The Radeon R9 Nano is at least 2x slower gaming GPU than the Arc A750. We cannot compare value as at least one GPU is out of stock.
Advantages of the Radeon R9 Nano
- Consumes up to 22% less energy – 175 vs 225 Watts
Advantages of the Arc A750
- At least 2x faster GPU for gaming
- Up to 100% more VRAM memory – 8 vs 4 GB
Radeon R9 Nano vs Arc A750 for Gaming
The GPU's performance in selected game and settings
Radeon R9 Nano
Aug 27th, 2015
Average FPS
72
59%
Min 1% FPS
37
52%
Price, CA$
Out of Stock
Value, CA$/FPS
Not Available
All items are out of stock.
Arc A750
Oct 12th, 2022
Average FPS
122
100%
Min 1% FPS
71
100%
Price, CA$
CA$369.99
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$3.03/FPS
100%
Buy on Amazon
CA$369.99
In Stock
Buy on Amazon
CA$389.00
In Stock
Buy on Amazon
CA$409.85
In Stock
Radeon R9 Nano vs Arc A750 in My Games
The FPS you'll get in saved games, click on a game to change it
The FPS you'll get in saved games, click on a game to change it
Add a Game
Select Settings
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Radeon R9 Nano vs Arc A750 in synthetic GPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Radeon R9 Nano vs Arc A750 in core GPU performance specifications
Radeon R9 Nano
Aug 27th, 2015
Memory
4 GB
50%
Memory Bandwidth
512 GB/s
100%
Pixel Fillrate
64 GPixel/s
24%
Texture Fillrate
256 GTexel/s
48%
FP32
8.192 TFLOPS
48%
Arc A750
Oct 12th, 2022
Memory
8 GB
100%
Memory Bandwidth
512 GB/s
100%
Pixel Fillrate
268.8 GPixel/s
100%
Texture Fillrate
537.6 GTexel/s
100%
FP32
17.2 TFLOPS
100%
Specifications
Comparison of all specifications
Radeon R9 Nano | SpecificationsComparison of all specifications | Arc A750 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Aug 27th, 2015 | Release Date | Oct 12th, 2022 |
| $649.00 | MSRP | $289.00 |
| Pirate Islands | Generation | Alchemist |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
175 W | Power Consumption | 225 W |
| Memory | ||
| 4 GB | Memory Size | 8 GB |
| HBM | Memory Type | GDDR6 |
| 4096-bit | Memory Bus | 256-bit |
| 512 GB/s | Bandwidth | 512 GB/s |
| Theoretical Performance | ||
| 64 GPixel/s | Pixel Fillrate | 268.8 GPixel/s |
| 256 GTexel/s | Texture Fillrate | 537.6 GTexel/s |
| 8.192 TFLOPS | FP32 | 17.2 TFLOPS |
