Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
AMD Nano
#41
BS - I don't believe TPU. Plus the card needs to be warmed up first.
Reply
#42
You don't believe TPU? In what way?
Reply
#43
(09-11-2015, 12:57 AM)ocre Wrote: wholly crap.  

AMD == fail


The nano is much better than I expected. So I retract this statement.

The biggest flaw is its price. It is a lot better than I thought in most every other way
Reply
#44
The only thing it has going for it is its size (IMHO). It performs about the equivalent of a OC' 980 (which has seen a price decrease), isn't more efficient (in real world testing) and cost almost $200 more (in some instances). It gives an indication of where things are headed, though.
Reply
#45
(09-22-2015, 11:41 AM)ocre Wrote: You don't believe TPU?  In what way?

Well, I need to do a bit of research on Nano reviews..  especially regarding WARMED-UP benchmark runs!!!   I'm just TOO skeptical, having soaked the platter in salt in advance before taking a first bite.
Reply
#46
Ahh, an oversight - the Nano has an 8-pin PCI-E power connector rather than 6-pin. It can draw nearly just as much power as the Fury X in some scenarios. Good thing even with Powertune maxed out at 150%, the heatsink still did such an amazing job at keeping it cooler than GTX 980 Ti. So I'm shocked at how it beats the 390X overall, along with the 980 non-Ti, at stock settings. Either the Nano chips are truly cherry-picked silicon dies, or these Fury chips just hit a wall by design even with the watercooling setup on the X. It reminds me a lot of my old X1900XTX, when no matter the voltage or the cooling, it just hit a wall with only 50MHz overclock, while being even more power-hungry than my 8800GTX which was much bigger and faster.
It's interesting how the Hawaii and Fury cards have been running with so little headroom left, that the efficiency totally sucked, and then AMD catches us by surprise with the Nano. Just lose 10-15% of the performance, and gain 35% of power savings while in a much smaller form factor that does not require massive water cooling.

Still..... there's the damn coil whine as reported by Hardwarecanucks, Tomshardware, etc.. At $649, this is unacceptable, and defeats the purpose of a quiet ITX system. Perhaps AMD has a hard time "affording" the kind of QA for the VRMs/inductors... I wonder if AMD will ever get rid of the coil whine on their next-gen cards. Hardly ANYBODY is ever buying a Nano. So far, there's only 4 customer reviews over at Newegg.
Reply
#47
Ocre, did you read this article over at HardOCP????
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/09/0...nano_press

Quote:Then I read what Roy Taylor was posting on Twitter....and he came across as being a jackass.

[Image: 1441821752sp4vnIyBH5_1_1.jpg]
...
Now, I think that explanation is a lie at this point given Roy Taylor’s public statements. I would go so far as to point out that AMD sampled a Nano card to HardForum member (Elmy) so that he could post the build in our own forums! (Which I have since removed. Given that our community does not have a Nano focus.) I was fine with our "Nano-less" review state before I read what Roy Taylor had to say this week. I asked and included Roy in on the email chain with Antal [long for Anal - emphasis mine].

...

Roy’s backtracking here seems humorous at best. Uh yeah....reviews need to be fair.....especially from those sites mentioned that AMD did not sample. I especially like the "That's the beginning and the end of this," part of his response. This may be one of the best "fuck off" lines I have ever had delivered to me in a corporate correspondence. {Golf Clap}
...

*rolls*
*welps!*
Roy Taylor says that HardOCP's 4-5 game reviews aren't fair, LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply
#48
The Nano is the same kind of market as the Bulldozer- make believe.

"If there were a bunch a LAN party cases that didn't fit normal size cards, we'd be sitting pretty!"

Same as "If there were a bunch of games and apps coded for more than 4 threads, we'd be sitting pretty!"

The problem is "Why would there be a bunch of cases that could only fit short cards when they are about as rare as tea totallers in Wisconsin?". Case makers want to build for a tiny percent of the market?

Same on the more than four threads. Most people have 2-4 core processors, 6-8 are rare. Devs want to code for the minority?

Wonder what they were thinking with this?
Reply
#49
The last we heard from Corsair George back in October 2013, Mini-ITX and Micro-ATX combined made up only about 15% of sales: http://www.silentpcreview.com/forums/vie...55#p578555
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)