Radeon RX 7700S vs R9 Nano

Place in the ranking	254	109
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	5.37	no data
Power efficiency	8.68	27.45
Architecture	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	Fiji	Navi 33
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	27 August 2015 (9 years ago)	4 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$649	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	2048
Compute units	64	no data
Core clock speed	no data	1500 MHz
Boost clock speed	1000 MHz	2500 MHz
Number of transistors	8,900 million	13,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	175 Watt	100 Watt
Texture fill rate	256.0	320.0
Floating-point processing power	8.192 TFLOPS	20.48 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	64
TMUs	256	128
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	32

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).

Laptop size	no data	large
Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	152 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
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	8 GB
Memory bus width	4096 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	500 MHz	2250 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	Portable Device Dependent
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	6.7
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.2
Vulkan	+	1.3
Mantle	+	-

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 22.07

RX 7700S 39.87
+80.7%

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

RX 7700S 15327
+80.6%

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.

R9 Nano 17282

RX 7700S 37918
+119%

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.

R9 Nano 14362

RX 7700S 24246
+68.8%

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	89 −34.8%	120 +34.8%
1440p	30−35 −103%	61 +103%
4K	50 +0%	50 +0%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	7.29	no data
1440p	21.63	no data
4K	12.98	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	40−45 −120%	88 +120%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −93.2%	85−90 +93.2%
Elden Ring	70−75 −97.2%	140−150 +97.2%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −52.2%	100−110 +52.2%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 −90%	76 +90%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −93.2%	85−90 +93.2%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 −115%	202 +115%
Metro Exodus	55−60 −61%	95−100 +61%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 −56%	75−80 +56%
Valorant	85−90 −79.8%	160−170 +79.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −52.2%	100−110 +52.2%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 −70%	68 +70%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −93.2%	85−90 +93.2%
Dota 2	75−80 −15.6%	89 +15.6%
Elden Ring	70−75 −97.2%	140−150 +97.2%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +9.2%	65 −9.2%
Fortnite	110−120 −51.8%	170−180 +51.8%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 −77.7%	167 +77.7%
Grand Theft Auto V	75−80 −72.7%	133 +72.7%
Metro Exodus	55−60 −61%	95−100 +61%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 −40.3%	200−210 +40.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 −56%	75−80 +56%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	34 −318%	140−150 +318%
Valorant	85−90 −79.8%	160−170 +79.8%
World of Tanks	240−250 −14.3%	270−280 +14.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −52.2%	100−110 +52.2%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 −27.5%	51 +27.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −93.2%	85−90 +93.2%
Dota 2	75−80 −61%	120−130 +61%
Far Cry 5	70−75 −38%	95−100 +38%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 −53.2%	144 +53.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 −40.3%	200−210 +40.3%
Valorant	85−90 −79.8%	160−170 +79.8%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	35−40 −86.1%	67 +86.1%
Elden Ring	35−40 −116%	80−85 +116%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 −86.1%	67 +86.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −0.6%	170−180 +0.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 −100%	40−45 +100%
World of Tanks	140−150 −70.3%	250−260 +70.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −62.2%	70−75 +62.2%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −122%	40−45 +122%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −128%	40−45 +128%
Far Cry 5	60−65 −108%	120−130 +108%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −58.6%	92 +58.6%
Metro Exodus	50−55 −72%	85−90 +72%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 −126%	70−75 +126%
Valorant	55−60 −117%	120−130 +117%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −116%	40−45 +116%
Dota 2	35−40 −78.9%	68 +78.9%
Elden Ring	16−18 −129%	35−40 +129%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 −78.9%	68 +78.9%
Metro Exodus	16−18 −94.1%	30−35 +94.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 −92.5%	120−130 +92.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −85.7%	24−27 +85.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 −78.9%	68 +78.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −114%	45−50 +114%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −116%	40−45 +116%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −157%	18−20 +157%
Dota 2	35−40 −108%	75−80 +108%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −103%	55−60 +103%
Fortnite	27−30 −111%	55−60 +111%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −45.5%	48 +45.5%
Valorant	27−30 −148%	65−70 +148%

This is how R9 Nano and RX 7700S compete in popular games:

RX 7700S is 35% faster in 1080p
RX 7700S is 103% faster in 1440p
A tie in 4K

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

in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 Nano is 9% faster.
in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 7700S is 318% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

R9 Nano is ahead in 1 test (2%)
RX 7700S is ahead in 62 tests (98%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	22.07	39.87
Recency	27 August 2015	4 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	175 Watt	100 Watt

RX 7700S has a 80.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 75% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 7700S 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 Radeon RX 7700S is a notebook one.

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