RTX A2000 12 GB vs Radeon R9 Nano

Place in the ranking	249	141
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	5.35	87.77
Power efficiency	8.74	35.24
Architecture	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	Fiji	GA106
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Design	reference	no data
Release date	27 August 2015 (9 years ago)	23 November 2021 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$649	$449

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX A2000 12 GB has 1541% 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	4096	3328
Compute units	64	no data
Core clock speed	no data	562 MHz
Boost clock speed	1000 MHz	1200 MHz
Number of transistors	8,900 million	12,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	175 Watt	70 Watt
Texture fill rate	256.0	124.8
Floating-point processing power	8.192 TFLOPS	7.987 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	48
TMUs	256	104
Tensor Cores	no data	104
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	26

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	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	152 mm	167 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	None
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	High Bandwidth Memory (HBM)	GDDR6
High bandwidth memory (HBM)	+	no data
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	12 GB
Memory bus width	4096 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	500 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	512 GB/s	288.0 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 HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	4x mini-DisplayPort
Eyefinity	+	-
Number of Eyefinity displays	6	no 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 compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.3	6.6
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	3.0
Vulkan	+	1.3
Mantle	+	-
CUDA	-	8.6

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.

R9 Nano 22.00

RTX A2000 12 GB 35.49
+61.3%

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.

R9 Nano 8486

RTX A2000 12 GB 13693
+61.4%

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	90 −55.6%	140−150 +55.6%
4K	44 −59.1%	70−75 +59.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	7.21	3.21
4K	14.75	6.41

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

35−40

−57.1%

55−60
+57.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 −53.1%	75−80 +53.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 −48.6%	55−60 +48.6%
Battlefield 5	70−75 −52.8%	110−120 +52.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 −55.6%	70−75 +55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 −57.1%	55−60 +57.1%
Far Cry 5	50−55 −56.9%	80−85 +56.9%
Far Cry New Dawn	55−60 −55.2%	90−95 +55.2%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −57.9%	210−220 +57.9%
Hitman 3	40−45 −59.1%	70−75 +59.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 −53.8%	160−170 +53.8%
Metro Exodus	75−80 −57.9%	120−130 +57.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 −55.2%	90−95 +55.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	70−75 −50.7%	110−120 +50.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 −56.3%	150−160 +56.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 −53.1%	75−80 +53.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 −48.6%	55−60 +48.6%
Battlefield 5	70−75 −52.8%	110−120 +52.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 −55.6%	70−75 +55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 −57.1%	55−60 +57.1%
Far Cry 5	50−55 −56.9%	80−85 +56.9%
Far Cry New Dawn	55−60 −55.2%	90−95 +55.2%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −57.9%	210−220 +57.9%
Hitman 3	40−45 −59.1%	70−75 +59.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 −53.8%	160−170 +53.8%
Metro Exodus	75−80 −57.9%	120−130 +57.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 −55.2%	90−95 +55.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	70−75 −50.7%	110−120 +50.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 −56.3%	75−80 +56.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 −56.3%	150−160 +56.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 −53.1%	75−80 +53.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 −48.6%	55−60 +48.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 −55.6%	70−75 +55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 −57.1%	55−60 +57.1%
Far Cry 5	50−55 −56.9%	80−85 +56.9%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −57.9%	210−220 +57.9%
Hitman 3	40−45 −59.1%	70−75 +59.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 −53.8%	160−170 +53.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	70−75 −50.7%	110−120 +50.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	47 −59.6%	75−80 +59.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 −56.3%	150−160 +56.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

55−60

−55.2%

90−95
+55.2%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 −54.8%	65−70 +54.8%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−35 −47.1%	50−55 +47.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −52.2%	35−40 +52.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24 −42.9%	30−33 +42.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	24−27 −60%	40−45 +60%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −38.5%	18−20 +38.5%
Far Cry 5	24−27 −60%	40−45 +60%
Forza Horizon 4	120−130 −61.3%	200−210 +61.3%
Hitman 3	24−27 −53.8%	40−45 +53.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −55.6%	70−75 +55.6%
Metro Exodus	40−45 −58.5%	65−70 +58.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 −52.2%	70−75 +52.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 −53.8%	40−45 +53.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	120−130 −57.5%	200−210 +57.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

35−40

−48.6%

55−60
+48.6%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −59.1%	35−40 +59.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 −58.8%	27−30 +58.8%
Hitman 3	16−18 −58.8%	27−30 +58.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	110−120 −57.9%	180−190 +57.9%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −45.8%	35−40 +45.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35 −57.1%	55−60 +57.1%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −38.5%	18−20 +38.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−12 −45.5%	16−18 +45.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −50%	18−20 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −60%	8−9 +60%
Far Cry 5	12−14 −50%	18−20 +50%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 −50%	45−50 +50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 −53.8%	40−45 +53.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 −55.6%	14−16 +55.6%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

−57.9%

30−33
+57.9%

This is how R9 Nano and RTX A2000 12 GB compete in popular games:

RTX A2000 12 GB is 56% faster in 1080p
RTX A2000 12 GB is 59% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	22.00	35.49
Recency	27 August 2015	23 November 2021
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	12 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	175 Watt	70 Watt

RTX A2000 12 GB has a 61.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

The RTX A2000 12 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 Nano in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 Nano is a desktop card while RTX A2000 12 GB is a workstation one.

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