AMD's upcoming super-compact graphics card, the Radeon R9 Nano, will be faster than NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 980, and a whopping 30% faster than the GTX 970, according to the company. At its size, it will offer the fastest pixel-crunching solution for compact ITX/SFF gaming PC builders, and that is something AMD want to capitalize on. If what we're hearing is true, then not only will the R9 Nano have the same core-config as the R9 Fury X, but also its price - US $649.99. At this price, the R9 Nano definitely isn't going to affect sales of the GTX 970 or GTX 980, which are currently going for as low as $299 and $465, respectively; but serve as a "halo product," targeted at SFF gaming PC builders.

111 Comments on AMD Radeon R9 Nano Faster than GeForce GTX 980, Pricing Revealed

1 to 25 of 111 Go to Page 12345 PreviousNext

#1 KarymidoN

649,99? No thanks. Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 5:12 Reply

#2 xkm1948

Great card. Too bad I already got the FuryX. Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 5:13 Reply

#3 Sempron Guy

Didn't expect it will be faster than the 980. So I expected a much lower price than announced. I was expecting between 390x and Fury price point. Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 5:17 Reply

#4 Athlonite

US $649.99 = NZD $950.69 ummmm NO thanks you can keep it at that price Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 5:19 Reply

#5 Prima.Vera

Is this a joke? Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 5:25 Reply

#6 Scrizz

KarymidoN 649,99? No thanks. Obviously someone was smoking the good stuff.... Obviously someone was smoking the good stuff.... Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 5:30 Reply

#7 Xzibit





The also said.. WCCFTech Do note that AMD also confirmed that while availability of the Radeon R9 Nano is planned for 10th September, the card will get custom variants after three months of its launch. So AIB Nanos would be Fury X spec in the form of their respected Fury AIB forms :confused: It doesn't make much sense unless they are just selling the chip and the form is a toss in.The also said..So AIB Nanos would be Fury X spec in the form of their respected Fury AIB forms :confused: Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 5:32 Reply

#8 FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!" This only makes sense in the context of premium Steam Machines. Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 5:35 Reply

#9 DarkOCean

It's like they want to go bankrupt !? all fury series an the reast of the rebrands are a bad joke in terms of pricing. Well what more can I say, they did this to themselfs. Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 5:37 Reply

#10 manofthem

WCG-TPU Team All-Star! Sounds like a nice little card with a very hefty price tag. Would have liked to try one but never mind now :( Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 5:57 Reply

#11 chinmi

649 ?? LMAO



amd just keep on digging their own grave... and they wonder why they lose the gpu market to nvidia... ha ha ha



RIP AMD Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 6:00 Reply

#12 Enterprise24

AMD bankrupt in 2020 is quite possibly. Several mistake by Lisa Su. Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 6:11 Reply

#13 mr2009

God damn it AMD... what the hell are you thinking? Please ban weed in your company. Someone is high as f***ed when they think that price is just right... Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 6:15 Reply

#14 rooivalk

AMD new motto:

Hype and Disappointment™ Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 6:16 Reply

#15 RejZoR

And they just got 3 people to buy R9 Nano for their gaming ITX system. The rest just can't be bothered... Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 6:22 Reply

#16 NC37





That is all... That is all... Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 6:34 Reply

#17 AsRock

TPU addict Wow that is a hefty price, how ever no one knows how much it's costing AMD to make these cards which might explain why nVidia are not bothering yet.



I do believe it should be at least $70 cheaper than the Fury X though due to the cooler at least how ever maybe this cooler cost more to design than the water cooler ?. Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 6:35 Reply

#18 the54thvoid

Is there still the issue with connectivity for HTPC's (for use with TV's) with no HDMI or is that covered by 3rd party adapters? Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 6:36 Reply

#19 newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder the54thvoid Is there still the issue with connectivity for HTPC's (for use with TV's) with no HDMI or is that covered by 3rd party adapters? All the shots show an HDMI, where do you get it doesn't have one? Faster than the 980 for about 3 minutes until it throttles maybe...just long enough for most benchmarks to finish so the reviews look good, but actual performance is much worse.All the shots show an HDMI, where do you get it doesn't have one? Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 6:41 Reply

#20 FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!" All Fiji cards are 3 DisplayPort 1.2a and 1 HDMI 1.4. Three devices max. Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 6:44 Reply

#21 ensabrenoir









but in all fairness.....its a (supposedly-at that price it should be going toe to toe with 980 Ti) powerful card......just needs a little price tweaking and they can change the landscape in their favor. .......I think I know whats going on with Amd now........the villian from Phineas & Ferb who always builds doomsday devices with a built in self destruct button works there................cause every time they come up with something awesome.....it seems to have a built in fail button that the competition will take advantage of.but in all fairness.....its a (supposedly-at that price it should be going toe to toe with 980 Ti) powerful card......just needs a little price tweaking and they can change the landscape in their favor. Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 6:48 Reply

#22 Sony Xperia S

I told some other members but they keep arguing with me. In fact, after reading all your posts, it turns that you, guys, have the same opinion like me.



Everyone EXPECTS cheaper prices. 450$ is perfectly fine.



650$ is a stupid joke. :(



Thank you, AMD, but indeed you are not thinking with your heads. Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 6:48 Reply

#23 Octavean

newtekie1 Faster than the 980 for about 3 minutes until it throttles maybe...just long enough for most benchmarks to finish so the reviews look good, but actual

performance is much worse.







All the shots show an HDMI, where do you get it doesn't have one? I'm only guessing here but,...



Perhaps he intended to say no HDMI 2.0 support for 60Hz with 4K Smart TV's which typically do not have DisplayPort connectivity.



A niche market,...perhaps but the Nano is definitely a niche product.



Personally I would rather buy a GTX 970 or GTX 980 because I would save a ton of money, still get decent performance and have the option of HDMI 2.0.



I don't need my video card to be that small or that expensive,.... I'm only guessing here but,...Perhaps he intended to say nosupport for 60Hz with 4K Smart TV's which typically do not have DisplayPort connectivity.A niche market,...perhaps but the Nano is definitely a niche product.Personally I would rather buy a GTX 970 or GTX 980 because I would save a ton of money, still get decent performance and have the option of HDMI 2.0.I don't need my video card to be that small or that expensive,.... Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 6:58 Reply

#24 Sony Xperia S

Octavean I don't need my video card to be that small or that expensive,.... But I think small cards are extremely sexy and your computer case would feel better with those ones. I want it to be that small but not this silly expensive.



It should NOT be a niche product - all cards should be like that. But I think small cards are extremely sexy and your computer case would feel better with those ones. I want it to be that small but not this silly expensive.It should NOT be a niche product - all cards should be like that. Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 6:59 Reply

#25 Frick

Fishfaced Nincompoop What were you guys expecting? Serious question. I had extremely vauge expectation about it being slower than the 390x and cheaper. Posted on Aug 27th 2015, 7:06 Reply