Radeon R9 Nano vs GeForce GTX 1080 Ti

Place in the ranking	70	250
Place by popularity	41	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	21.03	5.41
Power efficiency	13.40	8.75
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code name	GP102	Fiji
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Design	no data	reference
Release date	10 March 2017 (7 years ago)	27 August 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$699	$649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1080 Ti has 289% better value for money than R9 Nano.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	3584	4096
Compute units	no data	64
Core clock speed	1481 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1582 MHz	1000 MHz
Number of transistors	11,800 million	8,900 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	175 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	91 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	354.4	256.0
Floating-point processing power	11.34 TFLOPS	8.192 TFLOPS
ROPs	88	64
TMUs	224	256

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus support	no data	PCIe 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	267 mm	152 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)	600 Watt	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	1x 8-pin
SLI options	+	-
Bridgeless CrossFire	-	+

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR5X	High Bandwidth Memory (HBM)
High bandwidth memory (HBM)	no data	+
Maximum RAM amount	11 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	352 Bit	4096 Bit
Memory clock speed	1376 MHz	500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	484.4 GB/s	512 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support	+	no data
Eyefinity	-	+
Number of Eyefinity displays	no data	6
HDMI	+	+
DisplayPort support	-	+
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration	-	+
CrossFire	-	+
FRTC	-	+
FreeSync	-	+
HD3D	-	+
LiquidVR	-	+
PowerTune	-	+
TressFX	-	+
TrueAudio	-	+
ZeroCore	-	+
VCE	-	+
DDMA audio	no data	+
GPU Boost	3.0	no data
Ansel	+	-

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	DirectX® 12
Shader Model	6.4	6.3
OpenGL	4.5	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	+	+
Mantle	-	+
CUDA	+	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 1080 Ti 48.13
+119%

R9 Nano 22.00

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 1080 Ti 18568
+119%

R9 Nano 8486

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 1080 Ti 37672
+118%

R9 Nano 17282

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 1080 Ti 27564
+91.9%

R9 Nano 14362

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1080 Ti 142490
+75.1%

R9 Nano 81374

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1080 Ti 394694

R9 Nano 402499
+2%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	132 +48.3%	89 −48.3%
1440p	83 +137%	35−40 −137%
4K	66 +50%	44 −50%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	5.30	7.29
1440p	8.42	18.54
4K	10.59	14.75

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

85−90
+151%

35−40

−151%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	100 +104%	45−50 −104%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	80−85 +124%	35−40 −124%
Battlefield 5	162 +125%	70−75 −125%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	95−100 +111%	45−50 −111%
Cyberpunk 2077	85−90 +151%	35−40 −151%
Far Cry 5	122 +139%	50−55 −139%
Far Cry New Dawn	110−120 +102%	55−60 −102%
Forza Horizon 4	293 +120%	130−140 −120%
Hitman 3	100−110 +132%	40−45 −132%
Horizon Zero Dawn	190−200 +83.7%	100−110 −83.7%
Metro Exodus	144 +89.5%	75−80 −89.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	100−110 +79.3%	55−60 −79.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	215 +195%	70−75 −195%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +44.8%	95−100 −44.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	145 +196%	45−50 −196%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	80−85 +124%	35−40 −124%
Battlefield 5	147 +104%	70−75 −104%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	95−100 +111%	45−50 −111%
Cyberpunk 2077	85−90 +151%	35−40 −151%
Far Cry 5	96 +88.2%	50−55 −88.2%
Far Cry New Dawn	59 +1.7%	55−60 −1.7%
Forza Horizon 4	284 +114%	130−140 −114%
Hitman 3	100−110 +132%	40−45 −132%
Horizon Zero Dawn	190−200 +83.7%	100−110 −83.7%
Metro Exodus	144 +89.5%	75−80 −89.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	100−110 +79.3%	55−60 −79.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	196 +168%	70−75 −168%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	95−100 +106%	45−50 −106%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +44.8%	95−100 −44.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	71 +44.9%	45−50 −44.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	80−85 +124%	35−40 −124%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	81 +80%	45−50 −80%
Cyberpunk 2077	85−90 +151%	35−40 −151%
Far Cry 5	73 +43.1%	50−55 −43.1%
Forza Horizon 4	120 −10.8%	130−140 +10.8%
Hitman 3	100−110 +132%	40−45 −132%
Horizon Zero Dawn	153 +47.1%	100−110 −47.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	167 +129%	70−75 −129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	98 +109%	47 −109%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +44.8%	95−100 −44.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

121
+109%

55−60

−109%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	108 +157%	40−45 −157%
Far Cry New Dawn	86 +153%	30−35 −153%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	62 +170%	21−24 −170%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 +167%	21−24 −167%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	62 +148%	24−27 −148%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +223%	12−14 −223%
Far Cry 5	55 +120%	24−27 −120%
Forza Horizon 4	265 +114%	120−130 −114%
Hitman 3	65−70 +150%	24−27 −150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	118 +162%	45−50 −162%
Metro Exodus	88 +115%	40−45 −115%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	123 +167%	45−50 −167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	75−80 +188%	24−27 −188%
Watch Dogs: Legion	210−220 +68.5%	120−130 −68.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

98
+165%

35−40

−165%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	56 +155%	21−24 −155%
Far Cry New Dawn	69 +306%	16−18 −306%
Hitman 3	40−45 +135%	16−18 −135%
Horizon Zero Dawn	200−210 +78.1%	110−120 −78.1%
Metro Exodus	60 +150%	24−27 −150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	72 +106%	35 −106%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40 +208%	12−14 −208%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +200%	10−12 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	37 +208%	12−14 −208%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +280%	5−6 −280%
Far Cry 5	31 +158%	12−14 −158%
Forza Horizon 4	75 +150%	30−33 −150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	72 +177%	24−27 −177%
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 +189%	9−10 −189%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

49
+158%

18−20

−158%

This is how GTX 1080 Ti and R9 Nano compete in popular games:

GTX 1080 Ti is 48% faster in 1080p
GTX 1080 Ti is 137% faster in 1440p
GTX 1080 Ti is 50% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Far Cry New Dawn, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1080 Ti is 306% faster.
in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 Nano is 11% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 1080 Ti is ahead in 71 test (99%)
R9 Nano is ahead in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	48.13	22.00
Recency	10 March 2017	27 August 2015
Maximum RAM amount	11 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	175 Watt

GTX 1080 Ti has a 118.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 175% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

R9 Nano, on the other hand, has 42.9% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 Nano in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.