to see what that does, but also to try it on windows 10 with amd legacy drivers

and its a worse story, the card is getting 90-100fps on average but with substantial stuttering, not consistent small stutters, but 1/4 to 1/2 second long freezes where it shows a warning on the top of the screen that the driver is out of date

 

 

Its just bad, what exactly in the drivers is causing this problem, i dont know, but it runs worse on windows

and amd on linux is questionable at best most of the time so i couldnt even call that a valid comparison

granted, some of this is definitely due to the fact that this test systems is using an intel N100

 

which is kinda toaster tier, but is around the performance of an i5 4570, which would otherwise pair with an r9 nano fine, even if being a bit underwhelming with it

 

i dont think the nano is the way to go, kind of a shame because in terms of pure capability the nano would absolutely smash an rx 570 or even then rx580, but a lack of driver support is hindering it heavily

i think maybe if it was still 2021, this would be a different story entirely, but now clearly the r9 fury series has been kinda left behind

[Marie Rose]

16 hours ago, 8tg said:

Trying this on a different machine with a CPU bottleneck to see what that does, but also to try it on windows 10 with amd legacy drivers

and its a worse story, the card is getting 90-100fps on average but with substantial stuttering, not consistent small stutters, but 1/4 to 1/2 second long freezes where it shows a warning on the top of the screen that the driver is out of date

 

 

Its just bad, what exactly in the drivers is causing this problem, i dont know, but it runs worse on windows

and amd on linux is questionable at best most of the time so i couldnt even call that a valid comparison

granted, some of this is definitely due to the fact that this test systems is using an intel N100

 

which is kinda toaster tier, but is around the performance of an i5 4570, which would otherwise pair with an r9 nano fine, even if being a bit underwhelming with it

 

i dont think the nano is the way to go, kind of a shame because in terms of pure capability the nano would absolutely smash an rx 570 or even then rx580, but a lack of driver support is hindering it heavily

i think maybe if it was still 2021, this would be a different story entirely, but now clearly the r9 fury series has been kinda left behind

I have a n100 system to! Great lil cpu for little tasks.

Damn what a shame to hear, yeah the nano has more horsepower but the drivers are the issue holding this little fireant back. Still waiting for more parts here, got a case yesterday. Here's the progress. I will try the R9 Nano and then the rx580 2048 (rx570).