R9 Nano vs RX 580

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

RX 580
22.93
+4.7%

RX 580 outperforms R9 Nano by 5% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking223233
Place by popularity1not in top-100
Value for money20.155.28
ArchitecturePolaris (2016−2019)GCN 1.2 (2015−2016)
GPU code namePolaris 20Fiji
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date18 April 2017 (6 years old)10 September 2015 (8 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)$229 $649
Current price$138 (0.6x MSRP)$27 (0x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 580 has 282% better value for money than R9 Nano.

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores23044096
Compute unitsno data64
Core clock speed1257 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1340 MHz1000 MHz
Number of transistors5,700 million8,900 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)185 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate193.0256.0
Floating-point performance6,175 gflops8,192 gflops

Size and 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 supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length241 mm152 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin1x 8-pin
Bridgeless CrossFireno data1

Memory

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 typeGDDR5High Bandwidth Memory (HBM)
High bandwidth memory (HBM)no data+
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit4096 Bit
Memory clock speed8000 MHz500 MHz
Memory bandwidth256.0 GB/s512 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

Video outputs and ports

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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
Eyefinityno data+
Number of Eyefinity displaysno data6
HDMI++
DisplayPort supportno data+

Technologies

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

AppAccelerationno data+
CrossFireno data1
Endurono data-
FRTCno data1
FreeSyncno data1
HD3Dno data+
LiquidVRno data1
PowerTuneno data+
TressFXno data1
TrueAudiono data+
ZeroCoreno data+
VCEno data+
DDMA audiono data+

API support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.46.3
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan1.2.131+
Mantleno data+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

RX 580 22.93
+4.7%
R9 Nano 21.90

RX 580 outperforms R9 Nano by 5% in our combined benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

RX 580 8885
+4.7%
R9 Nano 8486

RX 580 outperforms R9 Nano by 5% in Passmark.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

RX 580 44344
+1.8%
R9 Nano 43546

RX 580 outperforms R9 Nano by 2% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

RX 580 19274
+11.5%
R9 Nano 17282

RX 580 outperforms R9 Nano by 12% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

RX 580 13927
R9 Nano 14362
+3.1%

R9 Nano outperforms RX 580 by 3% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

RX 580 82516
+1.4%
R9 Nano 81374

RX 580 outperforms R9 Nano by 1% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

RX 580 348952
R9 Nano 402499
+15.3%

R9 Nano outperforms RX 580 by 15% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

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 HD97
+6.6%
91
−6.6%
1440p43
+7.5%
40−45
−7.5%
4K36
−25%
45
+25%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 58
+31.8%
40−45
−31.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
+5.3%
35−40
−5.3%
Battlefield 5 124
+72.2%
70−75
−72.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+5.3%
55−60
−5.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%
Far Cry 5 83
+43.1%
55−60
−43.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 83
+40.7%
55−60
−40.7%
Forza Horizon 4 108
+45.9%
70−75
−45.9%
Hitman 3 65−70
+6.3%
60−65
−6.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+4.3%
45−50
−4.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+2.8%
35−40
−2.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 74
+57.4%
45−50
−57.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+4.8%
40−45
−4.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 47
+6.8%
40−45
−6.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
+5.3%
35−40
−5.3%
Battlefield 5 102
+41.7%
70−75
−41.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+5.3%
55−60
−5.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%
Far Cry 5 76
+31%
55−60
−31%
Far Cry New Dawn 78
+32.2%
55−60
−32.2%
Forza Horizon 4 101
+36.5%
70−75
−36.5%
Hitman 3 65−70
+6.3%
60−65
−6.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+4.3%
45−50
−4.3%
Metro Exodus 48
+33.3%
35−40
−33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+2.8%
35−40
−2.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 63
+34%
45−50
−34%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 72
+50%
45−50
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+4.8%
40−45
−4.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 34
−29.4%
40−45
+29.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
+5.3%
35−40
−5.3%
Battlefield 5 93
+29.2%
70−75
−29.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%
Far Cry 5 71
+22.4%
55−60
−22.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 71
+20.3%
55−60
−20.3%
Forza Horizon 4 82
+10.8%
70−75
−10.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 44
−6.8%
47
+6.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+4.8%
40−45
−4.8%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+6.1%
30−35
−6.1%
Hitman 3 35−40
+5.6%
35−40
−5.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−33
+3.4%
27−30
−3.4%
Metro Exodus 28
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
+3.4%
27−30
−3.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+4.1%
45−50
−4.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+5.4%
35−40
−5.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 53
+26.2%
40−45
−26.2%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+4.4%
45−50
−4.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+8%
24−27
−8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Hitman 3 21−24
+5%
20−22
−5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Metro Exodus 18
+38.5%
12−14
−38.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20
+33.3%
14−16
−33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27
−29.6%
35
+29.6%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18
+28.6%
14−16
−28.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Battlefield 5 37
+42.3%
24−27
−42.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 26
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 29
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
Forza Horizon 4 41
+32.3%
30−35
−32.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

This is how RX 580 and R9 Nano compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • RX 580 is 6.6% faster than R9 Nano

1440p resolution:

  • RX 580 is 7.5% faster than R9 Nano

4K resolution:

  • R9 Nano is 25% faster than RX 580

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 580 is 72.2% faster than the R9 Nano.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the R9 Nano is 29.6% faster than the RX 580.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 580 is ahead in 62 tests (91%)
  • R9 Nano is ahead in 3 tests (4%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (4%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 22.93 21.90
Recency 18 April 2017 10 September 2015
Cost $229 $649
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 185 Watt 175 Watt

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX 580 and Radeon R9 Nano. The differences in performance seem too small.


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

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon RX 580
Radeon RX 580
AMD Radeon R9 Nano
Radeon R9 Nano

Similar GPU comparisons

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

User ratings: view and submit

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


4.2 14744 votes

Rate AMD Radeon RX 580 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 87 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.