The AMD Radeon R9 Nano Review: The Power of Size
by Ryan Smith on September 10, 2015 8:00 AM ESTOverclocking
Finally, no review of a high-end video card would be complete without a look at overclocking performance.
Of all of the Fiji cards overclocking the R9 Nano is perhaps the easiest and certainly the most unusual. Due to the fact that the card is essentially a 1000MHz Fiji card with a heavy power throttle, the card is already validated for clockspeeds that under load it doesn’t have the available power to reach. As a result while one can crank up the clockspeeds, the card isn’t going to move until you increase the power limit. And even then you are more likely to hit the power cap again than you are to break 1000MHz sustained. So overclocking the GPU is something of an academic affair.
| Radeon R9 Fury/Nano Series Overclocking | |||||
| Ref. R9 Fury X | ASUS R9 Fury | Ref. R9 Nano | |||
| Boost Clock | 1125MHz | 1075MHz | 1075MHz | ||
| Memory Clock | 1Gbps (500MHz DDR) | 1.1Gbps (550MHz DDR) | 1.1Gbps (550MHz DDR) | ||
| Power Limit | 100% | 115% | 135% | ||
| Max Voltage | 1.212v | 1.169v | 1.2v | ||
Overall we were able to overclock our sample to 1075MHz on the GPU and 550MHz (1.1Gbps) on the memory. However load clockspeeds were almost always under 1000MHz even with a generous 35% increase in the power target. Overdrive does allow for a larger increase – up to 50% – but with the R9 Nano featuring a less robust power delivery system designed to push less power than R9 Fury or R9 Fury X, we’re hesitant to increase the limit further without a better idea of what the card can safely sustain for extended periods of time.
The overall performance gains from overclocking aren’t huge, but at 7-10% they also aren’t too shabby. However since higher clockspeeds quickly ramp up the power requirements due to the higher voltages required, the performance gains won’t be anywhere near the 35% increase in the power limit, despite that we are in fact still power limited.
Meanwhile the 35% increase in the power limit has a definite knock-on effect on the cooling system. The R9 Nano’s cooler is able to keep up with the additional load, holding temperatures to 74C, but noise levels are now over 51dB(A). Power consumption at the wall is similarly affected, with the R9 Nano essentially giving up all of its energy efficiency gains in the process.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
284 Comments
View All Comments
D. Lister - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
It is interesting how the ratio of AMD fans on every tech website is about 50/50 with Nvidia fans, yet AMD's market share has dropped below 20%. What's up with that? Either a lot of you AMD guys aren't putting your money where your mouth is, or it's like the same 3 fanboys posting their stuff everywhere with multiple accounts. :pMathos - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
Not really a fanboy of either side. I'm usually a fan of whatever will give me the best performance at the price point I can afford. Though currently I'm running an AMD HD7850 2GB, because thats what was best at below 200$ at the time I bought it.itproflorida - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
coincidence I am replying to your post, but of course your not a fan but you will buy another amd card, good for you.Mathos - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
Look I've probably been building and upgrading computer systems, longer than you've been alive there buddy, I've own more video cards than you'll probably ever know. Many of which predate both nVidia and ATI. I'm buying the R9 Fury, because at 550$, it's faster than similarly priced GTX 980's in the games that I have and play. Don't get me wrong, if I could afford more, I'd buy a 980ti. Unlike you, I apparently read bench marks and multiple reviews on such things. Plus I'm not one of these dumb people who buy x brand because they have the fastest top end card.... even though another brand has something faster at the price point I'm looking at.And speculation you say? Even though I've already been using said features with my 7850? Mostly just the frame rate limit settings to save power at the moment. Also.... have you not seen the performance difference with the DX 12vs11 benchmarks on other sites?
D. Lister - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
@MathosI think there is a misunderstanding here - my statement was based on a general observation, not pointed at anyone in particular. You could attach a hamster wheel to your gpu slot and I wouldn't mind as long as you feed the hamster, not to mention it would work nearly just as well for Project Cars or Witcher 3 for less money. Sorry, couldn't resist. :D
Mathos - Saturday, September 12, 2015 - link
Oh no, wasn't replying to you, was responding to that Florida person on that harsh reply. As far as your's yeah I figured that. It was kind of ironic, that a fan boy came out to attack my choice on the other post though. I'll have to check out the project cars and witcher 3 bench's. Don't play many racing games, other than Grid and Dirt. I still haven't finished Witcher 1, not worried much about Witcher 3 for a while.Beany2013 - Sunday, October 4, 2015 - link
Anyone who publicly describes themselves as a 'pro', and subsequently can't even manage basic grammar and punctuation needn't be listened to. Simple as that.medi03 - Saturday, September 12, 2015 - link
That's because most of the uneducated public with little clue buys nVidia.HollyDOL - Saturday, September 12, 2015 - link
Funny enough, I started to buy nVidia after I become educated in 3D graphics. At that time ATI provided such a terrible developer experience I doubt I'd be able to forgive&forget yet in next few years.medi03 - Sunday, September 13, 2015 - link
nVidia outsold AMD even in Fermi times, with slower, more expensive, more power hungry chips.So, nope, sorry to bust your bubble.