• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD Radeon R9 Nano

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
raghu78 said:
R9 390X and R9 390 are just going to be waiting for the Nano to launch so that they get official price cuts to USD 349 / USD 299.
Click to expand...

I am not sure about the 80% as fast as Fury X performance for the Nano but you are probably right that AMD used 390/390X as fillers right now and it's highly likely they will drop their prices once Nano launches since Nano is supposedly faster than a 290X which means 390X will have trouble selling at $429 between the Nano and the $549 Fury. I could see the Nano being 5% faster than the 290X.

TemjinGold said:
Except the Nano is most likely going to be flawed Fury cards that they otherwise would've thrown away. Not saying that's for sure cheaper.

On another note, I'm actually wondering why they didn't make THIS the 390X. That would've really sent a message.
Click to expand...

Ya, they screwed up the naming this gen. 390 series really should have been Fury cards, call the nano 385 series and the current 390/390X should have been 380/380X at most.
 
RussianSensation said:
Ya, they screwed up the naming this gen. 390 series really should have been Fury cards, call the nano 385 series and the current 390/390X should have been 380/380X at most.
Click to expand...

I disagree.
Much easier to differentiate between amd fury new advanced world leading technology vs 390x and then confuse the public.
 
RussianSensation said:
I am not sure about the 80% as fast as Fury X performance for the Nano but you are probably right that AMD used 390/390X as fillers right now and it's highly likely they will drop their prices once Nano launches since Nano is supposedly faster than a 290X which means 390X will have trouble selling at $429 between the Nano and the $549 Fury. I could see the Nano being 5% faster than the 290X.



Ya, they screwed up the naming this gen. 390 series really should have been Fury cards, call the nano 385 series and the current 390/390X should have been 380/380X at most.
Click to expand...

I actually think this would have been a great line-up:

  • Fury X2 $1099-1199
  • Fury X $649
  • Fury Pro $549
  • 390X (The current Nano) $429
  • 390 (full tonga that doesn't currently exist on discrete cards) $329
  • 380 (current 380 Tonga with a bump in freq) $239
  • 370 and down (Tonga derivitives) TBD
 
happy medium said:
Why would they try to target a card that to some is a horrible price/perf card and way overpriced?

Because they know the gtx980's price is gonna drop and squash the 390x?
Click to expand...

Fury on Jul 14th will make GTX 980 downright illogical at USD 500. Nvidia could definitely cut prices immediately but I am guessing they will wait till Fury Nano to cut GTX 980 price. My speculation for Nano specs - 3072 sp, 4 shader engines, 4 tesselation engines, 64 ROP, 4GB HBM. 850 - 900 Mhz clocks to hit that 175W TDP. I am guessing 15% faster than R9 290X at 60% the TDP . 1.15 / 0.6 = 1.92 approx. Price USD 429-USD 449. Thats my guess.
 
RussianSensation said:
I am not sure about the 80% as fast as Fury X performance for the Nano but you are probably right that AMD used 390/390X as fillers right now and it's highly likely they will drop their prices once Nano launches since Nano is supposedly faster than a 290X which means 390X will have trouble selling at $429 between the Nano and the $549 Fury. I could see the Nano being 5% faster than the 290X.
Click to expand...

I said clock for clock performance. so please bear that in mind. anyway here is my guess on Fury and Fury Nano.

R9 Fury X - 4096 sp, 1050 Mhz, 64 ROP, 4 GB HBM
R9 Fury - 3584 sp, 1000 Mhz, 64 ROP, 4 GB HBM
R9 Nano - 3072 sp, 900 Mhz, 64 ROP, 4 GB HBM.

btw Nano will be atleast 15% faster than R9 290X. As I already told you AMD is just trying to make a money grab from the uninformed few before Nano arrives. R9 390X is just a dead duck at USD 429. Nano at USD 449 will push R9 390X to USD 349.
 
Different Fiji GPUs?

AMD-Fiji-HBM.jpg


amd-radeon-fiji-gpu-100591483-orig.png
 
This is the first time I've been excited for an AMD GPU in a loooong time.

Tonga XT had some of my interest...but R9 Nano really takes the crown for me.

As I mainly use 2560 x 1080 and 3440 x 1440 Monitors...this card will be more than sufficient...will be perfect for my love to ITX builds...and is an all around winner.

I'm gonna admit it now...I didn't think AMD still had anything left for 2015(I was pretty sceptic about Fury X...still am)...but I have been proven wrong quite positively.



I just hope they give us a concrete release date soon...and that it's gonna be before the end of Q3...because this thing needs to go in a Skylake build right nao. So...please post official benchmarks the millisecond you see them. We have to know...for...reasons!
 
Last edited:
96Firebird said:
The "Captain Jack" benchmarks came out over 7 months ago, how do they still not have the card ready for launch?
Click to expand...

Big difference between early engineering samples and retail-ready product.

The less charitable interpretation is it would cannibalize sales of 390/X big time, so waiting another 2-3 months gives their AIB partners time to clear inventory first.
 
If the Captain Jack slides are true, then Fury Nano is 30% faster than R9 290X while using much less power. That is pretty mind blowing.
 
When PCMag asked AMD about the relative performance of Nano to Fury X and non X, the response is very telling.

He said Nano will respond to the temperature environment that it's in and if in a small case, it will limit its TDP, but if tested on an open bench, it can go a lot higher.

So it sounds like slightly cut Fiji with very low clocks to reduce TDP but it definitely can clock higher.
 
raghu78 said:
I said clock for clock performance. so please bear that in mind. anyway here is my guess on Fury and Fury Nano.

R9 Fury X - 4096 sp, 1050 Mhz, 64 ROP, 4 GB HBM
R9 Fury - 3584 sp, 1000 Mhz, 64 ROP, 4 GB HBM
R9 Nano - 3072 sp, 900 Mhz, 64 ROP, 4 GB HBM.

btw Nano will be atleast 15% faster than R9 290X. As I already told you AMD is just trying to make a money grab from the uninformed few before Nano arrives. R9 390X is just a dead duck at USD 429. Nano at USD 449 will push R9 390X to USD 349.
Click to expand...

That's what the 390X is there for. When R9 Nano drops, the 390X can have a price cut. Where does that leave NV? They'll have to price the 980 at 390X prices as they are the same performance. The 980ti has completely osbourned the titan x in a matter of 3 months, and will the 980ti suffer the same fate as the 290X? Sitting on store shelves with nobody wanting it no matter what the price because everyone wants the Fury? Especially considering the 980ti is hot and loud..
 
It looks like AMD have made it properly this time with pricing. They pretty much equaled the performance of GTX980 while having smaller price. Fury X looks to be faster even than Titan X while having 350$ smaller price tag, and Fury looks to be competing with GTX 980 Ti for 100$ less. And there is Nano, which will come in few weeks/months. 85-90% performance of Fury X while having 175W TDP and really tiny footprint. When it will come out it will make 390X prices go down even more, and become a big problem for any proposition from Nvidia.

It looks very good, so far.
 
I wonder if AMD will make something like two more cut down Fiji GPUs. Would made for some awesome replacements of the 390's.
 
96Firebird said:
The "Captain Jack" benchmarks came out over 7 months ago, how do they still not have the card ready for launch?
Click to expand...

Because it was a simulation of what they thought the Nano would be and not the final product. AMD makes it sound like they don't know yet what the core counts and speed of the Nano will be (or the regular Fury for that matter) because they have to see what the yields are.

Also remember these dies are super expensive; AMD needs to sell them as high of a price as possible and there's likely HBM availability issues too. Don't be surprised if regular Fury and/or the Nano gets delayed if the Fury X sells decently.

Price for the Nano is probably $499. Well, at least what AMD is hoping to sell it at.
 
Damn. Confirmation, just came in tonight:

http://www.twitch.tv/thetechreport/b/670328467

Jump to 36:00...

"It is the case that the display block on this card hasn't changed substantially from the Tonga. As a result, HDMI 2.0 is not supported by this card."

Well shoot, that's it then. Nothing we can do. Fury X (and likely the Nano as well) is a fantastic card, it deserves all of our support, tremendous value for anyone with a display port on their monitor. Bad mistake about HDMI 2.0, hopefully corrected at some point early next year.
 
Mako88 said:
Damn. Confirmation, just came in tonight:

http://www.twitch.tv/thetechreport/b/670328467

Jump to 36:00...

"It is the case that the display block on this card hasn't changed substantially from the Tonga. As a result, HDMI 2.0 is not supported by this card."

Well shoot, that's it then. Nothing we can do. Fury X (and likely the Nano as well) is a fantastic card, it deserves all of our support, tremendous value for anyone with a display port on their monitor. Bad mistake about HDMI 2.0, hopefully corrected at some point early next year.
Click to expand...

You just posed the exact same thing in 3 different threads.

Who is this guy who claims intimate knowledge of the fiji gpu? I wouldnt say anything is "confirmed" until AMD confirms it
 
Looks like a great replacement for my 7950 when It comes out, I just hope someone makes it with a dual link DVI port on the back as my 27" IPS monitor only has HDMI (XB1) and DVI(PC) on it.
 
everybody who doesn't want a nuclear power plant in their rigs will wait for nano hehe

i want nano

nano all the way down to r7

nanos !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top