R9 Nano med Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4200+ benchmarks på Ultra kvalitet kvalitetsindstillinger

På 1440p, R9 Nano kan ramme 50-60 fps på stort set alt på ultra, bare uden antialiasing, mindre omgivende okklusion og skruet ned skygger. Denne kombination mellem R9 Nano og AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4200+ vil forårsage alvorlige flaskehalse i mange spil og forårsage alvorlige fps tab. Beslutte, om at investere så mange penge i en high-end GPU R9 Nano gerne kræver omhyggelig tænkning. Med den 4096 nuværende MB RAM, R9 Nano kan det have meget få Hukommelse-relaterede flaskehalse i mere moderne spil.

 R9 Nano med Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4200+ benchmarks på Ultra kvalitet kvalitetsindstillinger
AMD Radeon R9 Nano
Pris kr 10,045.5
År 2015
Maksimal indspillet temperatur 73C
Max blæserstøj 45.8dB
Anbefalet strømforsyning 525W
Benchmark CPU AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4200+ ($129.95)
CPU indvirkning på FPS -41.2 FPS
CPU indvirkning på FPS% -50.0%
Indstillinger for benchmark-kvalitet Ultra Quality Settings
Gennemsnitlig 1080p-ydeevne 33.7 FPS
Gennemsnitlig 1440p ydeevne 25.3 FPS
Gennemsnitlig 4K-ydeevne 15.2 FPS
Hukommelse 4 GB
1080p Pris pr. Ramme kr 126.5
1440p Pris pr. Ramme kr 168.5
4K pris pr. Ramme kr 280.5
Serie R9 Nano
Samlet kombinations score 33/100 Svag

R9 Nano er meget dyrere end R9 390 da det koster en enorm . Sammenlign dette med R9 390, AMD Radeon R9 390X , som oprindeligt kom til en pris på , . I mellemtiden er NVIDIA nærmeste ækvivalente kort GTX 980 der koster . Desværre var spilpræstation ikke så imponerende. Selv hvis R9 Nano konsekvent leverer billedhastigheder over R9 390, AMD Radeon R9 390X , er gevinsten ikke meget til at retfærdiggøre en opgradering.

Hvorvidt det er en forsvarlig opgradering afhænger af, hvilket grafikkort du opgraderer fra. Brugere med en R9 390, AMD Radeon R9 390X ser ikke en bemærkelsesværdig stigning i billedfrekvensen efter at have betalt mere for denne R9 Nano . Tilsvarende vil dem, der holder på GTX 980 's GTX 780 grafikkort, ikke have en grund til at hoppe hold endnu. Til 1080p Full HD kunne vi spille Monster Hunter: World, Forza Horizon 4, Final Fantasy XV, Battlefield V, Fallout 76 på 61 fps til 68 fps og holdt billedhastighederne svævende rundt på 64 fps.

Til 1440p Quad HD kunne vi spille World War Z, Fallout 76 på 64 fps til 70 fps og holdt billedhastighederne svævende rundt på 67 fps.

Spillets ydeevne Ultra kvalitet under indstillinger

Ændre kvalitetsindstillinger

Opløsning 1920x1080

1% Low [Min FPS] Average FPS
År Spil Billeder pr. sekund
2019 Apex Legends
6
22.2
2019 Anthem
4
14.3
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
6
21.0
2019 Resident Evil 2
8
27.1
2019 Metro Exodus
3
12.0
2019 World War Z
8
26.8
2018 Call of Duty: Black Ops 4
7
24.3
2018 Assassin's Creed Odyssey
3
11.4
2018 Final Fantasy XV
5
19.4
2018 Shadow of the Tomb Raider
4
15.4
2018 Forza Horizon 4
5
19.4
2018 Fallout 76
6
21.0
2018 Hitman 2
5
16.3
2018 Just Cause 4
5
17.4
2018 Monster Hunter: World
5
18.8
2018 Battlefield V
6
20.0
2017 Assassin's Creed Origins
5
16.3
2017 Destiny 2
9
31.4
2017 PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds
5
16.3
2017 Fortnite Battle Royale
6
19.6
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
7
24.1
2017 For Honor
9
32.2
2017 Project CARS 2
7
22.8
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
8
27.6
2016 Ashes of the Singularity
5
17.0
2016 Hitman
7
25.8
2016 Rise of the Tomb Raider
6
21.9
2016 The Division
6
19.9
2016 Overwatch
9
30.4
2016 Dishonored 2
5
16.6
2015 DiRT Rally
10
35.2
2015 Grand Theft Auto V
5
19.1
2015 The Witcher 3
5
18.2
2015 Total War: Attila
5
17.2
2015 Rocket League
28
93.8
2015 Need For Speed
8
26.0
2015 Project CARS
7
24.9
2015 Rainbow Six Siege
14
45.6
2014 Civilization: Beyond Earth
10
34.9
2014 Dragon Age: Inquisition
7
24.5
2014 Far Cry 4
7
23.1
2014 GRID Autosport
7
24.7
2014 Shadow of Mordor
9
31.7
2014 The Talos Principle
10
35.1
2013 Crysis 3
6
21.6
2013 Battlefield 4
8
27.4
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
19
64.3
2009 League of Legends
37
120.7

Opløsning 2560x1440

1% Low [Min FPS] Average FPS
År Spil Billeder pr. sekund
2019 Apex Legends
5
16.5
2019 Anthem
3
11.3
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
5
16.3
2019 Resident Evil 2
5
18.2
2019 Metro Exodus
2
9.4
2019 World War Z
6
19.6
2018 Call of Duty: Black Ops 4
4
14.5
2018 Assassin's Creed Odyssey
2
8.9
2018 Final Fantasy XV
4
13.9
2018 Shadow of the Tomb Raider
3
10.8
2018 Forza Horizon 4
5
16.6
2018 Fallout 76
6
21.6
2018 Hitman 2
3
10.8
2018 Just Cause 4
3
12.9
2018 Monster Hunter: World
4
13.1
2018 Battlefield V
4
15.7
2017 Assassin's Creed Origins
3
12.9
2017 Destiny 2
8
27.1
2017 PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds
3
12.3
2017 Fortnite Battle Royale
3
12.7
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
5
17.4
2017 For Honor
5
18.8
2017 Project CARS 2
4
16.1
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
7
24.9
2016 Ashes of the Singularity
4
15.1
2016 Hitman
6
19.8
2016 Rise of the Tomb Raider
4
15.6
2016 The Division
4
14.9
2016 Overwatch
6
20.9
2016 Dishonored 2
4
14.2
2015 DiRT Rally
7
25.4
2015 Grand Theft Auto V
4
13.7
2015 The Witcher 3
4
14.1
2015 Total War: Attila
3
12.3
2015 Rocket League
12
40.2
2015 Need For Speed
6
20.1
2015 Project CARS
5
19.0
2015 Rainbow Six Siege
9
29.5
2014 Civilization: Beyond Earth
8
27.8
2014 Dragon Age: Inquisition
5
17.5
2014 Far Cry 4
6
21.2
2014 GRID Autosport
7
25.1
2014 Shadow of Mordor
7
23.1
2014 The Talos Principle
8
26.1
2013 Crysis 3
4
14.4
2013 Battlefield 4
5
18.7
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
16
53.6
2009 League of Legends
20
67.0

Opløsning 3840x2160

1% Low [Min FPS] Average FPS
År Spil Billeder pr. sekund
2019 Apex Legends
3
9.9
2019 Anthem
1
6.2
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
2
8.6
2019 Resident Evil 2
2
9.0
2019 Metro Exodus
1
5.9
2019 World War Z
3
11.2
2018 Call of Duty: Black Ops 4
3
10.2
2018 Assassin's Creed Odyssey
1
6.2
2018 Final Fantasy XV
2
8.0
2018 Shadow of the Tomb Raider
1
5.5
2018 Forza Horizon 4
3
10.8
2018 Fallout 76
3
12.0
2018 Hitman 2
1
6.2
2018 Just Cause 4
2
6.7
2018 Monster Hunter: World
1
6.3
2018 Battlefield V
2
7.4
2017 Assassin's Creed Origins
2
8.3
2017 Destiny 2
4
13.6
2017 PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds
2
7.1
2017 Fortnite Battle Royale
2
6.9
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
3
12.0
2017 For Honor
2
9.4
2017 Project CARS 2
4
13.4
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
6
20.9
2016 Ashes of the Singularity
3
11.7
2016 Hitman
3
11.5
2016 Rise of the Tomb Raider
2
8.5
2016 The Division
2
8.5
2016 Overwatch
3
10.8
2016 Dishonored 2
3
11.2
2015 DiRT Rally
4
14.4
2015 Grand Theft Auto V
2
6.8
2015 The Witcher 3
2
8.6
2015 Total War: Attila
3
10.9
2015 Rocket League
5
18.8
2015 Need For Speed
4
13.4
2015 Project CARS
4
13.4
2015 Rainbow Six Siege
4
13.7
2014 Civilization: Beyond Earth
5
17.8
2014 Dragon Age: Inquisition
2
9.5
2014 Far Cry 4
3
11.6
2014 GRID Autosport
5
16.7
2014 Shadow of Mordor
3
12.9
2014 The Talos Principle
4
14.9
2013 Crysis 3
2
7.2
2013 Battlefield 4
4
13.8
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
14
48.3
2009 League of Legends
8
26.8
R9 Nano with Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4200+ at 1080p and Ultra kvalitet settings
R9 Nano with Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4200+ at 1440p and Ultra kvalitet settings
R9 Nano with Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4200+ at 4K and Ultra kvalitet settings

R9 Nano Specifikationer

R9 Nano Board Design

Board NumberC882
Length6 inches 152 mm
Outputs1x HDMI3x DisplayPort
Power Connectors1x 8-pin
Slot WidthDual-slot
TDP175 W

R9 Nano Clock Speeds

GPU Clock1000 MHz
Memory Clock500 MHz 1000 MHz effective

R9 Nano Graphics Card

Bus InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16
GenerationPirate Islands (R9 300)
Launch Price649 USD
ProductionActive
Release DateAug 27th, 2015

R9 Nano Graphics Features

DirectX12.0 (12_0)
OpenCL2
OpenGL4.5
Shader Model6
Vulkan1.1.82

R9 Nano Graphics Processor

ArchitectureGCN 3.0
Die Size596 mm²
GPU NameFiji
GPU VariantFiji XT CA (215-0862120)
Process Size28 nm
Transistors8,900 million

R9 Nano Memory

Bandwidth512.0 GB/s
Memory Bus4096 bit
Memory Size4096 MB
Memory TypeHBM

R9 Nano Render Config

Compute Units64
ROPs64
Shading Units4096
TMUs256

R9 Nano Theoretical Performance

FP16 (half) performance8,192 GFLOPS (1:1)
FP32 (float) performance8,192 GFLOPS
FP64 (double) performance512.0 GFLOPS (1:16)
Pixel Rate64.00 GPixel/s
Texture Rate256.0 GTexel/s

Critics Reviews

The AMD Radeon R9 Nano shows that you don’t always have to be the fastest to win the race. Some races are more of a marathon, and it’s more important to pace yourself well. MORE: Best Graphics ...
The Radeon R9 Nano is the fruition of AMD's gamble of integrating stacked high-bandwidth memory (HBM) and a 4,096 SP pixel-grinder into a compact multi-chip module that eliminates the need for external memory chips, freeing up large swathes of PCB area.
The new Radeon R9 Nano is the little brother to the existing AMD Radeon R9 Fury cards – in water-cooled 'X' and air-cooled standard models – and deserves that distinction in more ways than one.
AMD seems to have hit all the cues it set out to with the Radeon R9 Nano. This card is ridiculously tiny in light of other high-end GPUs, its power consumption characteristics are significantly ...
AMD's R9 Nano is a graphics card that serves its (very) niche high-end small form factor market well but its premium pricing makes it unaffordable to many small form factor system builders, and ...
AMD's R9 Nano is a hell of a little graphics card, delivering near-R9 Fury X performance in a compact mini-ITX form-factor. It's also expensive—very expensive—at 0, matching the price of ...
The AMD Radeon R9 Fury Nano is one of the most exciting graphics cards I’ve seen for years and, at only 6in long, it’s also one of the smallest. ... Verdict. AMD’s latest card is one of its ...
While AMD is pegging the Radeon R9 Nano as a luxury card, a component that isn't meant to be about value for money, rather it's all about getting the maximum performance for a small form factor PC ...
With the Radeon R9 Nano at the heart of our test rig, it consumed over 90 fewer watts than the Fury X--AMD's specified power ratings are in-line with our testing.
AMD Radeon R9 Nano Overclocking Results Extra performance with the R9 Nano comes in two distinct areas, overclocking and power management. Interestingly, AMD lets users unlock the power management ...
The R9 Nano is stunningly powerful given its Mini-ITX-friendly form factor, and a true leap ahead for AMD. Just know that this is a specialized component meant for very tight, compact PCs, and ...
As it turns out, AMD's Radeon R9 Nano is a great piece of hardware; there's really nothing like it out there. That’s probably why AMD is setting its price at an eye-popping 9. A lack of ...
The Radeon R9 Nano is AMD's solution for all small-form-factor system builders that want to create a 4K-capable gaming PC in a tiny volume. Thanks to a new approach to power management, the card stays below 200 W at all times, while still delivering excellent framerates.
AMD Radeon R9 Nano - the Digital Foundry verdict The R9 Nano packs an unprecedented amount of rendering power into an absolutely tiny product, and possesses superb build quality.
AMD deserves some serious props for even creating the Radeon R9 Nano in the first place. This pint-sized powerhouse is the latest in a long line of AMD technical innovations that skate to where ...
We’ll have a full suite of Radeon R9 Nano benchmarks recorded in our ultra-high-end graphics test-bed, along with comparison numbers from an array of other high-end GPUs, a little later.
AMD’s itty-bitty Radeon R9 Nano isn’t due to launch until September 10, but a review unit landed on my doorstep today. Sadly, I can’t talk about its performance until then, but an AMD ...
The Radeon R9 Nano is a high-end graphics card by AMD, launched in August 2015. Built on the 28 nm process, and based on the Fiji graphics processor, in its Fiji XT CA variant, the card supports DirectX 12.0.
The AMD Radeon R9 Nano finished just behind the Radeon R9 Fury here, but well ahead of the R9 390 or similarly-sized GeForce GTX 970 mini (the Asus GeForce GTX 970 Direct-CU mini to be exact).
As it turns out, AMD's Radeon R9 Nano is a great piece of hardware; there's really nothing like it out there. That’s probably why AMD is setting its price at an eye-popping 9.
Meanwhile at the other end of the spectrum is the Radeon R9 Nano, which sees AMD push the limits on miniaturization and pack Fiji into a card just 6 inches long.

Diskussion og kommentarer

Del dine kommentarer
S
Stan 1 month ago
649 $ NOT 1529$ lmao
1 0