Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > CPUs and Overclocking

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2013
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-13-2012, 09:58 PM   #51
Abwx
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,066
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by minitron View Post
The i7 completes the task in 91.5s
The FX completes the task in 116s


The i7 is 26% faster than the FX (116/91.5)
Now tell us by how much the 8350 is slower.......
Abwx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 01:05 AM   #52
AtenRa
Diamond Member
 
AtenRa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Athens Greece
Posts: 5,830
Default

More time is not faster
Less time is Faster

116 Frames per Second are ~26,8% HIGHER or MORE or FASTER than 91.5 fps

116 seconds are ~26,8% SLOWER than 91,5 seconds (more time is SLOWER)

91,5 seconds are ~21,1% FASTER than 116 seconds (less time is FASTER)

Hope you got it now
__________________
Thief : Mantle CPU Scaling and Power evaluation
(10 CPUs at default and Overclock, including Power Consumption)
AtenRa is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 03:16 AM   #53
inf64
Platinum Member
 
inf64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,029
Default

Really guys it's pointless but I applaud your efforts . Maybe he is just trolling us all along and trolling himself in the process? I don't know,but what I know is he has no clue about some basic mathematical concepts.
__________________
ShintaiDK:"There will be no APU in PS4 and Xbox720."
ShintaiDK:"No quadchannel either.[in Kaveri]"
CHADBOGA:"Because he[OBR] is a great man."
inf64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 09:35 AM   #54
Idontcare
Administrator
Elite Member
 
Idontcare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: 台北市
Posts: 20,314
Default

The question I have is: with IB-E not coming out until Q3 2013, and with Haswell coming with much improved performance capabilities above and beyond even that of Ivy Bridge, is it actually plausible/probable that a consumer-grade quad-core Haswell is going to best the performance of even the 150W TDP extreme 6-core SB-E chips on release?
Idontcare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 09:37 AM   #55
inf64
Platinum Member
 
inf64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,029
Default

10-15% over 3770K can hardly best 6C SB-E @ 3.5Ghz. Unless you recompile your workload yourself and your code benefits from AVX2 or FMA.
__________________
ShintaiDK:"There will be no APU in PS4 and Xbox720."
ShintaiDK:"No quadchannel either.[in Kaveri]"
CHADBOGA:"Because he[OBR] is a great man."
inf64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 11:37 AM   #56
Makaveli
Diamond Member
 
Makaveli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,241
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Idontcare View Post
The question I have is: with IB-E not coming out until Q3 2013, and with Haswell coming with much improved performance capabilities above and beyond even that of Ivy Bridge, is it actually plausible/probable that a consumer-grade quad-core Haswell is going to best the performance of even the 150W TDP extreme 6-core SB-E chips on release?
Quote:
Originally Posted by inf64 View Post
10-15% over 3770K can hardly best 6C SB-E @ 3.5Ghz. Unless you recompile your workload yourself and your code benefits from AVX2 or FMA.
Agreed I think you will need a much larger IPC gap and some compiler tricks to bridge the gap in multithreaded work loads.

However in the Single threaded to 4 threaded workloads I can see Haswell doing very well and will win some benchmarks.
__________________
Intel Core i7 970 @ 4.2Ghz 1.29v | TRUE Black Rev.C + Scythe S-Flex 1600 rpm x2 | Asus P6-T Deluxe V2 | 12GB Mushkin DDR3-1600 7-8-7-20 1T | MSI 7970 Ghz + Kraken G10 & H55 | EVGA 650 SC Physx | Logitech G15+G500 | Intel 320GB G2 Raid 0 | WD 1TB Black Storage | ESATA 2TB Green | CM 690 II Advanced | Razor Vespula | HP ZR24w | Logitech Z560 | X-FI Titanium | Corsair Pro Series Gold AX750
Makaveli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 11:45 AM   #57
Idontcare
Administrator
Elite Member
 
Idontcare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: 台北市
Posts: 20,314
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by inf64 View Post
10-15% over 3770K can hardly best 6C SB-E @ 3.5Ghz. Unless you recompile your workload yourself and your code benefits from AVX2 or FMA.
Are you sure the top K model for a quad Haswell will be 3.5GHz?

Also, considering the microarchitectural improvements that are going in for bandwidth purposes, I'd expect MT workloads to see a disproportionate uplift with haswell versus IB. (which is why I am wondering if it might actually exceed that of SB-E, you've got a process node and two microarch iterations advantage at that point)
Idontcare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 01:19 PM   #58
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 10,183
Default

The speed and power gonna be very interesting, even with the VRM added ondie.

Or as David Kanter says:

Quote:
Haswell is the first family of SoCs that have been tailored to take advantage of Intel’s 22nm FinFET process technology. While Ivy Bridge is also 22nm, Intel’s circuit design team sacrificed power and performance in favor of a swift migration to a process with a radically new transistor architecture.
Haswell-DT vs SB-E/IB-E in singlethreaded gonna be an utter nightmare for LGA2011 owners. And SB-E atleast might easily lose more than it wins in MT.
__________________
Anandtech forums=Xtremesystems forums
ShintaiDK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 01:52 PM   #59
Makaveli
Diamond Member
 
Makaveli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,241
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
The speed and power gonna be very interesting, even with the VRM added ondie.

Or as David Kanter says:



Haswell-DT vs SB-E/IB-E in singlethreaded gonna be an utter nightmare for LGA2011 owners. And SB-E atleast might easily lose more than it wins in MT.

Lets say the IPC gap is 15% from Ivy to Haswell and it may be lower single digits.

At 15% its the same gap as nehalem and SB and the performance difference isn't that great depending on the application at the same clock speed.

so how would that be an utter nightmare?
__________________
Intel Core i7 970 @ 4.2Ghz 1.29v | TRUE Black Rev.C + Scythe S-Flex 1600 rpm x2 | Asus P6-T Deluxe V2 | 12GB Mushkin DDR3-1600 7-8-7-20 1T | MSI 7970 Ghz + Kraken G10 & H55 | EVGA 650 SC Physx | Logitech G15+G500 | Intel 320GB G2 Raid 0 | WD 1TB Black Storage | ESATA 2TB Green | CM 690 II Advanced | Razor Vespula | HP ZR24w | Logitech Z560 | X-FI Titanium | Corsair Pro Series Gold AX750
Makaveli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 02:09 PM   #60
Sheep221
Golden Member
 
Sheep221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Idontcare View Post
Are you sure the top K model for a quad Haswell will be 3.5GHz?

Also, considering the microarchitectural improvements that are going in for bandwidth purposes, I'd expect MT workloads to see a disproportionate uplift with haswell versus IB. (which is why I am wondering if it might actually exceed that of SB-E, you've got a process node and two microarch iterations advantage at that point)
It depends on various things, first the conductive lines in such a small scale dies are not really anymore intended for operation on such a high frequencies and for a second every year the time space between software hardware gets wider and makes high frequencies less effective in obtaining more performance. In fact, due to more and more advanced hardware there maybe complete OC dismiss in the future.
__________________
i5-2550K/16GB HyperX/HD5670/P67 Pro3/Agility3
Sheep221 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 03:47 PM   #61
inf64
Platinum Member
 
inf64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,029
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Idontcare View Post
Are you sure the top K model for a quad Haswell will be 3.5GHz?

Also, considering the microarchitectural improvements that are going in for bandwidth purposes, I'd expect MT workloads to see a disproportionate uplift with haswell versus IB. (which is why I am wondering if it might actually exceed that of SB-E, you've got a process node and two microarch iterations advantage at that point)
I give it 3.6Ghz with 4Ghz Turbo . And remember ,Haswell is all about power efficiency not super high clocks. The 10-15% speedup intel states is from clock+ipc. I suppose Haswell may be able to run at sustained turbo state longer than IVB/SB so there might be some benefit from there too.
__________________
ShintaiDK:"There will be no APU in PS4 and Xbox720."
ShintaiDK:"No quadchannel either.[in Kaveri]"
CHADBOGA:"Because he[OBR] is a great man."
inf64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 06:47 PM   #62
myocardia
Diamond Member
 
myocardia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 8,523
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Makaveli View Post
Lets say the IPC gap is 15% from Ivy to Haswell and it may be lower single digits.

At 15% its the same gap as nehalem and SB and the performance difference isn't that great depending on the application at the same clock speed.

so how would that be an utter nightmare?
I love how some people like to pretend as if Haswell isn't gonna have new instructions like TX and AVX2. With the right software, and even if Haswell only has a ~10% gain in IPC, Haswell could easily see up to a 100% gain per core*, at the same clock speed. Of course, that will only be in one or two of the best written, newly updated softwares. Still, it would suck to see your 6 core 3930k get slaughtered by a non-overclocked Haswell quad in the one software that you use the most!

* I personally only expect improvements of up to ~75-80% from TX/AVX2, but remember that you have to also add in the same IPC gain that Haswell will have with all other, older software, which may be as high as 15%.
myocardia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 07:22 PM   #63
Lepton87
Golden Member
 
Lepton87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Poland(EU)
Posts: 1,637
Default

Just look how sensitive WoW is to the cache size, despite clock frequency deficit and/or architectural improvements it still wins this benchmark.



Based on those numbers Xeon could easily be 130W part as it draws less power than 130W TDP 3960X. I wish Intel would release a fully unlocked SB-E procesor with 8 cores and no multiplier lock, as it turns out 1000$ is not enough for them to price their best processor. Extreme Edition should be Extreme if they can't or won't sell thir best processors for 1000$
they should price them at 2000$ and really keep them extreme. right now there's just a hair separating 3960k from their "Extreme" offering. I see nothing extreme in their current extreme line-up besides price.

Basically going with the "extreme" offering over 3960k makes sense only if that 400$ is pocket change for you.
__________________
i5 2600K@4778MHz(47x101.7MHz) 1.45V,Noctua NH-D14, Asus Maximus IV Extreme, 8GB Corsair 1866MHz, Gigabyte GTX Titan, Sandforce 2 120GB + Sandforce 1 60GB 2x2TB WD Caviar, BE Quiet 1200W, dell u2711

Last edited by Lepton87; 11-14-2012 at 07:27 PM.
Lepton87 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 07:51 PM   #64
Makaveli
Diamond Member
 
Makaveli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,241
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by myocardia View Post
I love how some people like to pretend as if Haswell isn't gonna have new instructions like TX and AVX2. With the right software, and even if Haswell only has a ~10% gain in IPC, Haswell could easily see up to a 100% gain per core*, at the same clock speed. Of course, that will only be in one or two of the best written, newly updated softwares. Still, it would suck to see your 6 core 3930k get slaughtered by a non-overclocked Haswell quad in the one software that you use the most!

* I personally only expect improvements of up to ~75-80% from TX/AVX2, but remember that you have to also add in the same IPC gain that Haswell will have with all other, older software, which may be as high as 15%.
Because history speaks for itself.

SB has had AVX for how long now and how many applications use it?
__________________
Intel Core i7 970 @ 4.2Ghz 1.29v | TRUE Black Rev.C + Scythe S-Flex 1600 rpm x2 | Asus P6-T Deluxe V2 | 12GB Mushkin DDR3-1600 7-8-7-20 1T | MSI 7970 Ghz + Kraken G10 & H55 | EVGA 650 SC Physx | Logitech G15+G500 | Intel 320GB G2 Raid 0 | WD 1TB Black Storage | ESATA 2TB Green | CM 690 II Advanced | Razor Vespula | HP ZR24w | Logitech Z560 | X-FI Titanium | Corsair Pro Series Gold AX750
Makaveli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 08:20 PM   #65
myocardia
Diamond Member
 
myocardia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 8,523
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Makaveli View Post
Because history speaks for itself.

SB has had AVX for how long now and how many applications use it?
Haha, very true. I honestly don't know enough about this stuff to know for sure whether it is the type of software that would benefit or not, but if it benefits in any way at all, I definitely expect at the least to see most if not all CAD software that's commercially available to have AVX2 support, if not both AVX2 and TX. I also wouldn't be surprised to see PhotoShop having some support for either or both, but probably not immediately.
myocardia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 08:32 PM   #66
Makaveli
Diamond Member
 
Makaveli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,241
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by myocardia View Post
Haha, very true. I honestly don't know enough about this stuff to know for sure whether it is the type of software that would benefit or not, but if it benefits in any way at all, I definitely expect at the least to see most if not all CAD software that's commercially available to have AVX2 support, if not both AVX2 and TX. I also wouldn't be surprised to see PhotoShop having some support for either or both, but probably not immediately.
I do believe we will see more of a push to have software recompiled for AVX2 over AVX because it will provide more of a benefit.

The question is when?

And will it be within the first year of release or are you going to be waiting for broadwell before you start seeing it used in alot of apps.
__________________
Intel Core i7 970 @ 4.2Ghz 1.29v | TRUE Black Rev.C + Scythe S-Flex 1600 rpm x2 | Asus P6-T Deluxe V2 | 12GB Mushkin DDR3-1600 7-8-7-20 1T | MSI 7970 Ghz + Kraken G10 & H55 | EVGA 650 SC Physx | Logitech G15+G500 | Intel 320GB G2 Raid 0 | WD 1TB Black Storage | ESATA 2TB Green | CM 690 II Advanced | Razor Vespula | HP ZR24w | Logitech Z560 | X-FI Titanium | Corsair Pro Series Gold AX750
Makaveli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2012, 08:40 PM   #67
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 10,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Makaveli View Post
Because history speaks for itself.

SB has had AVX for how long now and how many applications use it?
More than you might think. The issue is that AVX1 is FP and limited by that SB/IB/DB/PD needs 2 cycles to execute it. Haswell will do singlecycle.

Also the main benefit is AVX2 with vectoring of all scalar SSE functions plus gather. Visual Studio, Intel compilers etc already support and generate AVX2 code today.
__________________
Anandtech forums=Xtremesystems forums
ShintaiDK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 12:43 AM   #68
myocardia
Diamond Member
 
myocardia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 8,523
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Makaveli View Post
I do believe we will see more of a push to have software recompiled for AVX2 over AVX because it will provide more of a benefit.

The question is when?

And will it be within the first year of release or are you going to be waiting for broadwell before you start seeing it used in alot of apps.
Well, none of us can predict the future, but I'd put my money on it already having at least minimal support the day that Haswell launches/asap after it launches. That will be in the high dollar software like AutoCAD, and it's competition, of course. I highly doubt that people like you and I will see any benefit from it for at least a year or two, if not quite a long time after that. Although I am guessing that Adobe's next version of Photoshop will include support for it. Then again, I don't buy Photoshop, and you most likely don't either.
myocardia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 01:26 PM   #69
moonbogg
Diamond Member
 
moonbogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,131
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by myocardia View Post
Well, none of us can predict the future, but I'd put my money on it already having at least minimal support the day that Haswell launches/asap after it launches. That will be in the high dollar software like AutoCAD, and it's competition, of course. I highly doubt that people like you and I will see any benefit from it for at least a year or two, if not quite a long time after that. Although I am guessing that Adobe's next version of Photoshop will include support for it. Then again, I don't buy Photoshop, and you most likely don't either.

I have seen this too many times to not comment on it. The majority of "CAD" work is single threaded. There, thats it. The only time more cores does anything is if you do a photo realistic rendering or perhaps a physics simulation of a part or assembly, which is done, but not as often as the "CAD" work. The actual "CAD" part of a "CAD" program doesn't give a crap how many cores you got and it won't help. So please, if you happen to be a "CAD" user and want a better "CAD" experience, upgrade your video card to a Quadro or firepro GL.
__________________
3930K @ 4.3 - 16GB DDR3 @ 1600 - 2X GTX 670 SLI(2GB) - SAMSUNG 830 SSD - 1920X1080 @ 120HZ - WINDOWS 8.1
moonbogg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 01:37 PM   #70
Sheep221
Golden Member
 
Sheep221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moonbogg View Post
I have seen this too many times to not comment on it. The majority of "CAD" work is single threaded. There, thats it. The only time more cores does anything is if you do a photo realistic rendering or perhaps a physics simulation of a part or assembly, which is done, but not as often as the "CAD" work. The actual "CAD" part of a "CAD" program doesn't give a crap how many cores you got and it won't help. So please, if you happen to be a "CAD" user and want a better "CAD" experience, upgrade your video card to a Quadro or firepro GL.
CAD programs are still more likely to render with CPU instead of GPU, while there are CAD programs which are multi-threaded as well. The DDS-Solidworks is one of the more known programs to use multiple threads.
__________________
i5-2550K/16GB HyperX/HD5670/P67 Pro3/Agility3
Sheep221 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2012, 01:39 PM   #71
moonbogg
Diamond Member
 
moonbogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,131
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheep221 View Post
CAD programs are still more likely to render with CPU instead of GPU, while there are CAD software which are multi-threaded as well. The DDS-Solidworks is one of the more known programs to use multiple threads.
I use solidworks every day. Guess what functions of the program are multithreaded? Things like the SAVE command, etc. Seriously. The important part, that is, the actual design work, is single threaded.
__________________
3930K @ 4.3 - 16GB DDR3 @ 1600 - 2X GTX 670 SLI(2GB) - SAMSUNG 830 SSD - 1920X1080 @ 120HZ - WINDOWS 8.1
moonbogg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 05:57 PM   #72
phenomkid7
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 38
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by inf64 View Post
Funny that 8350 has been constantly sold out at newegg. So much for not going so well for AMD. I'm willing to say that AMD will exceed their sales expectation with Vishera line,far outselling FX8/6/4 series this and next year.
Yes because Newegg == the entire market for chips.
phenomkid7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 07:38 PM   #73
Haserath
Senior Member
 
Haserath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 723
Default

CPU A=120 seconds
CPU B= 12 seconds

A/B= 1000% faster(magnitude of 10)
And
A-B=C

C/A= 90% less time

So...

116/91.5= 26.8% faster

And

116-91.5

24.5/116= 21.1% less time
Haserath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 07:57 PM   #74
inf64
Platinum Member
 
inf64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,029
Default

We have been over that 10x already. Faster than and slower than use different bases for calculating numbers. 3970x is 21.1% faster than 8350(we use 8350's result as a base-which is 116;so 91.5/116=0.788 => 100-78.8=21.1). On the other hand 8350 is 26.8% slower than 3970x(we use a 3970x's results as a base-which is 91.5;so 116/91.5=1.26 or 26.8%). It's very easy to understand but yet somehow very complicated to some users here.
__________________
ShintaiDK:"There will be no APU in PS4 and Xbox720."
ShintaiDK:"No quadchannel either.[in Kaveri]"
CHADBOGA:"Because he[OBR] is a great man."
inf64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 09:21 PM   #75
TemjinGold
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,420
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by inf64 View Post
We have been over that 10x already. Faster than and slower than use different bases for calculating numbers. 3970x is 21.1% faster than 8350(we use 8350's result as a base-which is 116;so 91.5/116=0.788 => 100-78.8=21.1). On the other hand 8350 is 26.8% slower than 3970x(we use a 3970x's results as a base-which is 91.5;so 116/91.5=1.26 or 26.8%). It's very easy to understand but yet somehow very complicated to some users here.
Calm down. We all get that you need a different base for faster and slower. The problem is you're wrong because you are using the wrong base both times. I believe the other guy tried to explain it but to help you understand, pretend the Intel took 50s and the AMD took 100s. We would all agree, the Intel is 100% faster than the AMD in this case (since it's twice as fast), right? But here's what happens if you use your math:

50 / 100 = .5 => 1 - .5 = .5.

That puts the Intel at 50% faster than the AMD. How do you explain that?

While this doesn't work for FASTER, this formula is fine for SLOWER (because the AMD is 50% slower than the Intel.) Do you get it now?
__________________
Antec P182 | Seasonic X-660 | Cyberpower 1000PFCLCD |
Intel i5 2500k @4.2 w/ Corsair H55 | ASUS Maximus IV Gene-Z |
16gb G.SKILL DDR3 1600 | ASUS GTX580 |
Sharp AQUOS LC-32LE700UN 32" LED HDTV | 1x 960 gb Crucial M500 |
1x 1TB Samsung F3 | Samsung SATA DVD Burner | Logitech Z-5500

Last edited by TemjinGold; 11-18-2012 at 09:24 PM.
TemjinGold is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting 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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.