I guess the Radeon Technology Group might works after all.

See this ;
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041846331&postcount=110
http://techreport.com/news/29011/updated-a...sion-apologizes

Roy was saying......the 'fair reviews' was taken out of context.....

I guess Roy is learning it from our certain politicians.

Inb4 in a decade AMD rule the market share for GPUs,and kill off NVidia.

Hope not...

Interested to see what will happen in the coming years.

I read and bringing back the focus on PC =/= ditching consoles.

I can't wait to see these "fair" reviews.
Btw he already apologized to Scott from TR.


Meanwhile at HARDOCP,

Yup AMD roy already said sorry because of back lash and negative PR.
http://techreport.com/news/29011/amd-vp-ex...iews-arent-fair

AMD is not in a position to tell terms and condition and they can only make a good and hope for the best that is all.

This post has been edited by Desprado: Sep 10 2015, 03:35 PM

R9-Nano review from PCPER



from Digital Foundry. 1440p





from Blunty?



This post has been edited by Acid_RuleZz: Sep 10 2015, 10:56 PM

Impressive little card, kudos to AMD for proving that they too can make a decent card that doesn't eat power and in very tiny space. AMD is at an advantage because of HBM but at 28nm and lack of dedicated interposer fab is hurting AMD.

But that power trick is very easy to achieve on any GCN card because AMD puts too high clockspeed on it, thus requiring very high voltage to be stable. I could make my 290X as power saving as GTX 960 but performs much faster than it. I made an experiment already, at 950MHz my card needs mere 1.05V. I don't probe with multimeter or Kill-A-Watt meter but on GPU-Z software reading the VDDC Power In never reach 150W and Power Out never reach over 130W when running 3DMark.

Impressive Nano, too bad the price tag doesnt suit it.

So...seeing Nano is officially better binned chip than the one used for Fury X......does this means Fury X buyers got sold with 'lower' quality chip?

This post has been edited by JohnLai: Sep 10 2015, 11:55 PM

Any problem with that?

Just reading some user comments from several reviewer sites that they feel cheated by AMD.

That just dumb imo. Better cooler and better overclockability at the same price.
If you drop the Power Limit of a Fury X and undervolt it, you probably get similar performance with the Nano and slightly higher consumption if not the same.

where?

Mostly at reddit/wccftech when you search for nano, then checking the comment section.
Quite a lot of toxic comments though.


Some claiming AMD used them and charged them $650 for water cooling chip setup with high leakage (that cant really overclock far) while keeping the better chip that can easily reach same fury X clock rate with mere adjustment at CCC on simple air cooling (aka the Nano).

nano is a fail launch.Go see Overclock.UK which did not sell yet 1 nano and overclock.Uk is the biggest UK retailer for GPUs.

Higher leakage is usually better at overclocking because they tend to be more stable with extra volt and with WC keeping the leakage, it will overclock much better than lower leakage chip.
The Fury-X still lack proper voltage control and the VRM temp is somewhat worrying with extra voltage.

It's a product that cater to a niche audience with specific form factor and use-case scenario. How many people own 970 mini anyway?


Overall the Nano impressed me apart from the steep price. I was expecting 390-ish performance with thermal throttle everywhere.

So there's no thermal throttle on Nano? I saw in one video posted above stating that the card is running cool under 75C all the time, that is seriously impressive.

Here is the Nano review from Guru3D site:

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-r...o-review,1.html

Nano also in Malaysia already, nope not with me. I only have R9 390 and R9 295X2. Fury X no longer with me.

Nano is a product full of potential but plagued with 2 major problems
1. price
2. availability

Checked with one of the local retailer the price for Sapphire Nano is RM3200 including of GST

No, 75c is the Nano temperature target and 85c is the thermal limit iinm.

Can just turn up the power limit for more performance than normal Fury. But prepare for louder noise.

And yes, GCN cards are very efficient. The only thing is AMD had to set the hawaii and fiji chips to overclocking speeds on stock reference card to match the nvidia's card. That's why it is power hungry

I still wonder why AMD don't want to pursue laptop market with fiji chips. It can be clocked lower and it uses very few components.

This post has been edited by terradrive: Sep 11 2015, 10:07 AM