GRID T4-8Q vs Radeon R9 Nano
GRID T4-8Q
Popular choices:
Radeon R9 Nano
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The GRID T4-8Q is positioned at rank #302 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID T4-8Q
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID T4-8Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 Nano.
| Insight | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R9 Nano offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R9 Nano holds the technical lead. Priced at $200 (vs $1,000), it costs 80% less, resulting in a 383.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+383.9%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($1,000) | ✅More affordable ($200) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GRID T4-8Q and Radeon R9 Nano
GRID T4-8Q
The GRID T4-8Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 722 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,762 points.
Radeon R9 Nano
The Radeon R9 Nano is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 27 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1000 MHz. It has 4096 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 175W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,609 points. Launch price was $649.
Graphics Performance
The GRID T4-8Q scores 4,762 and the Radeon R9 Nano reaches 4,609 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID T4-8Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Radeon R9 Nano uses GCN 3.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,536 (GRID T4-8Q) vs 4,096 (Radeon R9 Nano). Raw compute: 2.218 TFLOPS (GRID T4-8Q) vs 8.192 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 Nano).
| Feature | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,762+3% | 4,609 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 3.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536 | 4096+167% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.218 TFLOPS | 8.192 TFLOPS+269% |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 96 | 256+167% |
| L1 Cache | 0.56 MB | 1 MB+79% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of video memory. Bus width: 64-bit vs 4096-bit.
| Feature | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | HBM |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 4096-bit+6300% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID T4-8Q draws 100W versus the Radeon R9 Nano's 175W — a 54.5% difference. The GRID T4-8Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID T4-8Q) vs 550W (Radeon R9 Nano). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 8-pin.
| Feature | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W-43% | 175W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-36% | 550W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 8-pin |
| Length | — | 152mm |
| Slots | — | 2 |
| Perf/Watt | 47.6+81% | 26.3 |
Value Analysis
The GRID T4-8Q launched at $2500 MSRP and currently averages $1000, while the Radeon R9 Nano launched at $649 and now averages $200. The Radeon R9 Nano costs 80% less ($800 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 4.8 (GRID T4-8Q) vs 23.0 (Radeon R9 Nano) — the Radeon R9 Nano offers 379.2% better value.
| Feature | GRID T4-8Q | Radeon R9 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2500 | $649-74% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $1000 | $200-80% |
| Performance per Dollar | 4.8 | 23.0+379% |
| Codename | GM204 | Fiji |
| Release | August 30 2015 | August 27 2015 |
| Ranking | #535 | #306 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GRID T4-8Q and Radeon R9 Nano
