I didn't have time to clarify my post earlier as it was made in a rush, but you were on the right track. The 970's been out since September, a bit later for it's smaller SFF forms. As such, the R9 Nano brings nothing particularly new to the table - 9 months later - other than offering an AMD alternative. Reflecting on this essentially killed the enthusiasm I had for it's possibilities, because it does not particularly offer anything different. I will admit it does conform to sizing in terms of how tall the PCB is, which I am glad to see. The 970 Mini tall PCB stuff from Asus and MSI is getting a bit out of hand, and in fact it's across their whole range at this point. I don't see the 3.5gb vs 4gb (HBM or not) as an issue, since neither card will likely matter when the next gen ones come anyway.
I'm aware of the 28nm node's longevity and have actually have made similar to others on different forums who had unrealistic expectations of the 980, 980 Ti and Fury X. Most notably, those overclocking cards like the 780 Ti and 980 see a very small benefit upgrading between them, even the two older to the 980 Ti (even with it also overclocked). Typically around 15% at best.
I can see quite a few people in both camps being rather vexed if they purchase cards from either side with long term in mind, and realize that next-gen will bring full DX12 compliance to both sides (neither has it fully, lacking in different areas), HDCP 2.2 compliance, HBM 2.0, die shrink for performance and efficiencies, smaller form factors, etc.
