AMD Radeon RX 480
vs
AMD Radeon R9 Nano

AMD Radeon RX 480
AMD Radeon R9 Nano
RX 480 R9 Nano Diferenţa
AMD Radeon RX 480 AMD Radeon R9 Nano
Preț lei 1,627.9 lei 6,238.3 4610.4 (283%)
An 2016 2015 1 (0%)
Temperatura maxima inregistrata 77C 73C 4 (5%)
Max ventilator de zgomot 51dB 45.8dB 5.2 (10%)
Sursă de alimentare recomandată 500W 525W 25 (5%)
CPU Benchmark Intel Core i7-6700K @ 4.00GHz ($334.99) Intel Core i7-4790K @ 4.00GHz ($306.99)
Impactul CPU pe FPS +0.0 FPS +0.0 FPS 0 (0%)
Impactul CPU pe FPS% 0.0% 0.0% 0 (0%)
Setări calitate Benchmark Ultra Quality Settings Ultra Quality Settings
Performanță medie de 1080p 62.5 FPS 73.1 FPS 10.6 (17%)
Performanța medie a 1440p 46.0 FPS 54.7 FPS 8.7 (19%)
Performanță medie 4K 27.6 FPS 32.7 FPS 5.1 (18%)
Memorie 8 GB 4 GB 4 (50%)
Costul pe 1080p pe cadru lei 26.1 lei 36.2 10.1 (39%)
Costul 1440p pe cadru lei 35.5 lei 48.4 12.9 (36%)
Cost 4K pe cadru lei 59.1 lei 81.0 21.9 (37%)
popover.html 74/100 49/100 25 (34%)
Verdictul nostru: Upgrade- RX 480 ul R9 Nano de la la la nu este recomandată, deoarece este mai mică de 30% de îmbunătățire a performanței. În general, un upgrade rezonabil este între 30% și 50% sau mai mult pentru a justifica achiziționarea de noi hardware. Raportul preț/performanță este mult mai bun pentru RX 480 .

Performanță joc la setările de calitate selectate

Modificarea setărilor de calitate

1920x1080

AMD Radeon RX 480
AMD Radeon R9 Nano
An Joc Cadre pe secundă
2019 Apex Legends
56
63.0
64
72.0
2019 Anthem
36
40.6
41
46.4
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
53
59.5
61
68.0
2019 Resident Evil 2
68
75.8
79
87.9
2019 Metro Exodus
30
33.7
35
39.1
2019 World War Z
76
85.0
78
87.0
2019 Gears of War 5
44
49.1
51
57.0
2019 F1 2019
55
61.6
64
71.5
2019 GreedFall
49
55.5
57
64.4
2019 Borderlands 3
35
39.0
40
45.2
2019 Call of Duty Modern Warfare
67
75.0
78
87.0
2019 Red Dead Redemption 2
26
28.9
30
33.5
2019 Need For Speed: Heat
40
45.4
47
52.6
2018 Call of Duty: Black Ops 4
75
84.0
71
79.0
2018 Assassin's Creed Odyssey
29
33.0
33
37.0
2018 Final Fantasy XV
51
57.0
56
63.0
2018 Shadow of the Tomb Raider
48
54.0
45
50.0
2018 Just Cause 4
43
48.7
50
56.5
2018 Monster Hunter: World
47
52.5
54
60.9
2018 Strange Brigade
71
79.1
82
91.8
2018 Battlefield V
58
65.0
58
65.0
2017 Assassin's Creed Origins
42
47.0
47
53.0
2017 Destiny 2
81
91.0
91
102.0
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
60
67.5
70
78.3
2017 For Honor
81
90.0
93
104.4
2017 Project CARS 2
57
63.7
66
73.9
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
69
77.2
80
89.6
2016 Dishonored 2
41
46.5
48
53.9
2015 Rocket League
236
262.5
274
304.5
2015 Need For Speed
65
72.7
75
84.4
2015 Project CARS
62
69.7
72
80.9
2015 Rainbow Six Siege
114
127.5
133
147.9
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
162
180.0
187
208.8
2009 League of Legends
303
337.5
352
391.5

2560x1440

AMD Radeon RX 480
AMD Radeon R9 Nano
An Joc Cadre pe secundă
2019 Apex Legends
37
46.9
42
53.6
2019 Anthem
25
32.2
29
36.8
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
36
46.2
42
52.8
2019 Resident Evil 2
40
51.0
47
59.2
2019 Metro Exodus
20
26.2
24
30.4
2019 World War Z
49
62.0
50
63.5
2019 Gears of War 5
28
35.6
33
41.3
2019 F1 2019
34
43.6
40
50.6
2019 GreedFall
32
40.1
37
46.5
2019 Borderlands 3
21
27.4
25
31.8
2019 Call of Duty Modern Warfare
43
54.0
50
62.6
2019 Red Dead Redemption 2
18
23.6
21
27.4
2019 Need For Speed: Heat
28
35.6
33
41.3
2018 Call of Duty: Black Ops 4
42
53.0
37
47.0
2018 Assassin's Creed Odyssey
20
26.0
23
29.0
2018 Final Fantasy XV
32
40.0
36
45.0
2018 Shadow of the Tomb Raider
28
35.0
28
35.0
2018 Fallout 76
50
63.0
56
70.0
2018 Just Cause 4
28
36.0
33
41.8
2018 Monster Hunter: World
29
36.7
34
42.6
2018 Strange Brigade
44
55.1
51
63.9
2018 Battlefield V
36
46.0
40
51.0
2017 Assassin's Creed Origins
24
31.0
33
42.0
2017 Destiny 2
62
78.0
70
88.0
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
38
48.7
45
56.5
2017 For Honor
42
52.5
48
60.9
2017 Project CARS 2
36
45.0
41
52.2
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
55
69.7
64
80.9
2016 Dishonored 2
31
39.7
36
46.1
2015 Rocket League
90
112.5
104
130.5
2015 Need For Speed
44
56.2
52
65.2
2015 Project CARS
42
53.3
49
61.8
2015 Rainbow Six Siege
66
82.5
76
95.7
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
120
150.0
139
174.0
2009 League of Legends
150
187.5
174
217.5

3840x2160

AMD Radeon RX 480
AMD Radeon R9 Nano
An Joc Cadre pe secundă
2019 Apex Legends
19
28.0
22
32.0
2019 Anthem
12
17.5
14
20.0
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
17
24.5
19
28.0
2019 Resident Evil 2
17
25.1
20
29.1
2019 Metro Exodus
11
16.5
13
19.1
2019 World War Z
24
35.7
25
36.5
2019 Gears of War 5
15
22.5
18
26.1
2019 F1 2019
19
27.8
22
32.2
2019 GreedFall
11
16.5
13
19.1
2019 Borderlands 3
10
14.3
11
16.5
2019 Call of Duty Modern Warfare
22
32.2
26
37.4
2019 Red Dead Redemption 2
10
15.0
12
17.4
2019 Need For Speed: Heat
15
22.5
18
26.1
2018 Call of Duty: Black Ops 4
21
30.0
23
33.0
2018 Assassin's Creed Odyssey
12
18.0
14
20.0
2018 Final Fantasy XV
16
24.0
18
26.0
2018 Shadow of the Tomb Raider
13
19.0
12
18.0
2018 Fallout 76
24
35.0
27
39.0
2018 Just Cause 4
13
18.8
15
21.8
2018 Monster Hunter: World
12
17.6
14
20.4
2018 Strange Brigade
21
30.0
24
34.8
2018 Battlefield V
20
29.0
16
24.0
2017 Assassin's Creed Origins
16
24.0
18
27.0
2017 Destiny 2
27
39.0
30
44.0
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
23
33.7
27
39.1
2017 For Honor
18
26.2
21
30.4
2017 Project CARS 2
26
37.5
30
43.5
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
40
58.5
47
67.9
2016 Dishonored 2
22
31.5
25
36.5
2015 Rocket League
36
52.5
42
60.9
2015 Need For Speed
26
37.5
30
43.5
2015 Project CARS
26
37.5
30
43.5
2015 Rainbow Six Siege
26
38.2
31
44.4
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
94
135.0
109
156.6
2009 League of Legends
52
75.0
60
87.0
RX 480 vs R9 Nano with i7-6700K vs i7-4790K at 1080p and ultra vs ultra settings
RX 480 vs R9 Nano with i7-6700K vs i7-4790K at 1440p and ultra vs ultra settings
RX 480 vs R9 Nano with i7-6700K vs i7-4790K at 4K and ultra vs ultra settings

AMD Radeon RX 480 / i7-6700K

La 1440p, RX 480 poate lovi 50-60 fps pe destul de mult totul la Ultra, doar fără antialiasing, ocluzie ambientală mai puțin și sa transformat în jos umbre. Este clar că RX 480 este o carte de high-end semnificativ mai capabilă, care poate reda titluri AAA la 1080p/1440p cu 50-60 de cadre pe secundă. În ceea ce privește memoria RX 480 , 8192 RAM MB este mai mult decât suficient pentru jocuri moderne și nu ar trebui să cauzeze blocaje.

adsense-leader.html

AMD Radeon R9 Nano / i7-4790K

La 1440p, R9 Nano poate lovi 50-60 fps pe destul de mult totul la Ultra, doar fără antialiasing, ocluzie ambientală mai puțin și sa transformat în jos umbre. Decide dacă să investească atât de mult de bani într-un High R9 Nano -end GPU-ului ca necesită gândit atent. Cu RAM 4096 curent MB R9 Nano , poate avea foarte puține blocaje legate de memorie în mai multe jocuri moderne.

setupad-728x90.html

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

Discuții și comentarii

Distribuiți comentariile dvs.