Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor

Our next benchmark is Monolith’s popular open-world action game, Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor. One of our current-gen console multiplatform titles, Shadow of Mordor is plenty punishing on its own, and at Ultra settings it absolutely devours VRAM, showcasing the knock-on effect that current-gen consoles have on VRAM requirements.

Shadow of Mordor - 3840x2160 - Ultra Quality

Shadow of Mordor - 3840x2160 - Very High Quality

Shadow of Mordor - 2560x1440 - Ultra Quality

Shadow of Mordor - 1920x1080 - Ultra Quality

Both of AMD’s Fury cards have handled Shadow of Mordor well in the past, and R9 Nano is no exception. The R9 Nano ends up trailing the R9 Fury X and R9 Fury by around 13% and 7% respectively, not too far off from their respective overall averages. Otherwise compared to NVIDIA’s offerings the R9 Nano clearly trails the similarly priced GTX 980 Ti, but enjoys a very comfortable margin over the likes of the GTX 980 and GTX 970 Mini.

Shadow of Mordor - Min Frame Rate - 3840x2160 - Ultra Quality

Shadow of Mordor - Min Frame Rate - 3840x2160 - Very High Quality

Shadow of Mordor - Min Frame Rate - 2560x1440 - Ultra Quality

Shadow of Mordor - Min Frame Rate - 1920x1080 - Ultra Quality

Minimum framerates on the other hand also inherit the other Fiji cards’ weaknesses. AMD actually doesn’t fare too poorly here, however the toll of being slower than the R9 Fury doesn’t do the R9 Nano any favors. Below 3840x2160 the R9 Nano feels the pinch of the GTX 980 and GTX 970 Mini, falling behind these cards.

Crysis 3 Civilization: Beyond Earth
Comments Locked

284 Comments

View All Comments

  • HOOfan 1 - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link

    Plenty of SFF cases fit full size cards now, unless you just have money burning holes in your pocket, why not buy one of those and get a regular non-X Fury or a 390X?
  • przemo_li - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link

    ROTFL

    390X & 980 are TWICE as long.

    That is SFF. Yeah, right. I will write SFF on my ITX tower. It will be so cool :P
  • trentchau - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link

    My Obsidian 250D is considered SFF (close to not being one) and it has a 980Ti in it. Why the laughter?
  • HOOfan 1 - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link

    Fractal Node 202 will fit a GTX 980...are you going to tell me that is not small form factor?
  • ingwe - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link

    For me there is a difference between a truly small form factor design and one that is "small form factor" but built to house a card twice as large as this. I am not saying this is an important distinction to everyone, but it is one that I would make. There is just a lot of size variability in mini-ITX cases.

    Your question though does really illustrate how much of a niche product this is though. You literally need to be going for the smallest package possible while retaining most of the performance--and not care about cost. It is an interesting product, but it is a mixed bag like the interview says.
  • tviceman - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link

    Clearly the Nano is a more interesting card to review but the obvious elephant in the room here is that Anandtech have completely dropped the ball on the last two major Nvidia releases (gtx 960 and gtx 950). Not only that, but you were also late with the Fury X review (being bed ridden can be a valid excuse but when deadlines are continually missed excuses run dry).

    Ryan you have great analysis, fair reviews, and strong writing. You've also had days, weeks (and months) to get reviews out (and on time) with the above mentioned cards and have failed to do so. You obviously need more help with reviews.
  • Oxford Guy - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link

    The 960 wasn't reviewed, most likely, because it was turkey.
  • Gigaplex - Thursday, September 10, 2015 - link

    How am I supposed to know it was turkey without either reading the review that doesn't exist, or buying one myself and being seriously disappointed? You don't just skip reviewing products that aren't very good, otherwise that defeats the point in reviews.
  • K_Space - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link

    @Gigaplex
    I think Of is insinuating that Anandtech would not review a product that defaces nVidia (though I disagree). Getting the Nano review as a priority plus being chief editor (who probably proof reads other reviews), add in various administritive duties and it all takes its toll. The annual call up for reviewers has gone out recently; I think Anandtech made it clear enough they would love a helping hand in getting timely reviews... On time.
  • K_Space - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link

    OG*

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now