The AMD Radeon R9 Nano Review: The Power of Size
by Ryan Smith on September 10, 2015 8:00 AM ESTMiddle Earth: Shadow of Mordor
Our next benchmark is Monolith’s popular open-world action game, Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor. One of our current-gen console multiplatform titles, Shadow of Mordor is plenty punishing on its own, and at Ultra settings it absolutely devours VRAM, showcasing the knock-on effect that current-gen consoles have on VRAM requirements.
Both of AMD’s Fury cards have handled Shadow of Mordor well in the past, and R9 Nano is no exception. The R9 Nano ends up trailing the R9 Fury X and R9 Fury by around 13% and 7% respectively, not too far off from their respective overall averages. Otherwise compared to NVIDIA’s offerings the R9 Nano clearly trails the similarly priced GTX 980 Ti, but enjoys a very comfortable margin over the likes of the GTX 980 and GTX 970 Mini.
Minimum framerates on the other hand also inherit the other Fiji cards’ weaknesses. AMD actually doesn’t fare too poorly here, however the toll of being slower than the R9 Fury doesn’t do the R9 Nano any favors. Below 3840x2160 the R9 Nano feels the pinch of the GTX 980 and GTX 970 Mini, falling behind these cards.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
284 Comments
View All Comments
looncraz - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
Indeed. At $200 cheaper I'd consider buying two of them, rather than none.The lack of a DL-DVI port, though, would probably limit me to just one.
Alexvrb - Saturday, September 12, 2015 - link
Agreed I think it's a great compact card but for their sake I hope they drop the price gradually as yields improve. Personally I will be waiting to see what happens with HBM2, I'm hoping that with the improvements in density they'll be able to push it into mid-range cards as well next time.Oxford Guy - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
I didn't see much about DX 12 and how it should counter all the energy efficiency stuff that is being pretty much obsessed about. The conclusion, for instance, talks so much about energy efficiency when in fact the real point of this card is not performance per watt but the form factor.I don't see anything about Ashes — not even a word about why it wasn't included.
Ryan Smith - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
"I don't see anything about Ashes — not even a word about why it wasn't included."We don't include non-release software in our GPU evaluations. Ashes isn't a complete game, it's still an alpha.
AS118 - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
I feel like that's totally valid. Until multiple finalized DX12 benches come out, I don't feel that we can really understand how current cards will work with DX12.Oxford Guy - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
It still merits a mention, even if it's just to say that.AS118 - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
I agree. In fact, this review seems as honest as every other Nano one. They all say "it's niche" and "it's too expensive for the performance if you don't need the small size, and regardless of what Roy said, the sites that were given a card are quite critical of the Nano, and most recommend getting a bigger, faster, cheaper card instead if you don't need something tiny.They say "It's a great product, but only for people that really must have the strongest mini-card".
RussianSensation - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
Wreckage = trolls like Rollo, but minus the facts.Kutark - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link
Whats the Roy Taylor incident? Im not aware.at80eighty - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
If there's anyone championing the cause of objectivity, it's you