Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Enthusiast Zone > Gaming > PC Gaming (Also, Advice Needed)

PC Gaming (Also, Advice Needed) (Page 7)
Thread Tools
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 4, 2017, 12:13 PM
 
I understand that returns on mining cards are high, as miners run them for a while at high overclocks and then return them or ask for a warranty replacement. They are also sold used to unsuspecting customers, causing bad reputation for the brand when they break.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2017, 07:03 AM
 
While we have had DOAs, and a few cards kick the bucket very soon after deployment (which would have happened to anyone), we've not them die due to regular use, and we run a >300 GPU farm. One thing that does happen is the cheap white thermal compound manufacturers use dries out (making the fans ramp up and wear out more quickly). So now we replace it with AC MX-4 (we may have moved to a better compound recently, I'm not sure) right out of the box, just to avoid that possible issue. Mining usually doesn't hurt the cards themselves, because the vast majority of miners undervolt them to the lowest settings they can get away with, while still being able to hit normal boost clock, to save on electricity.

So if cards are being RMA'd it's because, 1. they're DOA or defective right off the bat, 2. the fans malfunctioned, or 3. some inexperienced miner who doesn't know what he's doing is overclocking/overvolting his cards (this is particularly bad, because it really doesn't help the hashrate very much, esp not with relation to the amount of extra electricity used). But even then, the last one would take years of 24/7 (ab)use. Once we're done with ours we'll replace the compound again, clean the heatsinks/fans, and sell them, and I'm confident they'll be good gaming cards for years after (while saving the purchasers a good deal of $$ over buying new).
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 6, 2017, 09:37 AM
 
I get the feeling that the answer is 3). There are a lot of kids who don't know what they're doing out there trying to mine.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 14, 2017, 04:59 PM
 
Vega 64'is out, and also sold out. Vega 64 is neck and neck with a 1080 at 100-150W more power, while the Vega 56 beats the 1070 comfortable while using some 40W more. The first isn't so interesting, but the second is now the new performance card to beat... when it launches.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 15, 2017, 12:49 AM
 
I'm seeing the Vega 64 as being 10-20% behind the 1080 in most games, while also being a lot louder and hotter (because it's a very power-hungry card), they were available on Newegg until about 1pm today (EST).

Vega 56 does look very good for it's price point, though, it's certainly the mid-range card to buy, if you don't mind the higher noise levels. Unfortunately, it's also going to be the preferred miners' card too, offering 80% of the Vega 64's hashrate while using 1/3rd less power. I have a feeling that not many gamers will be able to get their hands on one, esp due to HBM2 production limitations, no matter AMD's attempts to counter miners. Each mining group I know has already placed wholesale orders for 100s and 100s of them.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 15, 2017, 04:11 AM
 
My statement was based on Anandtech reviews mostly, but they what I have read seem to agree. nVidia wins big in GTA V, and at the mostly pointless 1080p resolution (if you want to game at 1080p, save your money and get a 580 or 1060 or something) while the Vega 64 wins by a smaller margin elsewhere.

While I agree that Vega 56 is a better deal than Vega 64 for mining, the 580 is way better than either. AMD should make more of those to keep the miners satisfied and let gamers get the better cards.

In other news - no consumer Volta before Christmas:

https://seekingalpha.com/article/409...script?page=10 (Free reg req'd).
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 15, 2017, 03:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
My statement was based on Anandtech reviews mostly, but they what I have read seem to agree. nVidia wins big in GTA V, and at the mostly pointless 1080p resolution (if you want to game at 1080p, save your money and get a 580 or 1060 or something) while the Vega 64 wins by a smaller margin elsewhere.
Kyle at Bitwit is my source, it's Vega 56 and 64 vs GTX 1070 and 1080.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOIVkIgtrvE&t=0s

While I agree that Vega 56 is a better deal than Vega 64 for mining, the 580 is way better than either. AMD should make more of those to keep the miners satisfied and let gamers get the better cards.
Vega 56 mines at 280% the hashrate of the 580, but only uses 50% more power. That's quite an improvement.

In other news - no consumer Volta before Christmas:

https://seekingalpha.com/article/409...script?page=10 (Free reg req'd).
Yeah, earlier I said it would be Q1 2018.
( Last edited by Cap'n Tightpants; Aug 16, 2017 at 01:11 AM. )
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 16, 2017, 01:19 AM
 
and now AMD is raising the retail price on Vega cards by $100 across the board, after the first wave of cards went out. Team Red fans are livid, with good reason.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 16, 2017, 04:28 AM
 
That appears to be a rumor still, but it is really shitty if so.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 16, 2017, 05:16 AM
 
Looks like it's a bid to cash in on mining, no matter the effect on gamers. IF true, that's ugly business.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Jawbone54  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 16, 2017, 11:43 AM
 
If that's the case, aren't they a little late?
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 16, 2017, 12:57 PM
 
If that is the plan, wouldn't it be better to make way more Radeon 580, except underclocked to hit the sweet spot in the efficiency curve? They would be way cheaper to make and could be sold at reasonable prices with a healthy margin. I doubt that AMD even makes money off of Vega 10.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 17, 2017, 12:43 AM
 
Well, you have a limit of PCI-E slots, and there's the factor of megahashes per machine (which you want to be as high as possible, because PCs take up real estate and there's added expense of implementing more PCs). We use a rack mounted setup but most, even mid-sized, miners don't. They just have as many cheap rigs running as they can fit into a space, which are oftentimes air-conditioned storage lockers or cheap rental properties (bonus if utilities are included).

While undervolted, downclocked 580s and 570s would sell well, and take some pressure off Vega 56, its hashrate per slot is amazing and it's attracting a lot of interest.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 17, 2017, 05:30 AM
 
Not a problem: Make a 580 X2. Or X3 or X4 if you can fit it into the TDP. Doesn't even have to be made by AMD, it could be made by any of the AIB partners. Because hashrate is essentially linear with chip mm2, is not affected by having multiple dies, and cost scales superlinearly with mm2, it makes sense for everyone to use cards like that for mining.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 17, 2017, 03:55 PM
 
^^ Not seeing anything like that on the horizon from anyone, though.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 04:03 AM
 
I don't think anyone wants to invest too much in special mining cards as the bottom fell out of the mining market a few years ago and AMD stood with its warehouses full of unsold Tahiti chips.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 08:50 AM
 
AMD still hasn't made an official announcement one way or the other about the supposed price change. I suspect that the reaction to their shenanigans is even worse than they expected, and they're looking for a way to save face.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 06:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
I don't think anyone wants to invest too much in special mining cards as the bottom fell out of the mining market a few years ago and AMD stood with its warehouses full of unsold Tahiti chips.
That was before the alt-coin explosion, though. Now there are CC devs who purposely avoid ASIC solutions, making mining with such hardware impossible (Etherium, ZEC, Dash, sia, etc.) and those "currencies" are strong, growing as fast as BTC in a lot of cases.

AMD still hasn't made an official announcement one way or the other about the supposed price change. I suspect that the reaction to their shenanigans is even worse than they expected, and they're looking for a way to save face.
You bet they are, they didn't expect the Red army to pivot and turn on them so fast.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 18, 2017, 07:38 PM
 
BTC was supposed to be resistant to ASIC mining. It just didn't work out that way. If someone makes an Etherium-mining ASIC one day, demand for GPUs will crash - because l don't think anyone buys GPUs for BTC mining anymore.

To be clear, I think AMD should make more 580s for mining, at least if Vega 11 and 12 are still far away. I just understand why they don't.

AMD backed down on the price increases, btw.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 19, 2017, 04:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
BTC was supposed to be resistant to ASIC mining. It just didn't work out that way. If someone makes an Etherium-mining ASIC one day, demand for GPUs will crash - because l don't think anyone buys GPUs for BTC mining anymore.
They really can't make an ASIC for altcoins currently, because unlike BTC, devs revise the code when they try (and many have tried).

AMD backed down on the price increases, btw.
AMD risked being blackballed and, even worse, brutally roasted by a consortium of Youtube reviewers, from what I can tell almost all of the major ones, if they didn't hold to their original announced pricing. The reviewers (headed by Linus Sebastian of Linus Tech Tips) cited it being unethical that AMD officially stated a set price to them, waited until all their videos were published, and then marked that price up. Makes sense, these channels made value determinations based on the launch price, increasing it by $100 drastically changes that scale, making AMD's offerings no longer competitive.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 20, 2017, 11:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
They really can't make an ASIC for altcoins currently, because unlike BTC, devs revise the code when they try (and many have tried).
Why? They think it's chilly out and want some real climate change?

The reason why it is supposed to take a lot of computing power is that the calculations are supposed to show "proof of work" - basically, prevent anyone from messing with the system because you would need an insane amount of computing power to do so. This theory has some flaws, but if we skip that part for a second, why does locking ASICs out help secure this system? Either you want to make everyone equal, in which case you should design the algorithm to not run well on a GPU at all (which is trivial, btw - just add a bunch of branches so the result of one calculation depends on the result of the previous so it cannot be vectorized) or you accept that some people will invest lots of money to be bigger than average in the PoW stakes, and thus allow ASICs. The current system is just a weird middle ground.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 20, 2017, 08:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
Why? They think it's chilly out and want some real climate change?
They want regular folks to be able to effectively mine them, it keeps enthusiasts active within the CC community and throttles currency creation. Case in point, Zcash (aka. ZEC), one of the CCs we actively mine (~30% of our hash load), just updated their blockchain and miner to stop new ASIC development, and Etherium has done that at least a half-dozen times already.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 21, 2017, 07:02 AM
 
But that only means "let's freeze the situation where it is today, I don't care about the consequences". Even if we forget about the environmental aspect, they have to realize that the boom-and-bust cycle is threatening the survival of the third-party GPUs - they've already hit AMD hard once, and with the Vega launch going less than perfect, AMD may very well decide to just say "F that noise" and not make anything bigger than an APU and console graphics. nVidia is explicitly not focusing on consumer gaming solutions at the moment, and why should they, if their only competitor is being half-hearted at best.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 23, 2017, 03:36 AM
 
No, they don't care about those consequences. In fact, AMD just released mining specific drivers for Vega, so they've decided to accept miners with open arms. Why would AMD say "F that noise"? They're selling every single card they can get to market within minutes. The more I think about it, the more I believe you're not looking at this rationally. Why should they care if miners buy them, to be completely honest, they're consumers too. Just because gamers are angry doesn't necessarily change that. It's a market, and a very healthy one, at that.

After a little driver juggling and fiddling, I've determined that the Vega 64 is a damned good mining card, even better than the 1080TI or much more expensive Titan Xp.



Even at $600 for a Vega 64, that's a 2 month ROI, which is pretty fantastic.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 23, 2017, 03:42 AM
 
Samsung launches the world's largest QLED gaming monitor, a 49" 144Hz HDR monster.

http://hexus.net/tech/news/monitors/...aming-monitor/
Samsung is at Gamescom 2017 with what it claims to be "the world's largest QLED gaming monitor". At the Cologne-based gaming event, open to the public from today until 26th August, Samsung is showing off its new CHG90 QLED Gaming Monitor. This monitor is 49-inches in diagonal, however it is very wide but not very tall (super ultra-wide 32:9), delivering what Samsung calls "an IMAX-style cinematic viewing experience". In another description Samsung says the screen is equivalent to two bezel-less 27-inch 16:9 monitors side by side - which is not just good for gaming but great for multi-tasking too.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 23, 2017, 07:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Samsung launches the world's largest QLED gaming monitor, a 49" 144Hz HDR monster.

http://hexus.net/tech/news/monitors/...aming-monitor/


QLED is Samsung's brand for a plain old LCD with LED backlights. It is written like that to make people thinking about OLED, which only LG has at those sizes (and which is superior in some ways).

As for the size... So it's two displays 1080p 27" displays in one. Some how I suspect it will cost more than two 1080p displays.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 23, 2017, 08:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
No, they don't care about those consequences. In fact, AMD just released mining specific drivers for Vega, so they've decided to accept miners with open arms. Why would AMD say "F that noise"? They're selling every single card they can get to market within minutes.
If they can sell every single Polaris 10 they can make, that's great, because they probably have a nice profit margin on them. They will not have a nice profit margin on a 484 mm2 GPU on a big interposer with HBM2 sold for $400. They're doing that to show that they're still a force to be reckoned with in the GPU market. The lack of a "Big Polaris" hurt them in mindshare, and they're selling Vega 10 cheaply to make up for that.

Why would they want to walk away? Because they're not making money on the business long term. They lost a lot because they made a big chunk of massive Tahiti chips for the Bitcoin boom and then had to sell them for cheap and could not get the cheaper Tonga chips out for the same market position. You can't call up GF and say "I'd like a million Polaris 10 dies tomorrow, please" - the foundry process takes much longer than that and it works on reserving capacity long in advance. If they could expect the market to continue this way for the forseeable future, then great, they can make more chips and have them ready in a couple of months, but they can't count on that because they got burnt last time.

Right now AMD has Zen and it seems to be working out for them in the server/workstation market. They don't have Zen for laptops out yet, and it is a while still - that was a lower priority. They have Vega for that, but do they need more? It isn't exactly hard to stay ahead of Intel on the graphics front, and Intel hasn't moved its graphics hardware forward since Broadwell in 2014. They don't really need that Radeon department that badly for the CPU side right now. AMD also doesn't have a big compute market to buy the same hardware like nVidia does.

So if AMD gets burnt on another cryptocoin crash, I suspect that they will walk away from the AIB market. Make console graphics, make integrated GPU hardware, but skip the big AIB chips.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Jawbone54  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 23, 2017, 12:30 PM
 
My nearly-5-year-old MacBook is due for an upgrade.

I'm looking at picking up the Alienware 15 with GTX 1070, 16 GB, 256 GB/1 TB SSD/HDD combo, with 1080p IPS 300 nt panel.

Any caveats, warnings, recommendations, or alternatives?
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 23, 2017, 01:54 PM
 
Unless you plan on gaming on a higher res display, you can drop down to a GTX 1060. The 1070 is overkill for 1080p @60Hz.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Jawbone54  (op)
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Aug 23, 2017, 02:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Unless you plan on gaming on a higher res display, you can drop down to a GTX 1060. The 1070 is overkill for 1080p @60Hz.
Gaming on a spare external 1440p, no.

Just video/photo editing.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 23, 2017, 03:26 PM
 
Go with the 6GB 1060 version, then. The 1070 is entirely unnecessary.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 23, 2017, 03:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
If they can sell every single Polaris 10 they can make, that's great, because they probably have a nice profit margin on them. They will not have a nice profit margin on a 484 mm2 GPU on a big interposer with HBM2 sold for $400. They're doing that to show that they're still a force to be reckoned with in the GPU market. The lack of a "Big Polaris" hurt them in mindshare, and they're selling Vega 10 cheaply to make up for that.

Why would they want to walk away? Because they're not making money on the business long term.
That's probably why they're still planning on increasing pricing on Vega, after the first 60 days.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Pepetronic
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Sep 2017
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2017, 12:40 PM
 
Yeah, their power supply connections don't look too good. Please, take a look. On the other hand, nVidia was taken with her pants around her ankles - again. It turns out that if you try to use more than 3.5 GB of VRAM in the 970, performance slows down. After this was discovered, nVidia came back with its explanation: they have disability not only the 3 SMM (what they said), but also one of the eight back-end units, 8 ROPS and 256 KB of cache L2. Somehow, they forgot to mention it, and their official technical records listed 64 ROPs and 2MB L2.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:39 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,