AMD Radeon RX 480
vs
AMD Radeon R9 Nano

AMD Radeon RX 480
AMD Radeon R9 Nano
RX 480 R9 Nano Difference
AMD Radeon RX 480 AMD Radeon R9 Nano
Price $ 237.0 $ 649.0 412 (174%)
Year 2016 2015 1 (0%)
Maximum Recorded Temperature C 73C
Max Fan Noise dB 45.8dB
Recommended Power Supply 500W 525W 25 (5%)
Benchmark CPU Intel Core i7-6700K @ 4.00GHz ($334.99) Intel Core i7-4790K @ 4.00GHz ($306.99)
CPU Impact on FPS +0.0 FPS +0.0 FPS 0 (0%)
CPU Impact on FPS % 0.0% 0.0% 0 (0%)
Benchmark Quality Settings Ultra Quality Settings Ultra Quality Settings
Average 1080p Performance 61.5 FPS 72.9 FPS 11.4 (19%)
Average 1440p Performance 46.0 FPS 55.2 FPS 9.2 (20%)
Average 4K Performance 28.6 FPS 33.6 FPS 5 (17%)
Memory 8 GB 4 GB 4 (50%)
1080p Cost Per Frame $ 6.5 $ 8.9 2.4 (37%)
1440p Cost Per Frame $ 8.7 $ 11.8 3.1 (36%)
4K Cost Per Frame $ 14.0 $ 19.3 5.3 (38%)
Overall Combination Score 81/100 62/100 19 (23%)
Our Verdict: Upgrading from RX 480 to R9 Nano is not recommended as it is less than 30% of improvement in performance. In general, a reasonable upgrade is between 30% and 50% or more to justify the purchase of new hardware. The price/performance ratio is much better for RX 480 .

Game Performance at selected quality settings

Change Quality Settings

1920x1080

AMD Radeon RX 480
AMD Radeon R9 Nano
Year Game Frames Per Second
2019 Apex Legends
63.0
72.0
2019 Anthem
40.6
46.4
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
59.5
68.0
2019 Resident Evil 2
75.8
87.9
2019 Metro Exodus
33.7
39.1
2018 Call of Duty: Black Ops 4
84.0
79.0
2018 Assassin's Creed Odyssey
33.0
37.0
2018 Final Fantasy XV
57.0
63.0
2018 Shadow of the Tomb Raider
54.0
50.0
2018 Just Cause 4
48.7
56.5
2018 Monster Hunter: World
52.5
60.9
2018 Battlefield V
65.0
65.0
2017 Assassin's Creed Origins
47.0
53.0
2017 Destiny 2
91.0
102.0
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
67.5
78.3
2017 For Honor
90.0
104.4
2017 Project CARS 2
63.7
73.9
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
77.2
89.6
2016 Dishonored 2
46.5
53.9
2015 Rocket League
262.5
304.5
2015 Need For Speed
72.7
84.4
2015 Project CARS
69.7
80.9
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
180.0
208.8
2009 League of Legends
337.5
391.5

2560x1440

AMD Radeon RX 480
AMD Radeon R9 Nano
Year Game Frames Per Second
2019 Apex Legends
46.9
53.6
2019 Anthem
32.2
36.8
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
46.2
52.8
2019 Resident Evil 2
51.0
59.2
2019 Metro Exodus
26.2
30.4
2018 Call of Duty: Black Ops 4
53.0
47.0
2018 Assassin's Creed Odyssey
26.0
29.0
2018 Final Fantasy XV
40.0
45.0
2018 Shadow of the Tomb Raider
35.0
35.0
2018 Fallout 76
63.0
70.0
2018 Just Cause 4
36.0
41.8
2018 Monster Hunter: World
36.7
42.6
2018 Battlefield V
46.0
51.0
2017 Assassin's Creed Origins
31.0
42.0
2017 Destiny 2
78.0
88.0
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
48.7
56.5
2017 For Honor
52.5
60.9
2017 Project CARS 2
45.0
52.2
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
69.7
80.9
2016 Dishonored 2
39.7
46.1
2015 Rocket League
112.5
130.5
2015 Need For Speed
56.2
65.2
2015 Project CARS
53.3
61.8
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
150.0
174.0
2009 League of Legends
187.5
217.5

3840x2160

AMD Radeon RX 480
AMD Radeon R9 Nano
Year Game Frames Per Second
2019 Apex Legends
28.0
32.0
2019 Anthem
17.5
20.0
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
24.5
28.0
2019 Resident Evil 2
25.1
29.1
2019 Metro Exodus
16.5
19.1
2018 Call of Duty: Black Ops 4
30.0
33.0
2018 Assassin's Creed Odyssey
18.0
20.0
2018 Final Fantasy XV
24.0
26.0
2018 Shadow of the Tomb Raider
19.0
18.0
2018 Fallout 76
35.0
39.0
2018 Just Cause 4
18.8
21.8
2018 Monster Hunter: World
17.6
20.4
2018 Battlefield V
29.0
24.0
2017 Assassin's Creed Origins
24.0
27.0
2017 Destiny 2
39.0
44.0
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
33.7
39.1
2017 For Honor
26.2
30.4
2017 Project CARS 2
37.5
43.5
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
58.5
67.9
2016 Dishonored 2
31.5
36.5
2015 Rocket League
52.5
60.9
2015 Need For Speed
37.5
43.5
2015 Project CARS
37.5
43.5
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
135.0
156.6
2009 League of Legends
75.0
87.0

AMD Radeon RX 480 / i7-6700K

At 1440p, RX 480 can hit 50-60 fps on pretty much everything at ultra, just without antialiasing, less ambient occlusion and turned down shadows. It is clear that the RX 480 is a significantly more capable high-end card that can play AAA titles at 1080p/1440p with 50-60 frames per second. In terms of memory, the RX 480 's 8192 MB RAM is more than enough for modern games and should not cause any bottlenecks.

AMD Radeon R9 Nano / i7-4790K

At 1440p, R9 Nano can hit 50-60 fps on pretty much everything at ultra, just without antialiasing, less ambient occlusion and turned down shadows. Deciding whether to invest so much money in a high-end GPU like R9 Nano requires careful thought. With current 4096 MB RAM, the R9 Nano can have very few memory-related bottlenecks in more modern games.

RX 480 vs R9 Nano Specifications Comparison

Board Design

RX 480 R9 Nano
Board NumberC940, D009-01C882
Length9.5 inches 241 mm6 inches 152 mm
Outputs1x HDMI3x DisplayPort1x HDMI3x DisplayPort
Power Connectors1x 6-pin1x 8-pin
Slot WidthDual-slotDual-slot
TDP150 W175 W

Clock Speeds

RX 480 R9 Nano
GPU Clock1120 MHz1000 MHz
Memory Clock2000 MHz 8000 MHz effective500 MHz 1000 MHz effective

Graphics Card

RX 480 R9 Nano
Bus InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
GenerationArctic Islands (RX 400)Pirate Islands (R9 300)
Launch Price229 USD649 USD
ProductionActiveActive
Release DateJun 29th, 2016Aug 27th, 2015

Graphics Features

RX 480 R9 Nano
DirectX12.0 (12_0)12.0 (12_0)
OpenCL22
OpenGL4.54.5
Shader Model66
Vulkan1.1.821.1.82

Graphics Processor

RX 480 R9 Nano
ArchitectureGCN 4.0GCN 3.0
Die Size244 mm²596 mm²
GPU NameEllesmereFiji
GPU VariantPolaris 10 XT (215-0876184)Fiji XT CA (215-0862120)
Process Size14 nm28 nm
Transistors5,700 million8,900 million

Memory

RX 480 R9 Nano
Bandwidth256.0 GB/s512.0 GB/s
Memory Bus256 bit4096 bit
Memory Size8192 MB4096 MB
Memory TypeGDDR5HBM

Render Config

RX 480 R9 Nano
Compute Units3664
ROPs3264
Shading Units23044096
TMUs144256

Theoretical Performance

RX 480 R9 Nano
FP16 (half) performance5,834 GFLOPS (1:1)8,192 GFLOPS (1:1)
FP32 (float) performance5,834 GFLOPS8,192 GFLOPS
FP64 (double) performance364.6 GFLOPS (1:16)512.0 GFLOPS (1:16)
Pixel Rate40.51 GPixel/s64.00 GPixel/s
Texture Rate182.3 GTexel/s256.0 GTexel/s

Discussion and Comments

Share Your Comments