• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Radeon R9 Nano Nears Launch, 50% Higher Performance per Watt over Fury X

Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
4,576 (0.99/day)
Location
Multidimensional
System Name PC Mustard Race
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 4600H
Motherboard Asus Laptop OEM AM4
Cooling Internal Laptop Cooling
Memory 16GB Crucial 3200Mhz
Video Card(s) GTX 1650 Ti 4GB + Intergrated Vega GPU
Storage 512GB Crucial M.2 / 2TB Seagate 2.5in HDD
Display(s) 144hz Laptop IPS Panel 1080p
Case Laptop Chassis
Audio Device(s) Realtek Laptop Trash
Power Supply Power brick
Mouse CoolerMaster Masterkeys Lite L RGB Mem-Chanical Combo + Touch Pad
Keyboard Laptop RGB KB
Software Windows 10 Home 64bit
Benchmark Scores Don't do em anymore.
...and what do you expect? It's not like AMD hasn't over-hyped stuff in the past.
I get the extreme dislike of AMD's PR & overhyped BS but the constant negativity just keeps growing.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
26,147 (5.90/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Video Card(s) Sapphire Radeon RX 5500 XT Pulse 8 GiB
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate Exos X12 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Nixeus NX-EDG274K (3840x2160@144 DP) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW (1440x900@60 HDMI-DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
Man, I'm trying to remember where someone already said the Nano would fall between the 290X and 390X...where was that?
*cough*

Morale of the story is these are the same numbers, more or less, AMD put out during the conference.
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
2,180 (0.62/day)
Location
So. Cal.
AMD said said:
Data obtained through isolated direct measurement of GDDR5 and HBM power delivery rails at full memory utilization. Power efficiency calculated as GB/s of bandwidth delivered per watt of power consumed
So the Performance/Watt is not about FpS, but the efficiency of the bandwidth?

The GTX 680 was really a mid range GPU and the high end Kepler was the 780. Nvidia has continued this course with the 970/980.
While yes 680 could be considered Nvidia's mid-range, one could consider Tahiti was the mid-range. At the time AMD could see Nvidia couldn't absolutely start flooding the Full-Keplers into the gaming market for many months... while yes Titan showed @ $1,000 Feb 2013... AMD saw no reason to substantiate what was a semi-quasi Professional offering. Had they had 7990 prior to Titan they could've at least had something but it took till April at that point it had little value.

The true GTX Gaming version showed as GTX 780 June 2013; AMD had Hawaii in the market Oct 2013, but yes the 290X was 5 months behind. That's was where AMD really started faltering, not have the money or foresight to get moving with big die's like Hawaii and Fiji has been their Achilles Heel.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 16, 2015
Messages
305 (0.15/day)
System Name 2016
Processor intel i7-6700K
Motherboard ASUS Maximus VIII Impact
Cooling Noctua NH-D14
Memory G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4 2x16GB 3200MHz
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GTX 1070 mini (3rd from RMA; 2 burned)
Storage Samsung EVO 850 + 24TB NAS
Display(s) AOC 31.5" ips freesync; Oculus Rift CV1
Case Raijintek Metis Classic Black
Power Supply Silverstone SX500-LG (with Scythe fan!!)
Mouse Aula Killing The Soul
Keyboard Logitech K290
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores upgrade: www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/9798108/fs/5598299 www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/285676/spy/64550

apoe

New Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2014
Messages
29 (0.01/day)
Hey look it's another AMD marketing press release that will likely bear zero similarity to actual results achieved by independent third-party reviewers.
Exactly my thoughts when I saw the headline. Too much hype, all the time.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
1,648 (0.37/day)
System Name Lailalo / Edelweiss
Processor Ryzen 1700 @ 3.8Ghz / i7 3610QM @2.3-3.2Ghz
Motherboard Asus X370 Prime/ Lenovo Y580
Cooling Noctua / Big hunk of copper
Memory 16GB DDR4 3200 Ripjaws with Samsung chips / 8GB Hyundai DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) XFX R9 390 / GTX 660M 2GB
Storage Crucial 1TB MX500 SSD, Segate 3TB, 64GB Synapse SSD as Pagefile drive / Western Digital 1TB 7200RPM
Display(s) LG Ultrawide 29in @ 2560x1080 / Lenovo 15.6 @ 1920x1080
Case Coolermaster Storm Sniper / Lenovo Y580
Audio Device(s) Asus Xonar DG / Whatever Lenovo used
Power Supply Antec Truepower Blue 750W + Thermaltake 5.25in 250W / Big Power Brick
Mouse G602
Keyboard G510s
Software Windows 10 Pro / Windows 10 Home
Hilarious watching everyone moan about 970 this, 970 that, when there are many 970 owners who have come out and stated the VRAM situation causes performance stuttering when being pushed over 3.5GB. Just ask 980 owners who came from a 970. The 980 doesn't have the issues even when it is pushed over 4GB.

So you want AMD to release an ultra competitive GPU that takes on the 970 directly? Are you blind? They already have one in the 390. It goes toe to toe and beats the 970 for the same price. Just because it doesn't have an "X" means you don't consider it? For the same price you get 8GB VRAM, around the same performance, and no stuttering issues. So what if it gulps power instead of drinks. The only better option is almost $200 higher which isn't much better in fps. Until NV drops the 980 under 390X prices, there is no competition.
 
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
1,211 (0.39/day)
System Name desktop
Processor i7-4770k
Motherboard Asus z87-plus
Cooling Corsair h80
Memory 32gb G.Skill Ares @ 2400mhz
Video Card(s) EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 SC (ACX 3.0)
Storage 2x Samsung 1tb 850evo SSD, 3x WD drives, 2 seagate
Display(s) Acer Predator XB271HU 27inch IPS G-Sync 165hz
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster x-FI Platium, Turtle beach Elite pro 2 + superamp.
Power Supply OCZ Z Series 850W (10 years strong)
Mouse Logitech G502 hero
Keyboard Logitech G710+
This is the problem. Nvidia lacks competition. It was obvious when they released the GTX 680 as a high end GPU for $500 because it was a little faster than AMD's high end GPU the HD 7970. The GTX 680 was really a mid range GPU and the high end Kepler was the 780. Nvidia has continued this course with the 970/980.
GTX680 was a bit faster then 7970 at the time. Which is why AMD released the bios update and released the cards with 1ghz clocks to make their cards closer to the 680.

He is talking about the same handful of users here that pounce on any AMD related thread and write negative comments,
They only do that because amd is vastly better
Most people are pointing out how AMD has made claims about fury being like 20% faster then a gtx980ti, in real world use with settings gamers use it was even and even fury is a hair slower at times. If you go back to last few years, AMD has a history of saying their part is faster then it ends up being cause how they do their benchmarks. Like their A series APU, they claim it was faster then i7 in mobile but when you look at benchmarks they used it was All GPU accelerated ones. Most of which normal buyers of their product wouldn't use.

My point still stands from a few threads ago: Less than 20% is not significantly faster. Less than 10% is barely faster. Especially considering the fury line has had no OC potential. I am so glad I did not wait for this to come out. The only way this card isn't a total flop is if the price is about $300-$350, and I don't see that happening. This is going to fall in somewhere north of $400.
I had that arguement with someone over that 5-10% over 290x, they were hell bent defending AMD for it.
I get the extreme dislike of AMD's PR & overhyped BS but the constant negativity just keeps growing.
When PR ends up being not being entirely true and it happens over and over, only so much of it before people start noticing it.
 
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
343 (0.10/day)
Location
Ft Stewart
System Name Queen Bee
Processor 3570k @ 4.0GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte UD3 Z77
Cooling Water Loop by EK
Memory 8GB Corsair 1600 DDR3
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 970 Gaming WaterCooled
Storage 1x Western Digital 500GB Black 1x Intel 20GB 311 SSD
Display(s) BenQ XL2420G
Case CoolTek W2
Power Supply Corsair 650Watt
Software Windows 7 Pro
All I'm gonna say, AMD PR.

Ok maybe that, and we'll see :D
 
Joined
Jun 24, 2015
Messages
2,138 (1.07/day)
Location
Western Canada
System Name Ol' Beastie R4.0
Processor Ryzen 4650G
Motherboard B550i Aorus Pro AX (F10)
Memory 16GB 4000 16-16-16 @ 1.48V
Storage 256GB PM981
Case NCASE M1v5
I think people are missing the point here a bit.

The R9 Nano is designed to be a niche product. It aims to prove that GCN is still a slightly viable architecture to work with (and maybe, just maybe AMD is still a viable choice for your consumer graphics needs), despite the fact that both fully fledged 1.0 (Tahiti) and 1.1 (Hawaii) were monsters with respect to power consumption. It is not a direct competitor to the GTX 970; the R9 390 and 390X are supposed to be the hard-hitters that take on the GTX 970 and GTX 980 (with the latter having stiffer competition in the R9 Fury). Before you are quick to mention that Asus and GB have "mini-ITX" versions of the GTX 970, the R9 Nano is restricted to that niche, unlike the GTX 970, whose most popular variants are cards like the Strix, TF5, and ACX 2.0. The SG08 is a wonderful example of a single (1, not all of the mini-ITX cases, but 1 among perhaps 3 or 4 in total) mini-ITX case that has the strict limits on PCIe card length that may demand a card like the GTX 970 DC Mini or the R9 Nano, depending on the length of the PSU that you choose.

If the R9 Nano is released with a high asking price, it shouldn't be of any surprise to anyone since the card was never marketed as a GTX 970-killer - a GTX 970 DC Mini competitor, perhaps. However, I still cling to the belief that the Fiji product family shouldn't have warranted 3 separate, obscure launches. The Fury X release was the only one that drew significant attention (save for the R9 Nano, of course, we'll see how this one turns out), with most of that attention turning into hype and eventually, disappointment. The R9 Fury kind of just appeared in the background, and seemed incredibly delayed.

We've endured this kind of horrible marketing from AMD since, I dunno, forever? It isn't even something to take note of anymore. When you're losing to the competition in just about everything, what do you do? Find one of the rare things in which you aren't losing, and put it up on your PR slides. Duh. Would "Fury X is more expensive and slower than the GTX 980 Ti" be a better title for AMD's release event? It's just marketing. Learn to read the fine print. He even had a picture dedicated to the fine print.
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
3,525 (1.68/day)
System Name Wut?
Processor 3900X
Motherboard ASRock Taichi X570
Cooling Water
Memory 32GB GSkill CL16 3600mhz
Video Card(s) Vega 56
Storage 2 x AData XPG 8200 Pro 1TB
Display(s) 3440 x 1440
Case Thermaltake Tower 900
Power Supply Seasonic Prime Ultra Platinum
I didn't forget, but when your CEO says something is significantly faster, don't show me a slide saying that it is 5% faster in best case. But your other points are valid.
 
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
1,211 (0.39/day)
System Name desktop
Processor i7-4770k
Motherboard Asus z87-plus
Cooling Corsair h80
Memory 32gb G.Skill Ares @ 2400mhz
Video Card(s) EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 SC (ACX 3.0)
Storage 2x Samsung 1tb 850evo SSD, 3x WD drives, 2 seagate
Display(s) Acer Predator XB271HU 27inch IPS G-Sync 165hz
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster x-FI Platium, Turtle beach Elite pro 2 + superamp.
Power Supply OCZ Z Series 850W (10 years strong)
Mouse Logitech G502 hero
Keyboard Logitech G710+
I didn't forget, but when your CEO says something is significantly faster, don't show me a slide saying that it is 5% faster in best case. But your other points are valid.
If 5%-10% is acceptable then it would be very hypocritical of people to say that it is. Then all the complaints about intel cpu's only being ~10% faster well turns in to complete load of dung.
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
3,525 (1.68/day)
System Name Wut?
Processor 3900X
Motherboard ASRock Taichi X570
Cooling Water
Memory 32GB GSkill CL16 3600mhz
Video Card(s) Vega 56
Storage 2 x AData XPG 8200 Pro 1TB
Display(s) 3440 x 1440
Case Thermaltake Tower 900
Power Supply Seasonic Prime Ultra Platinum
Exactly. 10% is borderline. If Hawaii wasn't a couple years old it would be closer to acceptable.
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
499 (0.13/day)
Processor AMD 1300X
Motherboard ASRock AB350 Gaming K4
Cooling TR Macho Rev. A
Memory 16GB Corsair 3200 MHz
Video Card(s) Sapphire RX 560
Storage 250 GB 850 EVO, 2x6 TB WD Ae
Case Fractal R4
Audio Device(s) Aune MK2 DAC
Power Supply SeaSonic X650
Mouse Logitech G702
Keyboard Microsoft Sidewinder
Software Win 10
Plot twist: It will be an amazing cryptocurrency miner, and thus, no gamers will be able to buy one for nine months.
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2013
Messages
279 (0.10/day)
System Name Darkside
Processor R7 3700X
Motherboard Aorus Elite X570
Cooling Deepcool Gammaxx l240
Memory Thermaltake Toughram DDR4 3600MHz CL18
Video Card(s) Gigabyte RX Vega 64 Gaming OC
Storage ADATA & WD 500GB NVME PCIe 3.0, many WD Black 1-3TB HD
Display(s) Samsung C27JG5x
Case Thermaltake Level 20 XL
Audio Device(s) iFi xDSD / micro iTube2 / micro iCAN SE
Power Supply EVGA 750W G2
Mouse Corsair M65
Keyboard Corsair K70 LUX RGB
Benchmark Scores Not sure, don't care
FC4 is a rather demanding game on Tahiti,
Demanding yes, but still capable. I can get 60fps @1200p maxed settings if I dummy down the AA, 55fps in eyefinity with OC CFX.

:toast:
 
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,685 (0.55/day)
System Name panda
Processor 6700k
Motherboard sabertooth s
Cooling raystorm block<black ice stealth 240 rad<ek dcc 18w 140 xres
Memory 32gb ripjaw v
Video Card(s) 290x gamer<ntzx g10<antec 920
Storage 950 pro 250gb boot 850 evo pr0n
Display(s) QX2710LED@110hz lg 27ud68p
Case 540 Air
Audio Device(s) nope
Power Supply 750w superflower
Mouse g502
Keyboard shine 3 with grey, black and red caps
Software win 10
Benchmark Scores http://hwbot.org/user/marsey99/
um with water block, single slot 295x2 is do-able
yes. so please tell me more about how, no chance anybody could make one of these single slot :)
 

decends

New Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2015
Messages
1 (0.00/day)
I'm interested in Fury Nano. Not because I'd buy one, but I want to see the maximum power efficiency that AMD is able to achieve with Fiji. If it beats Maxwell in power efficiency, there might be hope left for Arctic Islands GCN.
I thought with the Arctic Islands was gonna be based off a completely new architecture and leave GCN behind......
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
13,791 (2.33/day)
I don't think AMD will be dropping GCN. It has been hugely successful. They'll just upgrade it to v2.0 or something...
 
Joined
May 2, 2015
Messages
142 (0.07/day)
Location
Finland
Processor AMD Phenom II X4 955 (OC 3.8 GHz)
Motherboard Asus M5A97
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO
Memory 8 GB (2 x 4 GB) Kingston HyperX FURY 1333 MHz DDR3
Video Card(s) Asus Radeon HD 7850 DirectCU II
Storage 256 GB Samsung SSD 840 EVO, 40 GB Intel 320 Series SSD, WD 160 GB 7200 RPM HDD
Display(s) 23" Asus VH238 (1080p)
Case Fractal Design Core 2500
Power Supply Antec HCG-520 High Current Gamer 520W
Mouse Logitech G400
Software Windows 8.1 Pro x64
I thought with the Arctic Islands was gonna be based off a completely new architecture and leave GCN behind......
I'm pretty sure it'll just be another newer version of GCN. AMD doesn't have the resources for designing a new GPU architechture and GCN has been succesful in many ways, they've gained market share in professional graphics and it also did well against Kepler. Performance and efficiency wise Fiji is doing okay-ish against Maxwell, but is hurt by very low yields because of manufacturing the HBM and the interposer.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
27,405 (4.99/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) ASUS Strix GTX 1080Ti
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Hilarious watching everyone moan about 970 this, 970 that, when there are many 970 owners who have come out and stated the VRAM situation causes performance stuttering when being pushed over 3.5GB. Just ask 980 owners who came from a 970. The 980 doesn't have the issues even when it is pushed over 4GB.
I think most of the 970 stuttering claims were made by people that never even owned a 970 actually. Also, any situation that would put a 970 over 3.5GB would also require SLI to run smoothly, so anyone with a single card(or claiming to have a single card) that complained of stuttering was over driving their card anyway.

As an actual 970 owner, an SLI 970 owner, I can tell you the stuttering was way over exaggerated. I get no noticeable stutter in any of the modern games except one. The one game I do get stutter on is Shadow of Mordor with the HD Textures installed. And the reason it stutters is for some reason it actually ignores the extre 0.5GB of memory and once it fills the 3.5GB it starts using system RAM. And I had the same problem with my 980, it just happened at 4GB. Shadow of Mordor actually will use close to 6GB of VRAM with the HD Textures, and once you start paging out to system RAM you will get stuttering. It isn't any worse on the 970 compared to the 980.

So you want AMD to release an ultra competitive GPU that takes on the 970 directly? Are you blind? They already have one in the 390. It goes toe to toe and beats the 970 for the same price. Just because it doesn't have an "X" means you don't consider it? For the same price you get 8GB VRAM, around the same performance, and no stuttering issues. So what if it gulps power instead of drinks. The only better option is almost $200 higher which isn't much better in fps. Until NV drops the 980 under 390X prices, there is no competition.
The 390 has virtually no overclock potential though, because AMD is already pushing the Hawaii silicon to its clock speed limits with the stock clocks. You are looking at sub-100MHz overclocks on the 390 while I haven't seen a 970 yet that couldn't do a 200MHz overclock.

And lets face it, overclock the video card is no mainstream. With every card coming with some kind of overclock utility bundled with it, and the warranties now covering overclocking, people do consider how a card will overclock in their final decision, especially people on an enthusiust tech site.

Then there is the fact that the 390 is more expensive, by about $30, than the 970. So the 390 is more expensive, performs worse once both are overclocked, performs equally when not overclocked, it uses way more power, puts out way more heat, and takes up way more space in your case. The 970 is already available in basically the same size form factor as the Nano, you'll never find a 390 in that form factor. The only benefit of the 390 is 8GB of VRAM, and all the reviews straight up say 8GB on this card is useless except in select couple of situations.
 
Last edited:

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
11,877 (3.67/day)
Location
Concord, NH
System Name Apollo
Processor Intel Core i9 9880H
Memory 64GB DDR4-2667
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, 8GB HBM2
Storage 1TB Apple NVMe, 4TB External
Display(s) Laptop @ 3072x1920 + 2x LG 5k Ultrafine TB3 displays
Case MacBook Pro (16", 2019)
Power Supply 96w Power Adapter
Mouse Logitech G602
Software MacOS 10.15.6
The 390 has virtually no overclock potential though, because AMD is already pushing the Hawaii silicon to its clock speed limits with the stock clocks. You are looking at sub-100MHz overclocks on the 390 while I haven't seen a 970 yet that couldn't do a 200MHz overclock.

And lets face it, overclock the video card is no mainstream. With every card coming with some kind of overclock utility bundled with it, and the warranties now covering overclocking, people do consider how a card will overclock in their final decision, especially people on an enthusiust tech site.
Yeah but, I bought my 390 with the intent that it would be good out of the box. You're right, I can't usually pull more than 1160Mhz on it without pumping a good bit of voltage and even then. The question was what were the alternatives. Paying a tiny bit extra for the 970 didn't make sense when the 390 does almost the same but gives you that 8GB of VRAM. Not to say that's useful yet but I've been occasionally touching that limit in Farcry 4.

The 390 has a lot of texturing capability versus the 970. On paper you would expect the 390 to do something vastly better than the 970 but we don't see that in a lot of cases. I suspect when we start using more memory for higher resolution textures that the 390 will suffer a lot less than a 970. This is all to be seen though. More demanding games are in order for us to see how that all goes over.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
27,405 (4.99/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) ASUS Strix GTX 1080Ti
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Yeah but, I bought my 390 with the intent that it would be good out of the box. You're right, I can't usually pull more than 1160Mhz on it without pumping a good bit of voltage and even then. The question was what were the alternatives. Paying a tiny bit extra for the 970 didn't make sense when the 390 does almost the same but gives you that 8GB of VRAM. Not to say that's useful yet but I've been occasionally touching that limit in Farcry 4.

The 390 has a lot of texturing capability versus the 970. On paper you would expect the 390 to do something vastly better than the 970 but we don't see that in a lot of cases. I suspect when we start using more memory for higher resolution textures that the 390 will suffer a lot less than a 970. This is all to be seen though. More demanding games are in order for us to see how that all goes over.
Sure, but the 390 isn't any better out of the box than the 970. At 1440p, their target market, they're basically dead even. And at this point the 970 is cheaper than the 390, so the question comes down to paying more for a card that is currently equal in performance, is worse in every other way, just in the hopes that the 8GB of memory becomes useful. And most of the experts(reviewers) have already said the 8GB won't be useful because the core just isn't powerful enough to utilize it. By the time you crank up the graphics to the point that the 8GB would be useful, the core is so bogged down with processing that you get no benefit anyway.
 
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
3,905 (1.62/day)
Location
Texas
System Name SnowFire / The Reinforcer / Portable?
Processor i7 10700K 5.1ghz (24/7) / 2x Xeon E52650v2 / AMD Ryzen 5 3600X
Motherboard Asus Strix Z490 / Dell Dual Socket (R720) / Asrock X570 ITX
Cooling RX 360mm + 140mm Custom Loop / Dell Stock / Noctua L9i (Yes L9i)
Memory Corsair RGB 16gb DDR4 3000 CL 16 / DDR3 128gb 16 x 8gb / Corsair RGB 3200 16gb
Video Card(s) GTX Titan XP (2025mhz) / Asus GTX 950 (No Power Connector) / GTX 970 (Temp)
Storage Samsung 970 1tb NVME and 2tb HDD x4 RAID 5 / 300gb x8 RAID 5 / 2x Samsung 850 Pro 512gb
Display(s) Acer XG270HU, Samsung G7 Odyssey (1440p 240hz) / HP Omen 1080p 240hz
Case Thermaltake Cube / Dell Poweredge R720 Rack Mount Case / Fractal Design Node 202
Audio Device(s) Realtec ALC1150 (On board)
Power Supply Rosewill Lightning 1300Watt / Dell Stock 750 / Brick / Fractal Design 450 Watt Bronze
Mouse Logitech G5
Keyboard Logitech G19S
Software Windows 10 Pro / Windows Server 2016 / Windows 10 Pro
Then there is the fact that the 390 is more expensive, by about $30, than the 970. So the 390 is more expensive, performs worse once both are overclocked, performs equally when not overclocked, it uses way more power, puts out way more heat, and takes up way more space in your case. The 970 is already available in basically the same size form factor as the Nano, you'll never find a 390 in that form factor. The only benefit of the 390 is 8GB of VRAM, and all the reviews straight up say 8GB on this card is useless except in select couple of situations.
Not exactly, the 390 can overclock a bit further than its predecessor 290 because of improvements on the silicon similar to the 390X's improvements. Just because the numbers on the clocks are higher does not result in more performance.
Now that's one situation and its all based on silicon lottery, however 1150+ is much more possible than it was before which results in a decent amount of performance. Most cards including those by NVidia have a point where overclocking starts to show diminishing results. So really the situation is going to matter what happens in SLI or CFX is where VRAM will have an impact. However on a single card to card basis, neither are going to really shine brighter than the other except depending on the silicon lottery.

Nano is adorable, I am curious about this cooler more than anything and how it performs with this card especially considering the small size. Though its not going to be my cup of tea unless I decide to make a new portable system.
 
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
4,487 (1.83/day)
Processor i7 7700k
Motherboard MSI Z270 SLI Plus
Cooling CM Hyper 212 EVO
Memory 2 x 8 GB Corsair Vengeance
Video Card(s) MSI RTX 2070 Super
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB and WD Black 4TB
Display(s) Dell 27 inch 1440p 144 Hz
Case Corsair Obsidian 750D Airflow Edition
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply EVGA SuperNova 850 W Gold
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Logitech G105
Software Windows 10
Not exactly, the 390 can overclock a bit further than its predecessor 290 because of improvements on the silicon
I thought the 390 was a 290 with higher clocks. Is there something new with the architecture?
 
Top