Radeon R9 Nano vs Titan X Pascal

Place in the ranking	153	247
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	6.87	5.34
Power efficiency	9.35	8.70
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code name	GP102	Fiji
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Design	no data	reference
Release date	2 August 2016 (8 years ago)	27 August 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,199	$649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Titan X Pascal has 29% 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	1417 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1531 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
Texture fill rate	342.9	256.0
Floating-point processing power	10.97 TFLOPS	8.192 TFLOPS
ROPs	96	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
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	1x 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 type	GDDR5X	High Bandwidth Memory (HBM)
High bandwidth memory (HBM)	no data	+
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	4096 Bit
Memory clock speed	1251 MHz	500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	480.4 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 DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
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	+

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	4.6	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.

Titan X Pascal 33.76
+53.5%

R9 Nano 21.99

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.

Titan X Pascal 13026
+53.5%

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.

Titan X Pascal 35981
+108%

R9 Nano 17282

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.

Titan X Pascal 100948
+132%

R9 Nano 43546

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.

Titan X Pascal 27349
+90.4%

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.

Titan X Pascal 136891
+68.2%

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.

Titan X Pascal 514513
+27.8%

R9 Nano 402499

Unigine Heaven 4.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark, a newer version of Unigine 3.0 with relatively small differences. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. The benchmark is still sometimes used, despite its significant age, as it was released back in 2013.

Titan X Pascal 4329
+150%

R9 Nano 1732

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	128 +43.8%	89 −43.8%
1440p	75 +66.7%	45−50 −66.7%
4K	57 +11.8%	51 −11.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	9.37	7.29
1440p	15.99	14.42
4K	21.04	12.73

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

79
+126%

35−40

−126%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	104 +112%	45−50 −112%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	95 +157%	35−40 −157%
Battlefield 5	174 +142%	70−75 −142%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	108 +140%	45−50 −140%
Cyberpunk 2077	78 +123%	35−40 −123%
Far Cry 5	121 +137%	50−55 −137%
Far Cry New Dawn	138 +138%	55−60 −138%
Forza Horizon 4	240 +80.5%	130−140 −80.5%
Hitman 3	104 +136%	40−45 −136%
Horizon Zero Dawn	296 +185%	100−110 −185%
Metro Exodus	143 +88.2%	75−80 −88.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	125 +116%	55−60 −116%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	161 +121%	70−75 −121%
Watch Dogs: Legion	226 +135%	95−100 −135%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	121 +147%	45−50 −147%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	85 +130%	35−40 −130%
Battlefield 5	165 +129%	70−75 −129%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	98 +118%	45−50 −118%
Cyberpunk 2077	69 +97.1%	35−40 −97.1%
Far Cry 5	92 +80.4%	50−55 −80.4%
Far Cry New Dawn	108 +86.2%	55−60 −86.2%
Forza Horizon 4	225 +69.2%	130−140 −69.2%
Hitman 3	104 +136%	40−45 −136%
Horizon Zero Dawn	275 +164%	100−110 −164%
Metro Exodus	143 +88.2%	75−80 −88.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	102 +75.9%	55−60 −75.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	194 +166%	70−75 −166%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	96 +100%	45−50 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	216 +125%	95−100 −125%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	67 +36.7%	45−50 −36.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	63 +70.3%	35−40 −70.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	75 +66.7%	45−50 −66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	59 +68.6%	35−40 −68.6%
Far Cry 5	67 +31.4%	50−55 −31.4%
Forza Horizon 4	112 −18.8%	130−140 +18.8%
Hitman 3	93 +111%	40−45 −111%
Horizon Zero Dawn	150 +44.2%	100−110 −44.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	167 +129%	70−75 −129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	95 +102%	47 −102%
Watch Dogs: Legion	64 −50%	95−100 +50%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

118
+103%

55−60

−103%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 +52.4%	40−45 −52.4%
Far Cry New Dawn	50−55 +50%	30−35 −50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	35−40 +56.5%	21−24 −56.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	51 +143%	21−24 −143%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	58 +132%	24−27 −132%
Cyberpunk 2077	38 +192%	12−14 −192%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +56%	24−27 −56%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +55.6%	120−130 −55.6%
Hitman 3	66 +154%	24−27 −154%
Horizon Zero Dawn	118 +162%	45−50 −162%
Metro Exodus	101 +146%	40−45 −146%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	122 +165%	45−50 −165%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +76.9%	24−27 −76.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	212 +66.9%	120−130 −66.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

92
+149%

35−40

−149%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	63 +186%	21−24 −186%
Far Cry New Dawn	48 +182%	16−18 −182%
Hitman 3	39 +129%	16−18 −129%
Horizon Zero Dawn	129 +13.2%	110−120 −13.2%
Metro Exodus	67 +179%	24−27 −179%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	68 +94.3%	35 −94.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	38 +192%	12−14 −192%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	32 +191%	10−12 −191%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	34 +183%	12−14 −183%
Cyberpunk 2077	18 +260%	5−6 −260%
Far Cry 5	33 +175%	12−14 −175%
Forza Horizon 4	73 +143%	30−33 −143%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	70 +169%	24−27 −169%
Watch Dogs: Legion	26 +189%	9−10 −189%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

47
+147%

18−20

−147%

This is how Titan X Pascal and R9 Nano compete in popular games:

Titan X Pascal is 44% faster in 1080p
Titan X Pascal is 67% faster in 1440p
Titan X Pascal is 12% faster in 4K

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

in Cyberpunk 2077, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Titan X Pascal is 260% faster.
in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 Nano is 50% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Titan X Pascal is ahead in 70 tests (97%)
R9 Nano is ahead in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	33.76	21.99
Recency	2 August 2016	27 August 2015
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	175 Watt

Titan X Pascal has a 53.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 months, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

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

The Titan X Pascal 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.