Intel Core i9-9900K Re-Review: Performance unleashed, but also leashed

[Toju Mikie]

Thanks for bringing this to light. I think manufacturers should implement a range so as not to cause confusion. Something like, instead of 95W for base clock only, they can put 95W-180W on the CPU specs.

Compare this with AMD's TDP statements. The wattage rarely goes over the TDP.

 

[hahahanoobs]

FX 9590 $900 MSRP
R9 Pro Duo $1500
R9 Nano $549

The R9 Pro Duo was a professional card with two GPUs. $1,500 given the form factor, performance and price. You definitely got more then 10% performance with that card. The only people who could complain about that card are those who wanted to use it for gaming, of which you would rely on crossfire support. That's goes for any dual GPU configuration.

The R9 Nano was a flagship card in an ITX footprint. It made it possible to have a powerful and small build. Performance wasn't the main concern, size and efficiency was of which it had it spades. If you were building high end mini-ITX at the time, that was the card to beat.

Oh I missed this delicious comment!!!

AMD isn't good at marketing are they? This was a RADEON Pro Duo targeted to professionals, and sometimes gamers apparently. Wow, that's confusing. It had two Fiji XT GPU's and AMD wanted $1499 for it. Of course it dropped to $800 about 30 days later, because it was so awesome.....

Nano was just a smaller Fury - that throttled. It also wasn't the most powerful card to fit in an ITX case. Far from it. Nano was physically smaller, but that's all it was. It wasn't better than what else was out there at the time. Even the GTX 980 Ti fit in MANY MANY MANY ITX cases. If Nano was such a SFF success, where is its successor? Exactly!

 

[Evernessince]

Oh I missed this delicious comment!!!

AMD isn't good at marketing are they? This was a RADEON Pro Duo targeted to professionals, and sometimes gamers apparently. Wow, that's confusing. It had two Fiji XT GPU's and AMD wanted $1499 for it. Of course it dropped to $800 about 30 days later, because it was so awesome.....

Nano was just a smaller Fury - that throttled. It also wasn't the most powerful card to fit in an ITX case. Far from it. Nano was physically smaller, but that's all it was. It wasn't better than what else was out there at the time. Even the GTX 980 Ti fit in MANY MANY MANY ITX cases. If Nano was such a SFF success, where is its successor? Exactly!

Seriously you are replying to a thread that last had a post over a year ago and after all that time you still couldn't contribute anything worthwhile to the conversation. Your post, as usual, contains nothing but conjecture and schadenfreude, sad.