980 or R9 nano?

[nightmarevoid]

I'm building a computer for a friend and I'm caught between the r9 nano and the 980. I like the price of the 980, although Nvidia gear (like g-sync) is just so much more expensive in general. It's been a while since I've used the catalyst drivers, but I've heard good things about them now. not to mention the r9 nano has size on its side. The really crappy part is that I'd like to be able to get away with a gtx 970, but black desert seems to be pretty demanding, and that's one of the games he wants to play. If only if only....

What was I talking about? oh yeah, graphics cards! I'd really like some input from people who have used one or both, and maybe some news on GPU optimization for black desert.

[dragoon20005]

the Nano is a Fury X but in a smaller TDP package and only needs one cooling fan

 

the VRAM being on the GPU die itself and the huge memory bandwidth means VRAM bottlenecking is non-existent

[nightmarevoid]

1 minute ago, dragoon20005 said:

the Nano is a Fury X but in a smaller TDP package and only needs one cooling fan

 

the VRAM being on the GPU die itself and the huge memory bandwidth means VRAM bottlenecking is non-existent

This is something that I really like about the R9 nano. Do you own one?

[dragoon20005]

Just now, nightmarevoid said:

This is something that I really like about the R9 nano. Do you own one?

nah i wish i could afford even one

 

it will cost me over 1k for the GPU

[nightmarevoid]

2 minutes ago, dragoon20005 said:

nah i wish i could afford even one

 

it will cost me over 1k for the GPU

Oh man, sometimes I forget how good I have it living in the states. Sorry it's so expensive for you

[19_blackie_73]

21 minutes ago, nightmarevoid said:

I'm building a computer for a friend and I'm caught between the r9 nano and the 980. I like the price of the 980, although Nvidia gear (like g-sync) is just so much more expensive in general. It's been a while since I've used the catalyst drivers, but I've heard good things about them now. not to mention the r9 nano has size on its side. The really crappy part is that I'd like to be able to get away with a gtx 970, but black desert seems to be pretty demanding, and that's one of the games he wants to play. If only if only....

What was I talking about? oh yeah, graphics cards! I'd really like some input from people who have used one or both, and maybe some news on GPU optimization for black desert.

the nano can get really noisy or you have to live with high temps/slight thermal throtteling. So if you don't need the small size, I'd go with the 980 or maybe take a look at a normal fury / 390X

[fuddinator]

Since the performance is very similar, the logical thing would be go for the cheapest one. I am partial to the green team. Personally, 980 for me. For someone else, whichever is cheaper. If you can get a fury for 450 go that way.

[Morgan MLGman]

R9 Nano is better imo, better DX12 support, as the 390 matches a 980 in DX12 benchmarks, it's also small, looks dope and has HBM, not GDDR5

If they cost the same, grab the Nano

[dragoon20005]

12 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

R9 Nano is better imo, better DX12 support, as the 390 matches a 980 in DX12 benchmarks, it's also small, looks dope and has HBM, not GDDR5

If they cost the same, grab the Nano

i think you mean the 390X

 

the 390 trade blows with the 970

[zMeul]

do you have a scenario where R9 Nano makes sense? then get one

if no, don't buy one - with the reference air cooling, it thermal throttles

 

get a EVGA GeForce GTX 980 GAMING ACX 2.0 for example, it's 499$ http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=04G-P4-2981-KR

[MMKing]

11 minutes ago, zMeul said:

do you have a scenario where R9 Nano makes sense? then get one

if no, don't buy one - with the reference air cooling, it thermal throttles

 

get a EVGA GeForce GTX 980 GAMING ACX 2.0 for example, it's 499$ http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=04G-P4-2981-KR

The Nano power throttles. Big difference, and it's an issue you can easily resolve by simply upping the power limit in a program like MSI afterburner.

[zMeul]

19 minutes ago, MMKing said:

The Nano power throttles.

the R9 Nano thermal throttles - big difference

I would not pay a single cent for a piece of HW that is not properly engineered

if OP is willing to, I have no problem with it - I'm just informing him

[MMKing]

15 minutes ago, zMeul said:

the R9 Nano thermal throttles - big difference

I would not pay a single cent for a piece of HW that is not properly engineered

Okay.

Note that a stock R9 Nano will attempt to reach 1GHZ Core clock. You will also note that the target 500MHZ memory clock stays unchanged at all tests.

 

1. http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_nano_review,13.html

At 73c. The card throttles up and down from high 920MHZ to low 875MHZ.

At 78c, inside a case. The card throttles from a high 880MHZ to low 850MHZ

 

However, you will note that the fan speed on the first 74c test was at 34%, while at the second the fan speed was at 56%. So the GPU was diverting more power to the fan, thus it was forced to throttle in order to do so.

 

2. http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_nano_review,37.html

The power limit is set to +50%, and the MHZ target is set to +7% or 1070MHZ. Yet there is no throttling experienced, even though the temperature is at 74c , while the fan speed is at 46%.

 

Conclusion: The R9 Nano does not suffer from thermal throttling, any more than the stock 980 which in fact runs hotter than the R9 nano.

 

R9 Nano: http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_nano_review,11.html

980/970 stock: http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/nvidia_geforce_gtx_970_and_980_reference_review,8.html

[zMeul]

3 minutes ago, MMKing said:

 

Conclusion: The R9 Nano does not suffer from thermal throttling, any more than the stock 980 which in fact runs hotter than the R9 nano.

yes, it does!

I've debated this topic for avery long time, ever since the R9 Nano was launched - the card thermal throttles on air, not so on liquid; check Linus' video(s)

 

and with this, I'm no longer replying to you as it's futile to argue on a matter that's already been proven by others

[Morgan MLGman]

49 minutes ago, dragoon20005 said:

i think you mean the 390X

 

the 390 trade blows with the 970

No, I meant 390. In DX12 benchmarks.

[dragoon20005]

Just now, Morgan MLGman said:

No, I meant 390. In DX12 benchmarks.

really 0.0

[MMKing]

11 minutes ago, zMeul said:

yes, it does!

I've debated this topic for avery long time, ever since the R9 Nano was launched - the card thermal throttles on air, not so on liquid; check Linus' video(s)

 

and with this, I'm no longer replying to you as it's futile to argue on a matter that's already been proven by others

The card throttles at 85c, not at the 75c you can expect the card to run at unless you live in the tropics. But it does power throttle at 100% load attempting to reach the 1GHZ clock speed while diverting power to the fans as the temperature rises. So it sort of thermal throttles, and it sort of doesn't. As with water cooling you are not only lowering the temperature, but you're removing fan power from the equation.

[Morgan MLGman]

5 minutes ago, dragoon20005 said:

really 0.0

Really:
Keep in mind that those benchmarks are early and it's going to change for sure, but you can see a pattern here

[MMKing]

The Ashes of the Singularity benchmarks is unfair in my opinion. It's unreasonable to demand that either AMD or Nvidia keep up to date on software in Beta or in steams early access.

 

Furthermore, regardless of how biased or unbiased the games developer is. Judging DX12 performance by a single game, even a fully released one draws an unrealistic picture of the future. In the current DX11 era, we have games that perform better on Nvidia, and we have games performing better on AMD. You want a sizable sample size to draw a reliable conclusion.

[Dabombinable]

12 minutes ago, MMKing said:

The Ashes of the Singularity benchmarks is unfair in my opinion. It's unreasonable to demand that either AMD or Nvidia keep up to date on software in Beta or in steams early access.

 

Furthermore, regardless of how biased or unbiased the games developer is. Judging DX12 performance by a single game, even a fully released one draws an unrealistic picture of the future. In the current DX11 era, we have games that perform better on Nvidia, and we have games performing better on AMD. You want a sizable sample size to draw a reliable conclusion.

A lot of people are forgetting that.

[nightmarevoid]

Hey there guys! So, I think I'm going to go with a sapphire R9 390X. Although I would have loved to get the msi 970 100 million edition for the green and black theme of the build, it just wasn't powerful enough. anyways, let me know what you think of these specs. the goals were around $1000 and on the smaller side.
Apevia X-QPACK3 green/black chassis

sapphire R9 390X GPU

intel 4690  CPU (not going to O.C.)

gigabyte H97 D3H mobo (crossfire support)

team dark 16 Gb DDR3 1600 MHz memory

EVGA 750W psu

windows 10 home OEM

I'm still on the fence weather I should go with a 1TB HDD or a 250Gb Samsung SSD. I'll have to ask my friend on that one.

(migh still get the 970 if my friend doesn't mind the occasional frame dip + cost savings)

[nightmarevoid]

As always, thanks for your help!

[Big-G]

Although there's a known thermal/power issue with the Nano trying to reach it's target spec, added cooling and a slight power bump OC will sort that out.

 

The HBM makes it a very good card for 1440p and entry 4K.