R9 Nano vs Gigabyte Sfx 1070

[goodtofufriday]

Which is better at the end of the day? I have the R9 nano currently and was wodnering if it was an upgrade or more of a side grade. I dont see anything online of the nano vs the SFX version of the 1070.

 

Thanks

[i_build_nanosuits]

the 1070 slap bitch a nano across the board even a FuryX is still quite a bit slower than it.

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1070-vs-AMD-R9-Nano/3609vsm58413

[Starelementpoke]

3 minutes ago, goodtofufriday said:

Which is better at the end of the day? I have the R9 nano currently and was wodnering if it was an upgrade or more of a side grade. i dont see anything online of the nano vs teh SFX version of the 1070.

 

Thanks

The 1070 is certainly stronger, that being said, don't see it worth putting in that money while the Nano is still plenty strong.

[goodtofufriday]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

the 1070 slap bitch a nano across the board even a FuryX is still quite a bit slower than it.

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1070-vs-AMD-R9-Nano/3609vsm58413

The sfx version doesn't run as well though as full size. 

 

Also my fury x seems to handle itself well against my other build with a 1070 strix. 

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 minute ago, goodtofufriday said:

The sfx version doesn't run as well though as full size. 

 

Also my fury x seems to handle itself well against my other build with a 1070 strix. 

GTX 1070 is pretty efficient and i don't see the size of the card and cooler being much of a factor here at least until you start dumping serious voltage into the chip...for a sweet spot overclock there is nothing you loose on with the sfx card.

As for the FuryX vs 1070...i don't know what you've tested...furyx is faster in hitman and 2 or 3 other AMD titles...but for the 65 349 other games available on PC the 1070 will be noticeably better.

[TheRandomness]

The 1070 is better. 

 

The only reason I'd get a Nano over the 1070 is because the 1070 is too long for the case I will build. 

[goodtofufriday]

4 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

The 1070 is better. 

 

The only reason I'd get a Nano over the 1070 is because the 1070 is too long for the case I will build. 

But is the SFX version better...  Which is why I asked that in the title. 

[goodtofufriday]

7 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

GTX 1070 is pretty efficient and i don't see the size of the card and cooler being much of a factor here at least until you start dumping serious voltage into the chip...for a sweet spot overclock there is nothing you loose on with the sfx card.

As for the FuryX vs 1070...i don't know what you've tested...furyx is faster in hitman and 2 or 3 other AMD titles...but for the 65 349 other games available on PC the 1070 will be noticeably better.

SFX scores have been considerably lower than the full card and Temps were high. 

 

Furyx/1070 wise I didn't see a noticeable difference between fallout 4, skyrim, dues ex,  and overwatch. 

[i_build_nanosuits]

2 minutes ago, goodtofufriday said:

SFX scores have been considerably lower than the full card and Temps were high. 

 

Furyx/1070 wise I didn't see a noticeable difference between fallout 4, skyrim, dues ex,  and overwatch. 

now, i see where this is going and i'm not going into that rabbit hole.
AMD has nothing to compete with a GTX 1070...R9 FuryX is quite a bit slower than a GTX 980ti, and the 980ti is slower than a 1070. end of the story, i'm out.

[goodtofufriday]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

now, i see where this is going and i'm not going into that rabbit hole.
AMD has nothing to compete with a GTX 1070...R9 FuryX is quite a bit slower than a GTX 980ti, and the 980ti is slower than a 1070. end of the story, i'm out.

Okay.  The sfx is a serious question since no one seems to have benched the two together.  

 

Other one I own both cards and play at 3440x1440. So ¯\_(ツ)_/ ¯

Maybe at 1080p?

[i_build_nanosuits]

Just now, goodtofufriday said:

Okay.  The sfx is a serious question since no one seems to have benched the two together.  

 

Other one I own both cards and play at 3440x1440. So ¯\_(ツ)_/ ¯

Maybe at 1080p?

SFX like i said is not a major factor in terms of performance...the GTX 1070 pull roughly 175W from the wall so it's pretty efficient and pretty to keep temps in check, so the SFX is still better than the blower style reference card, and more than enough to allow you to push the clock very close or the same as you could with a dual fan cooler or whatever...like i said, unless you load a custom bios on the card and start dumping extra voltage into the chip, the SFX card should have no problem keeping the GPU bellow 80c.

[goodtofufriday]

4 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

SFX like i said is not a major factor in terms of performance...the GTX 1070 pull roughly 175W from the wall so it's pretty efficient and pretty to keep temps in check, so the SFX is still better than the blower style reference card, and more than enough to allow you to push the clock very close or the same as you could with a dual fan cooler or whatever...like i said, unless you load a custom bios on the card and start dumping extra voltage into the chip, the SFX card should have no problem keeping the GPU bellow 80c.

Alright, thanks. Ill see if I can find one on sale. 

[i_build_nanosuits]

Just now, goodtofufriday said:

Alright, thanks. Ill see if I can find one on sale. 

i wouldn't trow out a nano to replace it for a 1070 sfx though unless you REALLY need the 30% +/- boost...which is not gonna be a deal breaker for most games you can just tweak settings a bit or something...BUT if you're buying a new small for factor card and you don't have one already, the GTX 1070 mini is defenetly better than the Nano, hands down...no question.

[goodtofufriday]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

i wouldn't trow out a nano to replace it for a 1070 sfx though unless you REALLY need the 30% +/- boost...which is not gonna be a deal breaker for most games you can just tweak settings a bit or something...BUT if you're buying a new small for factor card and you don't have one already, the GTX 1070 mini is defenetly better than the Nano, hands down...no question.

I do have the nano already, but its paired with a 6700k. Not really happy with the pairing honestly. 

[i_build_nanosuits]

Just now, goodtofufriday said:

I do have the nano already, but its paired with a 6700k. Not really happy with the pairing honestly. 

6700K is a good match for a nano... i don't understand? this is an HTPC for 4K gaming in the leaving room?

[goodtofufriday]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

6700K is a good match for a nano... i don't understand? this is an HTPC for 4K gaming in the leaving room?

No was looking to make a desktop replacement that I could lug around. Wanted to get near what my main rig can do in my signature. 

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 minute ago, goodtofufriday said:

No was looking to make a desktop replacement that I could lug around. Wanted to get near what my main rig can do in my signature. 

ohhh no doubt a machine with an i7-6700K and a GTX 1070 mini will steadily outperform an FX-9590/FuryX in 99%+ of the games out there...sure.

Not even mentionning power consumption and heat output...much easier to keep temps in check.

[goodtofufriday]

2 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

ohhh no doubt a machine with an i7-6700K and a GTX 1070 mini will steadily outperform an FX-9590/FuryX in 99%+ of the games out there...sure.

And this is where my main concern is, and im being 100% honest here. My other... other pc is a 4790k with a 1070 strix and I just havent been as blown away by the difference from my main that I thought I would be. its why im hesitant on this sfx 1070. Am I just not comparing the right games to see the difference?

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 minute ago, goodtofufriday said:

And this is where my main concern is, and im being 100% honest here. My other... other pc is a 4790k with a 1070 strix and I just havent been as blown away by the difference from my main that I thought I would be. its why im hesitant on this sfx 1070. Am I just not comparing the right games to see the difference?

Maybe...but like i said the GTX 1070 is faster than a FuryX but not by 50% or anything like that so it might very well be that the performance difference is somewhat negligeable enough that it won't make a night and day difference in the settings you can and cannot run properly in games you know...i mean, were talking about 30% between a 1070 and a Nano...so probably 15 or 20% tops between FuryX and 1070...and we all know that +20% GPU performance WILL NOT give you a +20% framerate increase...+20% will give you 5 to 10FPS extra...maximum...Sooo....like i said, i wouldn't upgrade the Nano to a 1070 UNLESS you can find a very good deal where it would end-up costing you 80$ out of pocket or something like that...if that's not the case honestly i would hold on to the AMD card and wait for next generation cards where the GTX 1160 or whatever they will call it should be cheaper and offer a more substantial performance increase because it will most likely be faster than a 1070, and around the price of a 1060...you know

[goodtofufriday]

10 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

-snip-

Really appreciate the info. Theres one on ebay I may try to snatch. But otherwise I think ill take your advice as its not a main rig