Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




Ethereal posted:

Computers are never going to be fast enough or power efficient enough for companies with large data centers. I don't think a slowdown in the consumer space would really affect much.

Exactly, business and science will always demand more more more.

What I'm interested in is seeing what things might crop up in the consumer space since all this incredible computing power is available.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




BangersInMyKnickers posted:

The only business requirement that is actually forcing people in to upgrading at this point is graphics design people and engineers/3d modeling.



Not necessarily. The same pressure that kept older versions of windows around (browser support) will also drive the older ones to go away too for general business users.

Web apps are still becoming more and more prevalent and the capabilities of older browsers just flat out suck. We don't support IE6 any more due to it's lovely handling of AJAX and anyone who wants to use our apps has to either use 7 or some other browser. As a result, we prompted an upgrade of a major pharmacy computer network so they could run IE7 (they were on XP embedded SP1 and Windows 2000). Yeah, they are still going to be on XP (just a newer version) but that sort of pressure is going to continue. IE9 will not go to XP and if companies are going to start utilizing web apps that require GPU acceleration for complex UIs, they need to upgrade.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




BangersInMyKnickers posted:

We are so far away from the point where IE8 won't be supported and therefor need to get off XP to update it that it isn't even worth considering. Other factors will drive it before that.

It really depends on how quickly GPU acceleration of the browser becomes a requirement. The Amazon shelf demo is horribly clunky without GPU acceleration (around 6fps vs 60fps with acceleration.) If these types of rich web apps become common quickly, the push will be there.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




BangersInMyKnickers posted:

Why the hell is a business going to care if Amazon.com is running slowly?

That's just a single thing. The idea is the GPU can do heavy UI lifting and web UIs are getting more complex all the time. With intel making it possible for every PC to have a decent GPU in them and Microsoft wanting to promote the latest and greatest IE, I think it's very likely that GPU browser acceleration is going to play a large part in future MS web technologies.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Sharepoint eventually take advantage of GPU acceleration in the browser as well as the web client for Exchange. Then you have things like Reporting and Analysis services for SQL server for creating graphically and data heavy reports that could benefit from enhanced UI acceleration.

That's just in MS's ecosystem, that's saying nothing about the ton of other web applications provided to businesses that could benefit from an enhanced UI.

All I'm saying is we may see businesses start ditch XP in droves as progress accelerates since it won't be able to keep up with web technologies.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




They way I view it is if you can get more speed out of a processor without doing anything crazy, why the hell not?

I have an Athlon II X3 that I'm overclocking to 3.3ghz from 2.9ghz on stock cooling. Am I really going to notice those extra 400mhz? Probably not. Then again, why not use the thing to it's full potential? The only thing I did was spend about 30 seconds mucking around in the bios.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




To this day, I think my most stable computer was still my old Socket 370 system. 440 BX motherboard with a Celeron 366 (5.5 multiplier.) I set the bus speed at 100mhz from day one and enjoyed 50% over-clock and speed equivalent to a top of the line P3 for the day. This was back when Celerons weren't nearly as gimped so you could get 95% of the performance of an equivalently clocked P3. I used that PC from 1999 until 2004 when I finally built an Athlon XP system so I could play Half Life 2.

I just pulled it out of the closet last weekend so I could recycle it. Part of me wants to hold onto it for nostalgia, but it really is worthless today.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




rscott posted:

300As were probably my second favorite CPU of all time

Ha, this is bringing back a flood of memories. If I recall correctly, the 366@550 overclock that I did was the big successor to the massive 300A overclocks.

And yes, you are right, I now remember mine was supposed to be FASTER than a P3 550 due to the cache issue.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




WhyteRyce posted:

The 300As had a near guaranteed overclock to 450. The 366s had a higher multiplier which meant it had to go to 550 if you wanted a FSB of 100mhz, but the success rate of getting those to 550 were much lower than getting the 300s to 450.

I had a 366 which didn't hit 550 so I had to settle for 450 at some funky FSB

I think I spent an extra $10 on my 366 and got a reseller binned one that was guaranteed to hit 550.

Which brings back even more memories. That was quite common at the time to go to a computer parts vendor and pay a little extra to have them pre-test the CPU at an overclocked speed.

I think I managed to push mine a bit beyond 550 and I think the motherboard grew unstable before the CPU did. That Abit board had support for FSBs over 100mhz even though there were no chips yet that supported it.

I look back at the Alpha cooler on it which seemed huge at the time and the retail heatsink that came with my X3 dwarfs it.

bull3964 fucked around with this message at 18:17 on Sep 22, 2010

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




Alereon posted:


This is kinda a derail, but no board based on the BX chipset had proper dividers for 133Mhz. Those boards that advertised support were rated to overclock to 133Mhz, but you were still putting a 33% overclock on the PCI and AGP buses. Also, for the record, I didn't post that thing you quoted about Via chipsets.

That's true on the AGP, but not the PCI. I had an ABit BM6 (440BX) which had a 1/4th PCI multiplier so you could run the PCI bus at 33 mhz while at 133. Your AGP would be a little over 88mhz at that point, but a lot of cards could take that.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




movax posted:

I was totally going to jump on those, but they sold out before I decided too, hah. My only complaint with G. Skill the last time I had their products was the RMA process being a pain in the rear end. But they've recently got a US RMA Center, so it's a lot better now.


Yeah, I just had to RMA my G. Skill ram and it was relatively painless. There was a batch that wasn't initalizing properly on cold boots with certain configurations. It would cause a memory related BSOD at some point during the windows startup. Warm boots were completely fine and the ram was rock solid stable otherwise.

I just submitted an RMA, mentioned I had the common cold boot issue, and I had an RMA number the next day. 10 days or so after I sent it in, I got new modules back.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




So, everyone's caught up in Ivy Bridge but no discussion at all about the fact that the Sandy Bridge Xeon E5-2600 series was released today?

Anandtech has a pretty good writeup.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5553/...dge-for-servers

Pretty drat impressive if you ask me.

Edit: Hell, that's what I get for getting distracted before I hit the reply button.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




FISHMANPET posted:

Mmm, please put these in some Dell servers yesterday so I can buy them.

Or at least get started now so when the time comes I can get these for our virtualization push.

The first wave of the 12G servers are live now. You can order the R620, R720, and R720xd with them.

Speaking of which, I'm really liking the increased drive flexibility these things have over their predecessors.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




FISHMANPET posted:

Holy poo poo these are amazing. Even the 620 is loaded with 24 DIMM slots. I'm in love.

E: And I can price them out in my Dell Premier ghetto, even better.

Yeah, the R620, R720 and R720xd are all basically the same machine now, just different chassis configurations (1U, 2U, 2U with assload of drives.) Specing these machines out seem so much less byzantine.

I also love how you can do 1 socket now and still load the server up with 192gb of ram if you need to. It can be a real help with SQL Server Enterprise licensing costs if you are memory bottlenecked but have a low CPU load.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




Too bad 32gb RDIMM DDR3 is so expensive and really too bad that 32gb LRDIMM DDR3 is loving insanely expensive.

The cost of memory really ramps up when looking at the two socket solutions as capacity goes up. I was looking at various configs for an R620. Yeah, these are dell ram prices but you aren't going to find them a ton cheaper elsewhere.


256gb 16x$400 = $6400
320gb 20x$400 = $8000
384gb 24x$400 = $9600

448gb (4x16gb, 12x32gb) = $30,000
512gb (16x32) = $40,000
768gb 24x32 = $91,200

Once you have to start using 32gb RDIMMs and then 32gb LRDIMMs to get the max density, the price jumps quickly.

But it is nice to know I can load a server up with 384gb of ram now, and if the 32gb modules drop an assload in the next two years or so I can double the memory capacity of the server without having to buy a new machine.

bull3964 fucked around with this message at 20:16 on Mar 7, 2012

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




I'm excited, I should have two Dell R620s to play with by the end of the month with each having 2x E5-2690. These will be replacing servers with single X5670s in them. So, we'll be going from 6 Westmere-EP cores at 2.93ghz (max turbo 3.3ghz) to 16 Sandy Bridge E cores also at 2.9ghz (max turbo 3.8ghz.)

Technology is getting scary cheap.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




Factory Factory posted:

Said the person buying processors costing 4 iPads each.

Well, I'M not buying them .

Still though, my career is only 11 years old and I am continually amazed at the pace of technology. It doesn't seem that long ago that I was on my first job out of college, upgrading to SQL Server 2000 on a BLAZING fast PIII Xeon 700 who's leased price was probably more than the $15k /machine cost of what was just ordered.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




FISHMANPET posted:

I guess it shouldn't be a surprise that they were going to make chips for a 4-way system, but I am shocked that they're fitting it all on one level. You could potentially jam that into a 1U, right? 32 cores, 64 threads in a 1U? Now you're starting to get into SPARC territory.

The only limitation I could see in putting it in a 1U is removing enough heat and having beefy enough power supplies that fit into 1U.

This should be the board in the upcoming R820 from dell. I'm just not sure when they are going to launch. From what people are speculating, the next line of 12G servers are going to launch in May with a 3rd line in July. They still have to launch their 1 socket and 4 socket 12G line, so it's a tossup which will come out in May (I'm betting the single socket line.)

We got our brandy new R620s last week, but I haven't had the opportunity to even unpack them yet. I really want to start playing with 16 cores of Sandy Bridge goodness.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




I had no idea that Intel was launching Ivy Bridge Xeons so soon after they launched the Sandy Bridge ones.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/15/...s-microservers/

Granted, it looks like the Sandy Bridge ones are still the high end models as none of those are more than 4 cores.

Also, with this announcement, it looks like the Dell R320, R420, and R520 all launched today. I guess I'll be spending my morning playing on dell's site to get a feel for these new machines.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




FISHMANPET posted:

It looks like they also launched a whole pile of Sandy Bridge Xeons (according to Wikipedia at least, and they're what's in those Dells), the E5-2400 series and and E5-4600 (quad socket chips!). All three of those new Dells use the E5-2400, not the E3 chips. So no idea if there's anything using the E3 chips yet.

Yeah, you're right, intel mentions them in the presser.

I'm betting the E3 will go into precision workstations and maybe the R220 whenever they launch it.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




I wonder how much of a game performance boost the NVIDIA 620M will give the UX32VD-DB71. I really like the 11.6" form factor as I want to maximize portability after owning my 15.6" E1505 for the past 6 years, but I would be willing to jump up to 13.3 if there was a significant increase in the play-ability of games. I'm not really looking for a gaming machine necessarily, but it seems like it would be dumb to overlook.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




Yeah, I'm just going to have to wait until some benchmarks are out when I can compare them side by side.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




I love how Intel made this confusing and made both Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge "E3" processors and even gave them the same name other than tacking "v2" on the end.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




Palladium posted:

Intel missed the boat to the point that the ARM ecosystem has grown so dominant that even having a better performance/battery life x86 SoC won't even guarantee a win. Moore's Law is now biting back at their rear end when even 5 year old PCs are too powerful to the average Youtube cat video viewer while ARM SoCs initially being dog slow years back, now we are going "holy loving poo poo" when we hear things like Qualcomm announcing their Snapdragon 800 successor being 75% faster to an already insanely fast S4 Pro. Add to the perpetually declining PC sales (plus things like Samsung outselling the entire PC market in terms of units with smartphones ALONE this year) and you are looking at a company that once thrived as a high-margin, high-volume x86 monopoly relegated to just another ARM making TSMC, stripped of its enormous R&D budget soon enough.

The thing is though, the demand is still there and will continue to be there in the Enterprise space.

Someone has to sell the hardware to power all these cloud services.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




I want haswell simply for the integrated GPU.

Someday i will have my dream of an ~11" notebook with a 2650x1600 screen 6+ hours of battery life and the ability to run most games at decent settings at 1080p.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




The first OEM that puts the HD 5200 in a 13" ultrabook with a 2560x1600 screen will have my money faster than I've ever spent it on anything ever.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




Pffft, as if I came here for mundane things like "facts."

I will continue to dream of an ultraportable gaming notebook with good battery life.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




Celeron 366 (SL36C) was my baby in an Abit BM6. Set it at 100mhz FSB and call it a day. I ran that thing at 550 mhz for around 5 years without so much as a hiccup.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




It's going to be interesting though to see the same thing happen to the phone/tablet market that happened to the PC market. Devices will become "good enough" and upgrade cycles will lengthen and all the tech pundits will yell about the falling sky.

Intel will always have a place pushing computing density forward in the datacenter and I'm not so sure that ARM has a place in the datacenter anymore due to the growth and advancement of virtualization.

Three years ago I could see the logic of 10 ARM webservers stuffed in a 1U chassis for low cost compute density, but now you could do twice as many on a single 1U R620 with a couple of Xeons and still have capacity left over to do other nonspecialized compute stuff as well.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




Carriers are also eliminating their early upgrade discounts left and right. Verizon just made the cycle 24 months (the full term of the contact) rather than 20 months. That alone is going to slow down the upgrade cycle quite a bit. No contract and pay as you go also puts a wrench in the whole "get a new device every 1 1/2 years" mindset.

Yes, there's some damage attrition, but people are starting to keep phones longer and longer. I got a couple of friends right now that are sitting on 3+ year old smartphones because they are working "good enough" and are waiting for the "next big thing."

There is still quite a bit of ways to go though before the market levels out since you have all the developing countries that are seeing massive growth in smartphones, but it will come eventually.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




Alereon posted:

That's not really true though, you get better performance and lower power usage with ARM-based servers. Anandtech's testing of the Calxeda-based Boston Viridis shows pretty compelling advantages. The conventional wisdom seems to hold true, if the per-thread performance of ARM is high enough for your application it will probably be the most efficient, otherwise you go Xeon (or maybe Opteron in some scenarios).

I'm still not completely convinced. They are faster under this workload and consume less power, but only just.

The final conclusion sums it up nicely. There's potential there, but it's very much niche now.

In the end, I still think it all comes down to Intel's fabs. TSMC is going to be awfully busy supplying Qualcomm and Apple with SoCs for their mobile markets. So, it remains to be seen if someone like Calxeda is going to be get enough A15s to be competitive on price as Intel iterates their product. We have Ivy Bridge leaks with up to 15 cores slated to come in Q1 2014.

So, while their power/performance may be great, it still may be cheaper to go x86 when all is said in done.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




I'm just not sure how much further you can innovate the desktop space based on what people use their computers for. For the past 2-3 year, the most substantial upgrade you could do for general computing was install an SSD, not upgrade a processor or graphics card.

Even in enthusiasts brackets, games have been limited by consoles for the most part.

It's only in business where any of this extra speed is necessary and intel's been doing fine there.

Also, it's easy to dismiss Haswell improvements as being "mobile" only, but they are also going to be huge in the server space where every bit of density counts. So, intel is focusing on a market where they have complete dominance right now.

bull3964 fucked around with this message at 14:11 on Jun 7, 2013

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




Apple doesn't have a reason to switch to ARM for notebooks for the same reason that Windows RT has no reason to exist, Intel is competitive in the lower power/high performance SoC market with x86. It may have looked in 2011 like ARM was necessary to jump to the next level of power savings, but that's no longer the case.

Without switching their entire computer line to ARM, an ARM notebook would create fragmentation in their OSX market.

bull3964 fucked around with this message at 14:21 on Oct 31, 2013

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




That's the thing though, the latest Intel low power chips have proven themselves to be MORE power efficient than many ARM chips, so I really don't buy the power thing. Apple isn't going to out-engineer Intel at this point.

You may view it as 6 market segments, but really it's 2. iOS and OSX. Thus far, there has been a clear delineation between the two. The former is a touch optimized interface with no legacy app support and the later eschews touch entirely and relies on trackpads and keyboards.

An ARM notebook would be somewhere in-between. They would either have to branch OSX for ARM and then have a version of their OS that's completely incapable of running a huge swath of software and increased market confusion for nebulous efficiency gains or they would put iOS on it. However, that would be adapting iOS for a hardware target completely unlike anything that has used it before. Touch would be de-emphasized due to the form factor which has serious implications for the usability of iOS.

It's adding a serious level of complexity to their market line for goals that no one is asking for right now.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




The biggest issue I see is they aren't going to want to simultaneously run OSX on ARM and x86. They will either make a clean break to ARM for all their computers or fork the consumer OS into something else entirely.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




incoherent posted:

All it reads is "Please put our hardware in your phone, we ported android for you!!!" I don't think anyone is seriously thinking about putting any intel hardware out in phone factors.

Motorola did and it worked out quite well. A chunk of Samsung tablets also use Intel chips.

Honestly, what's going to drive Intel adoption in the handheld space is going to be limited fab capacity at places like TSMC. Demand is going to continue to ramp and Intel has fab capacity to spare. All it will take is for an OEM to face SoC shortages of Qualcomm chips and have to make a choice between shipping a product late or using an Intel SoC.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




Shaocaholica posted:

Whats still flash? I thought most video streaming sites switched to HTML5?

Pretty much anything that requires DRM of any sort is still either Flash or Silverlight and likely will be for a long long time.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




HalloKitty posted:

Intel have made a real mess of Iris Pro, since it hardly shows up anywhere relevant.

Other than the ASUS Zenbook Infinity, where are my 13" laptops with i7-4558U? Even then it's only Iris Pro 5100, but that's close to good enough.

Also, unlocked CPU with Iris Pro? No, Intel, that's not what people wanted. People wanted "Intel TSX-NI, Intel VT-d, vPro, and TXT" extensions that were disabled for no particular reason on the K CPUs, and a heatspreader that wasn't the width of the Grand Canyon away from the die.

I think you can honestly blame Apple for that. Since they bought up all the initial supply, other OEMs designed their products around the available chips. Short of doing a mid-gen refresh once the parts became available, they are just going to skip them altogether.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




BobHoward posted:



I don't think you can blame Apple for it at all. The "initial supply" argument puts the cart before the horse. If Intel was being run in a halfway competent fashion at that time, I'm sure they chose how to allocate wafer start capacity based on what each OEM was interested in ordering, and in what quantity. If other OEMs had been seriously interested, I'm sure they could have had supply at launch. IMO, the only sense in which you can blame Apple is that Apple has the high end laptop market sewn up so completely that high volume PC OEMs aren't trying real hard to be there.

At the end of the day though it's all about cash. Apple has it and Intel knows it so they can work out better deals because they know Apple can pay. Other OEMs aren't quite that endowed.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




The brilliance of that is Intel managing to take fab capacity away from its competitors by utilizing TSMC to produce an x86 product.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.




Yeah, Ice Lake is the one you want.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply