JEMC on 17 June 2015
| Bofferbrauer said: The Nano does intrigue me, seems like a perfect card for most gamers: compact, yet powerful with low energy consumption and thus low TDP, and here the smaller VRAM shouldn't be as much of a concern compared to the bigger Fury cards. Now if we had a pricetag for that one... |
If what AMD said is true, the Nano will be slower than a 290X.
The Nano uses 175W and Fiji offers "50% higher performance per Watt" compared to 290X. Given that the 290X uses 290W, the maths say that
Nano uses 60% of the 290X total power (175/290 = 0.6) plus 50% more performance per Watt = 0.6 x 1.5 = 0.90
So Nano gives about 90% of the performance of a 290X.
Please excuse my bad English.
Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070
Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.
