H3C XG310 vs Radeon R9 Nano

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking308not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.76no data
Power efficiency8.93no data
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameFijiDG1
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date27 August 2015 (10 years ago)11 November 2020 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores4096768 ×4
Compute units64no data
Core clock speedno data1050 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1100 MHz
Number of transistors8,900 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)175 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate256.052.80 ×4
Floating-point processing power8.192 TFLOPS1.69 TFLOPS ×4
ROPs6424 ×4
TMUs25648 ×4
L1 Cache1 MBno data
L2 Cache2 MB1024 KB
L3 Cacheno data16 MB

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 supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length152 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin1x 8-pin
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 typeHigh Bandwidth Memory (HBM)LPDDR4X
High bandwidth memory (HBM)+no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB ×4
Memory bus width4096 Bit128 Bit ×4
Memory clock speed500 MHz2133 MHz
Memory bandwidth512 GB/s68.26 GB/s ×4
Shared memory-no data

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+-
DisplayPort 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

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.6
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan+1.3
Mantle+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 27 August 2015 11 November 2020
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 175 Watt 300 Watt

R9 Nano has 71% lower power consumption.

H3C XG310, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R9 Nano and H3C XG310. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R9 Nano is a desktop graphics card while H3C XG310 is a workstation one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.4 101 votes

Rate Radeon R9 Nano on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 7 votes

Rate H3C XG310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 Nano or H3C XG310, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.