• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

PowerColor Radeon RX Vega Nano Pictured

Now that is kinda cool. Hopefully a full coverage water block comes out for it.
An AIO bracket or a full cover block is the only way i see this being competitive in the same class as its bigger brothers (V56, V64). I would hope they make it with the full core enabled but i doubt it based on vegas thermals and power draw, even the Fury Nano throttled to the point where it was keeping up with the 980, not the 980ti. Its going to be close behind the 1070 is my best guess, if it had of been release way earlier we might have seen a 1060ti to compete
 
even the Fury Nano throttled to the point where it was keeping up with the 980e

Fury Nano was just a touch slower than the Fury X and would occasionally outperform the Fury non X.

Its going to be close behind the 1070 is my best guess

Not a chance , a stock Vega 56 is well ahead of a 1070. Even with just 56 CUs and slightly lower clocks Vega Nano it's guaranteed to be at least just as fast as a 1070.

if it had of been release way earlier we might have seen a 1060ti to compete

It's irrelevant though , this card is aimed at a very specific use case.
 
Fury Nano was just a touch slower than the Fury X and would occasionally outperform the Fury non X.



Not a chance , a stock Vega 56 is well ahead of a 1070. Even with just 56 CUs and slightly lower clocks Vega Nano it's guaranteed to be at least just as fast as a 1070.



It's irrelevant though , this card is aimed at a very specific use case.
Vega nano will have 64 though
 
i hope it will be some vega 32 or 48
 
Do you have something concrete info? According to PCGH this powercolor variant was 56 version of Vega.
Their info is based on the power connector info
They have no proof

It could be 56 but im not so sure
 
Last edited:
Back
Top