R9 Nano mining results + power draw

[Eliovp]

Evening.

I have done some testing the past few days with a Nano and i want to share my findings.


First picture is a picture of the power usage of the system without a gpu installed.


So 43watt when running idle (i7 processor with 32GB Ram, Win10Pro 64bit)


Next picture is a screenshot of the Nano running Ethereum.

http://s11.postimg.org/4208ayv1f/Ethereum.png
Stock clocks (1000/500) @ 26Mhz average.

Power draw

102 watt give or take for the Nano running Ethereum @ 26Mhz


Than we have a screenshot of the Nano running X11 (not the newest Nicehash optimized miner)
http://s4.postimg.org/9ayxqaotp/x11.png
Again Stock clocks @ 12Mhz average + not even playing with intensity, XI 1024 would have given me probably more.

Power draw

105 watt for the Nano @ X11


Next one is Quark, again, not the newest Nicehash optimized miner.
http://s10.postimg.org/68j3y2ufd/Quark.png
Stock clocks @ 16Mhz, a little disappointed here..

Power draw is almost identical to Ethereum power draw.


So my conclusion.

Best card i have ever had, Period!

There's no Nvidia card that can beat these numbers (yet).

Although, as mentioned before. It's an expensive card.
But worth every penny and it looks better too!  

Yeah, i'm an AMD Fanboy, i know :p

If there are questions or if someone wants to see another test, just ask.

[antantti]

Amazing numbers. What is the clock per clock (and watt per watt) performance nano vs fury vs fury x?

[Eliovp]

Amazing numbers. What is the clock per clock (and watt per watt) performance nano vs fury vs fury x?

Here are some old tests i've done with some Fury X's

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1116027.msg11950487#msg11950487

[antantti]

Amazing numbers. What is the clock per clock (and watt per watt) performance nano vs fury vs fury x?

Here are some old tests i've done with some Fury X's

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1116027.msg11950487#msg11950487

Last red card I had was 6990 so I dont know what is going on there. Is it possible to run fury x limiting power usage to nano levels?

Ethereum, nano vs fury x, same watts at the wall? What is the hashrate then?

[Eliovp]

Amazing numbers. What is the clock per clock (and watt per watt) performance nano vs fury vs fury x?

Here are some old tests i've done with some Fury X's

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1116027.msg11950487#msg11950487

Last red card I had was 6990 so I dont know what is going on there. Is it possible to run fury x limiting power usage to nano levels?

Ethereum, nano vs fury x, same watts at the wall? What is the hashrate then?

Haven't done an exact power measurement for a Fury X on Ethereum but i know it hits 27Mhz stock clocks and i believe plus minus 200 watt, i would need to test that to be sure.

[Gotomoon]

For Quark, you need not memory speed, so it can be reduced to much lower value, so will the power draw.

[pallas]

For Quark, you need not memory speed, so it can be reduced to much lower value, so will the power draw.

I don't think you can change the ram speed on Fiji chips.
Maybe with some bios hacks...

[Tantlizbat]

For Quark, you need not memory speed, so it can be reduced to much lower value, so will the power draw.

I don't think you can change the ram speed on Fiji chips.
Maybe with some bios hacks...

So some energy will be wasted. When I run Quark, I just use 260MHz instead of 1500 MHz for memory. There is no effect on the mining speed.

[turkandjaydee]

how long its gonna break even though.
Dear god the price is crazy.

[EastBirth]

how long its gonna break even though.
Dear god the price is crazy.

The Fury cards are not meant to be used for mining. The price is too high and they are not efficient (price wise) in Ethereum mining. The best for Ethereum is 280x.

[joblo]

@Eliovp

I'm not meaning to come off as a troll but you admitted you're an AMD fan boy so it's fair game to challenge you.

"best card ever"?

The numbers you posted put it on par with the GTX980 but at a much higher price. Considering the 980 is 1 1/2 years old,
and second in line, that isn't much to brag about. Will you be testing with the new miner? That might look more impressive.

What is already impressive with the nano is the size reduction, packing 980 performance in a half length card is
an achievement. But that raises the issue of heat dissipation, always a concern with AMD. The improved power
efficiency is nice to see but AMD is still playing catch up.

With the expectations of pascal in the next few months nvidia will probably jump ahead again.

If AMD wants to really compete with Nvidia they either have to put out a better product, or a cheaper product.
An equal product at a higher price won't do it.

[Eliovp]

@Eliovp

I'm not meaning to come off as a troll but you admitted you're an AMD fan boy so it's fair game to challenge you.

"best card ever"?

The numbers you posted put it on par with the GTX980 but at a much higher price. Considering the 980 is 1 1/2 years old,
and second in line, that isn't much to brag about. Will you be testing with the new miner? That might look more impressive.

What is already impressive with the nano is the size reduction, packing 980 performance in a half length card is
an achievement. But that raises the issue of heat dissipation, always a concern with AMD. The improved power
efficiency is nice to see but AMD is still playing catch up.

With the expectations of pascal in the next few months nvidia will probably jump ahead again.

If AMD wants to really compete with Nvidia they either have to put out a better product, or a cheaper product.
An equal product at a higher price won't do it.

Okay, lets say it like this: True i'm in a way an AMD fanboy. I always support the smaller players. I still support Nokia :p (nah i'm joking..)

Yes, for me, best card i ever had. Not only because it's so energy efficient, but also because it's so small, it stays cool, it wouldn't go higher than 65 degrees with fan speed at 25% or so when i was testing (must admit, it wasn't inside a case, still isn't and in an open warehouse), so the heat issue isn't even there. Plus it isn't "that" expensive.

How much did the 980 cost when it came out? And how much does it still cost?

I totally agree with you regarding the price, although that i made a few deals and it's a lot cheaper on my part. But in general, true, it isn't..

The "an equal product at a higher price" statement, that's something i surely don't agree on.

It's in my eyes in no way equal to anything Nvidia offers. The size alone... Temperature you spoke about. I'm now running it at core clock 1100 and it's at 70 degrees (fan @ 40%). Performance wise, there isn't an asic resistant algo out there where it wouldn't end up in the top 3, speed wise..

So i stand by my words. It is the best card AMD has to offer at this moment. And again, those are my words and is my own opinion.


 

[joblo]

@Eliovp

I'm not meaning to come off as a troll but you admitted you're an AMD fan boy so it's fair game to challenge you.

"best card ever"?

The numbers you posted put it on par with the GTX980 but at a much higher price. Considering the 980 is 1 1/2 years old,
and second in line, that isn't much to brag about. Will you be testing with the new miner? That might look more impressive.

What is already impressive with the nano is the size reduction, packing 980 performance in a half length card is
an achievement. But that raises the issue of heat dissipation, always a concern with AMD. The improved power
efficiency is nice to see but AMD is still playing catch up.

With the expectations of pascal in the next few months nvidia will probably jump ahead again.

If AMD wants to really compete with Nvidia they either have to put out a better product, or a cheaper product.
An equal product at a higher price won't do it.

Okay, lets say it like this: True i'm in a way an AMD fanboy. I always support the smaller players. I still support Nokia :p (nah i'm joking..)

Yes, for me, best card i ever had. Not only because it's so energy efficient, but also because it's so small, it stays cool, it wouldn't go higher than 65 degrees with fan speed at 25% or so when i was testing (must admit, it wasn't inside a case, still isn't and in an open warehouse), so the heat issue isn't even there. Plus it isn't "that" expensive.

How much did the 980 cost when it came out? And how much does it still cost?

I totally agree with you regarding the price, although that i made a few deals and it's a lot cheaper on my part. But in general, true, it isn't..

The "an equal product at a higher price" statement, that's something i surely don't agree on.

It's in my eyes in no way equal to anything Nvidia offers. The size alone... Temperature you spoke about. I'm now running it at core clock 1100 and it's at 70 degrees (fan @ 40%). Performance wise, there isn't an asic resistant algo out there where it wouldn't end up in the top 3, speed wise..

So i stand by my words. It is the best card AMD has to offer at this moment. And again, those are my words and is my own opinion.


 

I agree it's the best since ATI was bought out by AMD. Now if they put out a 2xnano it would give nvidia a run for it's
money at the top end.

[ldw-com]

http://anandtech.com/show/9874/amd-dual-fiji-gemini-video-card-delayed-to-2016


There it is

[Rostadom]

http://anandtech.com/show/9874/amd-dual-fiji-gemini-video-card-delayed-to-2016


There it is

It makes little difference to the mining community if this card is delayed. It is too expensive and does not mine efficiently on ethereum.

[antantti]

It makes little difference to the mining community if this card is delayed. It is too expensive and does not mine efficiently on ethereum.

I edited my post.. it's 11mhz per card.


Some extra info.

23,5Mhz @ 60Watt (core down to 850) per card on Ethereum, 25Mhz @ 100watt (stock clock) and 30Mhz @ 200watt (core @ 1100)

Don't think Nvidia can beat that ;-)

But pricy card none the less..

Hmmm...

[Namsbreh]

I picked up a Nano for testing today.  A Sapphire AMD Radeon R9 Nano, my rig is drawing 200 watts more at the wall mining ETH at stock 1000/500@25mh with the Nano plugged in.  I'm slightly disappointed, although nice & warm.

What drivers are you using please?  I'm using the latest Crimson, Catalyst 15.8 with driver 15.300.1025.0

ETA:

I have stripped the rig down, re-installed everything and with just the Nano plugged in system is using 230w.  Mobo, CPU etc take 75w, meaning Nano now taking 155w at wall mining ETH @stock.  Not as good as the OP, but getting better.

[Naficopa]

I use 280x to mine Ethereum. There is no difference if I use 14.6 or 15.8.

[Eliovp]

I picked up a Nano for testing today.  A Sapphire AMD Radeon R9 Nano, my rig is drawing 200 watts more at the wall mining ETH at stock 1000/500@25mh with the Nano plugged in.  I'm slightly disappointed, although nice & warm.

What drivers are you using please?  I'm using the latest Crimson, Catalyst 15.8 with driver 15.300.1025.0

ETA:

I have stripped the rig down, re-installed everything and with just the Nano plugged in system is using 230w.  Mobo, CPU etc take 75w, meaning Nano now taking 155w at wall mining ETH @stock.  Not as good as the OP, but getting better.

I tested with Win 10 Pro, Latest Crimson drivers 15.11 or so i thought it was. Not sure, i'd have to check.

Mine is an XFX R9 Nano. But that wouldn't make any difference i think.

[Namsbreh]

Thanks, Win 7 on the rig with the Nano.  Maybe I should try 10.