It is currently Sat Jul 12, 2014 2:58 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: DFI LanParty JR 790GX-M3H5 mATX Motherboard
PostPosted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 10:43 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Posts: 11811
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
DFI LanParty JR 790GX-M3H5 mATX Motherboard

_________________
Mike Chin,
Editor/Publisher, SPCR
Support SPCR with your donations!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:25 pm
Posts: 628
Location: Finland
No FireWire :cry:

_________________
Fight spam! The Official Anti-Spam Thread.
Have a nice day.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 3:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:12 am
Posts: 2744
Location: ITALY
Dear MikeC,

as a µATX board, I mean it cannot (and it shouldn't) be compared with the full ATX M4A78T-E, but with a more similar one, like the M4A78-HTPC/RC with reference to its power figures are indeed more coherent: better yet, why (in the silence perspective that belongs to SPCR) haven't you checked the DFI with low power 4850e/5050e, or even 705e processors, as in the M4A78-HTPC/RC's article?

Regards,
Luca


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 4:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 1:19 am
Posts: 488
Location: Australia
some nice little touches but plenty of deal breakers for me- no esata, crappy layout, high price and bad efficiency.

quest_for_silence:
matx and atx- i can't see how they're any different if they use the same chips, my guess is that in this case the power circuitry has the biggest effect on efficiency... maybe.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 6:47 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Posts: 11811
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
porkchop wrote:
quest_for_silence:
matx and atx- i can't see how they're any different if they use the same chips, my guess is that in this case the power circuitry has the biggest effect on efficiency... maybe.

Also, the board is meant mainly for overclockers and gamers, so it's relevant to test with high power components. It's easy to extrapolate what would happen with lower power components -- the differences in power between the DFI and the Asus would get smaller.

_________________
Mike Chin,
Editor/Publisher, SPCR
Support SPCR with your donations!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 6:54 am 
Offline
Patron of SPCR

Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2002 1:49 pm
Posts: 834
Location: Somerset, WI - USA
quest_for_silence: also, this is an AM3 only MB. You can't put an 4850e in it as that's an AM2 CPU.

Thanks for the review. Being the only AM3 mATX board out there, I've been looking at it. But the price and dual PCIe x16 slots turned me off. Although the BIOS undervolting options look nice. I don't suppose you could run some undervolting power tests?

Also, if the hot VRMs are possibly causing the higher power draw, what if you used a top-down heat sink or for a test, just positioned a fan to blow over them to see if that helped bring down the higher power draw.

Thanks!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 7:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:12 am
Posts: 2744
Location: ITALY
BillyBuerger wrote:
quest_for_silence: also, this is an AM3 only MB. You can't put an 4850e in it as that's an AM2 CPU.

I know, I know: I just wasn't sufficiently clear (english is not my native language).

This M3H5 is just an AM3 re-issue of the slightly former M2RS, so a test may be done with this one, or as suggested using the 705e/905e.

Regards,
Luca


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 7:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:12 am
Posts: 2744
Location: ITALY
porkchop wrote:
matx and atx- i can't see how they're any different if they use the same chips, my guess is that in this case the power circuitry has the biggest effect on efficiency... maybe.

The difference lays in where the chips are, and how much high is their temperatures: statistically power efficiency greatly decrease with high temperature, as maybe pointed out even by MikeC.

So, with reference to the full ATX Asus, the DFI is less efficient: but is it significant? Instead what about the more similar µATX ASUS? If I need a µATX board I would like to know if it is up to its pars.

Regards,
Luca


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 7:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:12 am
Posts: 2744
Location: ITALY
MikeC wrote:
Also, the board is meant mainly for overclockers and gamers, so it's relevant to test with high power components.

For sure, but any comparison should have been made with reference preferably to other µATX boards (see the 720BE power consumption on the M4A78-HTPC/RC: it's around 20w more on cpu load, nearby the difference between the AM2+ M3A78-T and AM3 M4A78-T).

Anyway, if you would ever test another AM3-HD3300 µATX board I'd have clearer, more definitive findings.

Regards,
Luca


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 3:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:51 am
Posts: 464
Location: Sweden, Stockholm
quest_for_silence wrote:
S N I P
better yet, why (in the silence perspective that belongs to SPCR) haven't you checked the DFI with low power 4850e/5050e, or even 705e processors, as in the M4A78-HTPC/RC's article?

Regards,
Luca


Because "silence", "high performance" and silent are not mutually exclusive. There are a lot of ppl out there that need high performance PCs and still wanting them as quiet, efficient and silent as any other silent PC enthusiast here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 4:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 1:19 am
Posts: 488
Location: Australia
quest_for_silence wrote:
The difference lays in where the chips are, and how much high is their temperatures: statistically power efficiency greatly decrease with high temperature, as maybe pointed out even by MikeC.

a poor argument, let me ask you this: who designed the dfi board?
asus has used the same chips and have produced a board with significantly better efficiency, sure the matx form factor is more limiting, but the layout of the chips isn't that different between them and i'm sure the reviewer pointed out the odd nb positioning- dfi's choice.

you say higher temps reduce efficiency, but the opposite is also true- bad efficiency leads to higher temps. in the end, it's the designer/engineer/maker who is responsible for the performance of their motherboard.

edit:
i think i might have something.
the larger atx board has more space, allowing it to support more sophisticated power circuitry. asus has a thing called 8+1 phase power, and judging by the pics, the dfi has a 4+1 thing going on, perhaps this makes a difference?
and maybe the larger surface area in general just lets thing breath more easily... i don't know :?


Last edited by porkchop on Sun Jun 28, 2009 7:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 5:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 177
Location: Germany
I really think no eSATA or firewire should be listed in the cons section. This leaves you with no direct high speed access to external storage, which is to me - and I guess many enthusiasts - a rathe big con. Which should be readily apparent especially if you only check out the pro/con section.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 5:58 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Posts: 11811
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
K.Murx wrote:
I really think no eSATA or firewire should be listed in the cons section. This leaves you with no direct high speed access to external storage, which is to me - and I guess many enthusiasts - a rathe big con. Which should be readily apparent especially if you only check out the pro/con section.

done.

But consider that eSATA is simply SATA with a different connector; a simple adapter SATA cable w/ captive PCI cover port is all that's needed for eSATA. I agree, tho, that not having it integrated on the back panel is a bit of a surprise for an enthusiast board.

As for firewire, it is starting to disappear from a lot of boards.

_________________
Mike Chin,
Editor/Publisher, SPCR
Support SPCR with your donations!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 6:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 9:18 pm
Posts: 404
Location: Illinois, USA
MikeC wrote:
But consider that eSATA is simply SATA with a different connector; a simple adapter SATA cable w/ captive PCI cover port is all that's needed for eSATA.


This is a matx dual-VGA board aimed at the performance gaming community. Many people won't have any PCI slot covers to spare. In that case, the only option would be an eSata connector on the front panel of the case, I guess.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 9:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:12 am
Posts: 2744
Location: ITALY
Redzo wrote:
Because "silence", "high performance" and silent are not mutually exclusive.

Aren't "silence and silent" nearby the same thing? Maybe a typo?

Anyway, I never said so, I made a somehow different consideration: if you cope the above quoted requirements with "small form factor" (i.e. µATX or smaller footprint), they become more and more mutually exclusive the more the dimensions shrink, as laws of physics can't be overcome.

Regards,
Luca


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 10:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:12 am
Posts: 2744
Location: ITALY
porkchop wrote:
a poor argument

It's not an argument, it's a matter of facts.
porkchop wrote:
asus has used the same chips and have produced a board with significantly better efficiency, sure the matx form factor is more limiting, but the layout of the chips isn't that different between them and i'm sure the reviewer pointed out the odd nb positioning- dfi's choice.

Let's see the DFI LanParty JR 790GX-M3H5's layout:

Image

versus Asus M4A78-HTPC/RC's layout:

Image

You see that without the need for the second graphic card slot the ASUS'es layout seem to be more rational (and therefore more effective?).

Well, let's see some relevant power figures:

Code:
Power Consumption:         AMD Phenom II X3 720BE
                 ÂµATX         ATX        ATX         ÂµATX
Test State    M4A78-HTPC    M3A78-T    M4A78T-E  JR-790GX-M3H
VC-1             ~91W        ~91W        ~71W         74W
CPU Load         147W        131W        117W        127W
CPU+GPU          162W        157W        135W        149W


Comparing µATX boards each other, and then the ATX ones each other, we may argue that the µATX form may be a major limiting factor, and it should be investigated (at least to definitely say if the DFI has a relative poor or not so good power efficiency, with reference to quiet computing).

porkchop wrote:
you say higher temps reduce efficiency, but the opposite is also true- bad efficiency leads to higher temps.

You know that efficiency is declared for a given temperature range, so even such an hypotethical poor efficiency is a given percentage for a given temperature, and if you increase the latter, things are simply going worse. In fact, as you eventually note:

porkchop wrote:
the larger atx board has more space, allowing it to support more sophisticated power circuitry. asus has a thing called 8+1 phase power, and judging by the pics, the dfi has a 4+1 thing going on, perhaps this makes a difference?
and maybe the larger surface area in general just lets thing breath more easily... i don't know :?

Yes, size matters: heat dissipation is in direct ratio to physical dimensions, isn't it? And so, for some respects, the power efficiency.

Regards,
Luca


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 4:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 1:19 am
Posts: 488
Location: Australia
quest_for_silence wrote:
It's not an argument, it's a matter of facts.

that's correct, my mistake.
what i meant was that dfi designed the board, so if it isn't as efficient then it's their problem.


quest_for_silence wrote:
Let's see the DFI LanParty JR 790GX-M3H5's layout:

the temps show that the nb temps are about the same, the dfi is about 10C higher in sb temps, and a massive 17C higher in vrm temps.
now the similar nb temps suggest that the positioning hasn't increased its temperature, since its the same as the asus board even though it has a heatpipe going directly into a hotter heatsink. god knows what's with the sb temps, the heatsinks seems similar sized and on both boards they're far away from any other heat generating sources (no video cards were used in these tests)- perhaps some bad thermal goop. the vrm temps however, can be explained by the different heatsinks used, and the design of the power circuitry- both things are directly chosen/designed/engineered by dfi.


quest_for_silence wrote:
Yes, size matters: heat dissipation is in direct ratio to physical dimensions, isn't it? And so, for some respects, the power efficiency.

for heatsinks yes, but for motherboards i'm still not that convinced. i believe that if makers wanted to and tried to, they could make a matx board just as efficient as an atx board (i can see asus shoehorning their 8+1 phase thingy into a matx board... but then again i'm no engineer).


the great thing about matx is that they tend to be cheaper, but this sometimes leads to cheaper components and no vrm cooling :twisted:
the dfi is more expensive than the asus, and is less efficient, the smaller size simply isn't a good enough excuse for me.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 4:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 11:52 am
Posts: 307
Location: (near) Berlin, Germany
Hmmm - I'd love to build a very quiet µATX gaming rig out of that - two ATI cards with Accelero S1s on them, then a duct over them with a 120mm fan blowing through the duct towards the rear end of the case, all that combined with a big Phenom II in an Antec NSK3480 - sweet. Of course it could be difficult to route all theses cables, but we love challenges, do we?

Looks like you could get a nice performance-per-m³-figure with this board...

Now I would just have to convince my significant other that I needed a new toy - that would be the hardest part :lol:

_________________
My system


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 5:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:12 am
Posts: 2744
Location: ITALY
porkchop wrote:
if it isn't as efficient then it's their problem.

For sure, but to be fair according to me it has to be compared to similar products.
porkchop wrote:
the temps show that the nb temps are about the same, the dfi is about 10C higher in sb temps, and a massive 17C higher in vrm temps.

It may worth to give a look to the more similar (as for form factor AND price) M4A78-HTPC/RC: SB temp is 53°C (-7°C), NB temp is 66°C (-20°C), VRM's temp seem to be identical (or nearby: even the VRM seem identical, a 4+1 if I'm correct).
porkchop wrote:
now the similar nb temps suggest that the positioning hasn't increased its temperature

With respect with the above quoted data, it should seem that the different positioning may affect NB's temp, even if the HD 3300 is more powerful than HD 3200.
porkchop wrote:
the vrm temps however, can be explained by the different heatsinks used, and the design of the power circuitry- both things are directly chosen/designed/engineered by dfi.

And/or super imposed by the form factor, I guess.
porkchop wrote:
quest_for_silence wrote:
Yes, size matters: heat dissipation is in direct ratio to physical dimensions, isn't it? And so, for some respects, the power efficiency.

for heatsinks yes, but for motherboards i'm still not that convinced.

Well, as said, the law of physics can't be overtaken by human will: the µATX form factor has more thermal limitations than the ATX (a smaller surface is able to dissipate less heat than a larger one, and this is a fact, a smaller surface may host less chip than a larger one, and so on).
porkchop wrote:
the smaller size simply isn't a good enough excuse for me.

The smaller size isn't an accident (or an excuse): it's a capital point of the whole project. This is my point: apples to apples, µATX to µATX.

If in case then you may discuss if the choice of Crossfire on a µATX motherboard is savvy or not.

But anyway, I have not to convince anyone of some evidences: if you (or MikeC) don't like that mobo, it won't be a problem.

Regards,
Luca


Last edited by quest_for_silence on Mon Jun 29, 2009 5:32 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 5:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:12 am
Posts: 2744
Location: ITALY
mexell wrote:
in an Antec NSK3480

Maybe a positive pressure SST Sugo 03/04 could cool such a rig more effectively (but the toy will cost a lot more with the SG04H).

Regards,
Luca


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 5:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 1:19 am
Posts: 488
Location: Australia
the asus M4A78-HTPC/RC uses a different nb and sb.
and also, spcr reviews of am3 cpus on am2+ motherboards have given significantly higher power draws.
from the asus M4A78-HTPC/RC review:
As it turns out, the M4A78-HTPC/RC is among the lowest power AMD boards we've encountered, coming close to matching the Gigabyte's 740G-based board in idle power consumption. Power draw on load was also excellent
and
In our M4A78T-E review, we noticed a significant power consumption discrepancy of up to 22W when using an AM3 CPU on an AM2+ motherboard. Unfortunately the M4A78-HTPC/RC is also afflicted by this anomaly, so it doesn't appear to have been an isolated case

the hd3300 is used in both the dfi and atx asus.

i'm not arguing that the position of the nb doesn't affect it's cooling, but in the case of the dfi and atx asus- there isn't a large difference in temps.

matx is smaller, but the pcb itself only dissipates so much heat (read- hardly any). heatsinks can be made to overhang- if the manufacturer chooses to do so, there is plenty of space for larger heatsinks on any motherboard.

my point about the size is that it's the main thing it has over the asus, and frankly i don't believe the decrease in efficiency is a good enough trade-off.

edit- yes i have given up on quoting, its a pita!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 6:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 2:57 pm
Posts: 507
Location: England
MikeC wrote:
But consider that eSATA is simply SATA with a different connector; a simple adapter SATA cable w/ captive PCI cover port is all that's needed for eSATA.


Not quite. eSATA has a higher minimum transmit potential in order to handle longer cables and greater inference. Taking normal SATA outside the case may not work properly and greatly increases the chances of signal errors.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 6:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:12 am
Posts: 2744
Location: ITALY
porkchop wrote:
the asus M4A78-HTPC/RC uses a different nb and sb.

I'm a bit tired to repeat the same whole thing: prolly I have to do some course of english to communicate effectively on SPCR.

Look at the data, figures are for 20w more for the µATX ASUS 780G at load, with reference to µATX DFI: how much is the power leakage for an AM3 cpu on an AM2+ board? About 20w, as pointed out by the comparison of Asus M3A78-T and Asus M4A78T-E (just some messages above). How much is the power consumption difference at load between a 780G and a 790GX? According to some reviews (as Tom's HG) it measures under 4w. Do that expensive M4A78-HTPC/RC uses different VRM? No, they seem pretty the same. And so on. It seems a lot of coincidences to leave them out, don't it?

porkchop wrote:
my point about the size is that it's the main thing it has over the asus, and frankly i don't believe the decrease in efficiency is a good enough trade-off.

Pick up another µATX AM3 790GX mobo and measure it (and, incidentally, that's all I suggested to MikeC): if you'd find significant power savings, then you'd have found your small board of choice (naturally, if you don't mind about Crossfire).

Well, I give it up: have a nice day porkchop and, please, use less bold (not all people are presbyopic).

Regards,
Luca


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 6:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 1:19 am
Posts: 488
Location: Australia
i understand what you're getting at, factoring in everything the two matx boards do in theory have similar power draws.
i still believe that the design and component choice has a larger effect on efficiency than physical size, size will sometimes limit choices but there's always a way around it (think mini itx), remember that they are asking for a premium here.

sorry about the bold if you don't like it- i just thought it was easier to read this way.

i will have good day, and i thank you for debating this with me- it has made my day go by a little quicker which is always welcome on a work day :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 8:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 6:54 am
Posts: 3009
Location: Sweden
Well there aren't many 790GX AM3 µATX boards out there, it's this one and one from Jetway with both DDR2 and DDR3. The layout is almost identical, and it has a eSATA port. Newegg link, yes it's ugly.
Placing the NB close to the back is typically 790GX (not all though), Biostar looks like this too.

MikeC: The Jetway board would be perfect for comparing the power draw of the possible AM2, AM2+, AM3, DDR2 and DDR3 combinations since it removes a lot of variables when using the same motherboard. Sorry if I'm repeating myself, I may have posted this before.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 9:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:12 am
Posts: 2744
Location: ITALY
Mats wrote:
Biostar looks like this too.

Maybe this other Biostar could be more interesting (just for comparison purposes), since it does Crossfire and it is an AM3 one (as the DFI and Jetway), but it's amazing that its layout looks like more similar to the ASUS M4A78-HTPC/RC' one.

Regards,
Luca

P.S.: more than the "vexata quaestio" of an AM3 cpu in an AM2+ socket, I'd also like to find out any µATX mobo with 8+2 cpu's VRM, to eventually realize whether I'm a moron (as someone have to tell me that two mainboards are different, while I've already pointed out that they are different), or I'm just unable to properly understand english.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 9:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:49 am
Posts: 454
Location: Where I Am
quest_for_silence wrote:
Well, as said, the law of physics can't be overtaken by human will: the µATX form factor has more thermal limitations than the ATX (a smaller surface is able to dissipate less heat than a larger one, and this is a fact, a smaller surface may host less chip than a larger one, and so on...

The smaller size isn't an accident (or an excuse): it's a capital point of the whole project. This is my point: apples to apples, µATX to µATX.

If in case then you may discuss if the choice of Crossfire on a µATX motherboard is savvy or not.
A mATX performance board aimed at gamers is still mostly a strange idea. They are also way overpriced. Who actually buys these then? A good midrange ATX board without the gimmicks will cost less, be much more versatile and perhaps more efficient and reliable.

Quote:
No eSATA or Firewire
Inexcusable.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 10:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:12 am
Posts: 2744
Location: ITALY
Shamgar wrote:
A mATX performance board aimed at gamers is still mostly a strange idea.

From a silence perspective, yes, indeed.
Nonetheless the web is full of guys with gaming rigs equipped by crossfired HD4870s or GTXs in a µATX form factor (to say, something like Shuttles, or Sugos). Nice toys, tiny and angry, if you like the genre: if they was sport cars, maybe they'd be some Lotus.
Shamgar wrote:
They are also way overpriced. Who actually buys these then?

Not so overpriced for what I said above (and even Jetway or Biostar come for $100-120 and more: not to mention ASUS). Anyway, they may be used even as HTPC giving some satisfaction.

Regards,
Luca


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 10:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 177
Location: Germany
MikeC wrote:
But consider that eSATA is simply SATA with a different connector; a simple adapter SATA cable w/ captive PCI cover port is all that's needed for eSATA.

Well, aside from the differences and the space concerns already mentioned, looking at the accessoires picture this does not seem to be incuded. Which is not understandable at a price point of $140 (other vendors, e.g. Gigabyte, do include such a connector).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 11:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 6:54 am
Posts: 3009
Location: Sweden
Dual PCIe x16 always costs more (even if it's dual x8 ), but I think S775 nVidia 9300's are just as overpriced, even though they cost less than this DFI.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group