Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account


Photo

Building first new PC in 10 years

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#1
gamehead200

gamehead200

    SEARCH!!! SEARCH!!!

  • Super Moderator
  • 7,039 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
Hey all,

I'm back from the dead, kind of. I've missed out on a lot of hardware-related news over the years. Anyways, I haven't built a desktop in about 10 years (about the same time I joined MSFN) but am planning to build one since I won't be on the go as much as I have been while I was in school (holy crap, just graduated!).

This was my first attempt at speccing it out: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/bNUV
Here's my revised build: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/bP6J

Trying to get the built closer to $1k as much as I can, just not sure what to cut. I would cut the SSD down to 128GB if I wasn't planning a dual-boot with Linux and Windows 7, so I'd like to keep that if possible. The Samsung HDD is there for storage and I'll eventually have another one in there for some RAID1 action.

What will I be using this for? Occasional gaming, media playback, photo editing, file/media store/server. I also need it to have some pep for running some CPU-intensive apps on occasion. What exactly? No idea yet, but it happens from time to time.

Tripredacus will wine about how I asked /r/buildapc before coming to MSFN for help, but that's only because a bunch of friends recommended it.


How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#2
MagicAndre1981

MagicAndre1981

    after Windows 7 GA still Vista lover :)

  • Patrons
  • 5,990 posts
  • OS:Vista Ultimate x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

why do you use the old 570? They use more power compared to the 670. Or you can try the AMD Radeon HD 7950 or 7870.

The rest seems to be ok. If you only do gaming the CPU is over-sized. Games need a fast GPU. The CPu is less important here. Only a quadcore is required for todays games. So an i5 (with K) is enough.
Posted Image

#3
gamehead200

gamehead200

    SEARCH!!! SEARCH!!!

  • Super Moderator
  • 7,039 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
Why? Trying to save some $$. The 570 fits my budget. Unless you can suggest something comparable for the same price? Again, this is for occasional gaming.

#4
dencorso

dencorso

    Adiuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 5,846 posts
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

Well, as you fully know, I hardly am the one to come to, when thinking of new hardware, since my main interest is elsewhere, but I think even 7 x64 has plenty of space in 64 GB, which is also faster to image... so, I'd like to suggest a RunCore SSD. I use them in my netbooks, and they never gave me grief. The RunCores are not exactly cheap, but they're fast and rugged.
Visit their site and look at the specs. You may find faster elsewhere, but not even near as rugged (while still pretty fast).

#5
Kelsenellenelvian

Kelsenellenelvian

    WPI Guru

  • Developer
  • 8,795 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
Can I ask why you are sticking with intel?

I can easily build twice the system with AMD.

I also think that vid card is pretty pricey.

I would go with something like this:

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819103961 8-core CPU $170

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16813157305 SATA 6 & USB 3 MOBO $67

http://www.newegg.co...=9SIA0ST08P6223 32 gigs 1333 ddr3 ram $199

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814150599 XFX 1gig ddr5 vid card $150

$586 so far with lots of room for the rest. (Plus I went pretty high on the ram)

Edited by Kelsenellenelvian, 12 July 2012 - 06:39 PM.


#6
gamehead200

gamehead200

    SEARCH!!! SEARCH!!!

  • Super Moderator
  • 7,039 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
I always thought the new Intels used way less power than AMD chips, so I stuck with that. Might consider it, though, for my purposes, I think 8 cores is a little overkill.

#7
Kelsenellenelvian

Kelsenellenelvian

    WPI Guru

  • Developer
  • 8,795 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
8 cores is $20 buck more than 6 cores right now.

it does use @ 70 watts more but it is twice the cpu too.

Edited by Kelsenellenelvian, 12 July 2012 - 07:39 PM.


#8
gamehead200

gamehead200

    SEARCH!!! SEARCH!!!

  • Super Moderator
  • 7,039 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
How hot will it typically run compared to the Intel chip?

#9
CoffeeFiend

CoffeeFiend

    Coffee Aficionado

  • Super Moderator
  • 5,399 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Can I ask why you are sticking with intel?

My guess would be: because nobody else builds nice fast CPUs at the moment.

I can easily build twice the system with AMD.

That's *nowhere* near twice the system!

For starters, the AMD CPU is a Bulldozer which are very well known not to perform so great (even compared to their older chips like the Phenom II), it uses about 20W more of power idle (and like 100W extra at full load) which translates into real costs (and heat), and the i5 3570K wins universally across all benches, and by quite a margin. For example, if you look at a simple but decent synthetic bench like passmark, you see the FX8120 scored 7078 vs 7942 for the 3570K. Yep, its 8 cores are slower combined than the i5's 4 cores. That essentially means you get twice as many cores, but that each core runs at less than half the speed of the cores in the i5. That's a very, very bad thing: unless you do a handful of very specific tasks like LOTS of video encoding, you'll never use anywhere near 8 cores in the first place. You just get lots of slow cores that always sit idle and still use power. And when the vast majority of simple apps only have one thread the i5 wins big -- it'll run those programs (the CPU bound part of it) twice as fast. In fact, the cheapo dual core i3's win against the FX-8120 in a lot of benchmarks -- every single-threaded benchmark for starters (and then everything that doesn't make use of a lot of threads for heavy processing, like basically all sysmark benches). Even a mid-range i5 from the previous generation wins against the FX-8120 in all benches, and the 3570K is faster than that. In fact, THG places the FX-8120 in the same "category" as the Core 2 Duo E8600, E8500, E8400, E7600 for gaming... So again, too many slow cores = bad (slow, power hungry), half the cores that are more than twice as fast each = MUCH better.

it does use @ 70 watts more

70 watts extra (assuming that's true), at a reasonable 8.5¢/kWh (cheap hydro power like we have here, taxes in) * 70W/1000W * 24h * 365 days = $52 extra on you power bill per year. Assuming a lifetime of 5 years on the machine, that means $250 wasted, for a CPU that's actually much slower! And based on his current location and what Google finds, it seems to be closer to 22¢/kWh there, so that would be $135/year, or $675 wasted over 5 years. Once you factor that extra cost in, it becomes pretty clear what the best pick is: $230 for the much faster i5 3570K or ($170 + $675 extra power used by it over a 5 year usable lifetime) $845 for a much slower AMD CPU. Assuming they were the same speed (which they're not), the AMD CPU would have to cost negative $615 (as in, "here, take this CPU and $600 in cash with it") to be worth buying!

I also think that vid card is pretty pricey

It's a mid-end gaming card. Considering he wants to do gaming and that it's the main bottleneck on such a system for gaming, I'd say it's a very good pick. Your card is definitely cheaper (by $100) but when you look at any gaming bench, it really shows too (the FPS are almost half of the GTX 570). Now, the card MagicAndre1981 picked is what I would personally call pricey ($400+). It has better performance for sure, but I'm not personally spending that much on a video card anytime soon. Then again, it's by far the easiest piece to replace years down the road when it's become too slow.

I think even 7 x64 has plenty of space in 64 GB

I never looked at RunCore SSDs before (don't recall seeing them in any bench either, but either ways newegg/ncix/etc don't sell them) but 64GB is definitely on the small side. Yes, Win7 by itself will fit, but modern apps can be quite large (e.g. 15GB for the Adobe CS6 suite), and modern games (which he wants to play) even more so! The last game I played (Max Payne 3) takes 35GB by itself... A 120GB SSD would be very restricting to me, but with 240GB or 256GB I'd be OK.

Either ways, I was looking at building a machine fairly similar to what he picked (same exact CPU, same chipset, same SSD, similar video card, etc -- it's also pretty close to my PC at work). My main gripe with it is the ASrock mobo (I'm not really fond of that OEM but I'm not saying it's junk either, just that I'd pick something else).
Coffee: \ˈkȯ-fē, ˈkä-\. noun. Heaven in a cup. Life's only treasure. The meaning of life. Kaffee ist wunderbar. C8H10N4O2 FTW.

#10
gamehead200

gamehead200

    SEARCH!!! SEARCH!!!

  • Super Moderator
  • 7,039 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
OK, that all made a lot of sense. CoffeeFiend, if you're not very fond of ASRock, what would you suggest instead?

#11
CoffeeFiend

CoffeeFiend

    Coffee Aficionado

  • Super Moderator
  • 5,399 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
ASUS and Gigabyte are the best two IMO, but that comes with a slightly higher price tag. But there are other decent OEMs like MSI. Here's my current shopping list for my upgrade (ncix.com):

Antec P280 XL-ATX Tower Case Black 3X5.25 2X2.5 6X3.5IN 2X120MM Top 1X120MM Rear Front USB3.0 No PSU $104.99 (nicer case IMO)
NCIX Gaming Bundle Deal Intel Core i5 3570K Unlocked CPU & MSI Z77A-G43 DDR3 CrossFire Motherboard $344.99 (great CPU and you essentially get a pretty decent Z77 mobo for $100)
G.SKILL F3-12800CL10D-16GBXL Ripjaws X 16GB 2X8GB Kits 240PIN DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 Desktop Memory $98.99 (8GB doesn't cut it for me)
Crucial M4 Micron C400 SSD 256GB 2.5IN Solid State Disk Flash Drive SATA3 6Gbps $209.99 (a Samsung 830 would be somewhat nicer, but that's $75 more and not in stock)
XFX Radeon HD 6870 900MHZ 1GB 4.2GHZ GDDR5 2xDVI HDMI 2x Mini DisplayPort PCI-E Video Card $174.99 (good enough for my needs, fits my budget -- your GTX 570 gets about 25% higher FPS)
(keeping existing 750W 80+ PSU and hard drives, no optical drive, probably the same HSF as you picked), for a total of $933.95

Edit: I don't think thunderbolt is mature enough to bother (drivers and OS, devices availability, etc), and there's far less of an incentive on a desktop (which already has plenty of PCI-e slots and tons of video connectors on nice superfast GPUs)
Coffee: \ˈkȯ-fē, ˈkä-\. noun. Heaven in a cup. Life's only treasure. The meaning of life. Kaffee ist wunderbar. C8H10N4O2 FTW.

#12
dencorso

dencorso

    Adiuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 5,846 posts
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

I do like ASUS too. Do visit the RunCore site, and look at the specs.

#13
CoffeeFiend

CoffeeFiend

    Coffee Aficionado

  • Super Moderator
  • 5,399 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Do visit the RunCore site, and look at the specs.

The specs of the RunCore Pro VI are alright, 562MB/s read (max) 389MB/s write (max) which is alright. There are tons of SSDs around those speeds, including the $65 60GB OCZ Agility 3 at 525MB/s read 475MB/s write. It comes down to pricing mainly, and availability (seemingly you can't buy RunCore products in North America)

Edit: comparing based on MemoryC's prices:
120GB RunCore Pro V
560 MB/s read, 525 MB/s write, 50K random 4KB write IOPS, $131.44 + international shipping from Ireland (and customs clearance)...

Mushkin Enhanced Chronos MKNSSDCR120GB 2.5" 120GB at newegg (free shipping)
550 MB/s read, 515 MB/s write, 90K random 4KB write IOPS, $89.99
Coffee: \ˈkȯ-fē, ˈkä-\. noun. Heaven in a cup. Life's only treasure. The meaning of life. Kaffee ist wunderbar. C8H10N4O2 FTW.

#14
dencorso

dencorso

    Adiuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 5,846 posts
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

I usually buy mine from MemoryC. Yes, I know it's in Ireland... but it can give you an idea of the prices, because they certainly have almost whatever other brand you may think of.

#15
MagicAndre1981

MagicAndre1981

    after Windows 7 GA still Vista lover :)

  • Patrons
  • 5,990 posts
  • OS:Vista Ultimate x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

I like ASRock, their support is fantastic. ASUS and Gigabyte don't have good support.
Posted Image

#16
Kelsenellenelvian

Kelsenellenelvian

    WPI Guru

  • Developer
  • 8,795 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
Coffefiend = Thanks for schooling me.

The reason why I said what I said was because I was a HUGE intel only guy for a really long time.

Then last year I got aghold of $500 ish bucks and built a AMD system:

CPU = 1100t Black Ed
Ram = 16 gigs ddr3 1333
Vid = AMD Radeon HD 6450
Mobo = ASUS M4N75TD

Its actually the Fastest system I have ever owned. Except for the video card (I have a older geforce in my sons pc thats quit abit better) I am EXTREMLY happy with it.

#17
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,520 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

I like ASRock, their support is fantastic. ASUS and Gigabyte don't have good support.

I also think that ASRock is underrated. They've got decent motherboards for very reasonable prices.
Posted Image
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#18
CoffeeFiend

CoffeeFiend

    Coffee Aficionado

  • Super Moderator
  • 5,399 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Coffefiend = Thanks for schooling me.

That wasn't really the intent (not in a bad way at least) but just to point out that the current AMD offerings very much suck compared to Intel's (with some explanations to back it and perhaps help him make his choice too)

I was a HUGE intel only guy for a really long time.

At the beginning, Intel was clearly the best (the NEC v20 was alright though). Then many years later, AMD had some decently priced alternatives (Athlon era), and then they peaked with the Athlon64. That was a far better CPU than the P4 (architecture, speed, etc), but Intel basically surpassed it with the Core 2 Duo. AMD then released some quad cores that were cheaper and that were a good alternative to the Core 2 Quads but that only lasted for so long. Beyond that point AMD's offerings are extremely deceiving. Their current desktops CPUs seem to be all about having a very large number of useless cores (more cores sitting idle 100% of the time, not helping performance but just increasing your power bill) while having a deceivingly low single threaded perf (making everything run much slower) which is completely the inverse of what most people want or need. And they seem to be focusing on super slow APUs in the mobile world, like laptops with ghetto Fusion E-350 CPU (APU) that's actually slower than an old Intel Pentium D 3GHz from 2005 (there are i3's that are more than 6x faster!) Even on the server side, they're focusing on the same tons of slow cores approach, where their 16 core monster is barely faster than their previous 12 core beast (and even sometimes slower). That misguided strategy of just adding more which remind us of shavers (now with 17 blades!) will only last them so long. They desperately need to increase IPC, reduce cache latency, reduce the penalty of a branch misprediction, etc.

I like ASRock, their support is fantastic. ASUS and Gigabyte don't have good support.

That's anecdotal evidence at best. It comes across as baseless accusations out of asrock fanboy-ism or whatever. I've had great support from both ASUS and Gigabyte (even smaller players like Zotac recently), and I'm hardly the only one. Their products are very solid and reliable, and they are top rated on every site with reviews as well. There's nothing wrong with liking ASRock (I'm just not a big fan of their products myself) but to say the two biggest both suck is preposterous.
Coffee: \ˈkȯ-fē, ˈkä-\. noun. Heaven in a cup. Life's only treasure. The meaning of life. Kaffee ist wunderbar. C8H10N4O2 FTW.

#19
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 14,266 posts
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

That's anecdotal evidence at best. It comes across as baseless accusations out of asrock fanboy-ism or whatever. I've had great support from both ASUS and Gigabyte (even smaller players like Zotac), and I'm hardly the only one. Their products solid and reliable, and they are also top rated on every site with reviews as well.

With all due respect :), I completely fail to see how yours is NOT as well anecdotal evidence at best , or if you prefer, apart the divergence of opinions, your post contains the SAME *whatever* you are saying MagicAndre1981's post contains :ph34r:.

I also completely fail to see the BIG differences between Asus (Asustek), Asrock and Pegatron:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asustek
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASRock
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegatron
http://en.wikipedia....ron_Corporation

To me they are just names/brands all revolving around the same "main group". :unsure:

jaclaz

#20
CoffeeFiend

CoffeeFiend

    Coffee Aficionado

  • Super Moderator
  • 5,399 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

I completely fail to see how yours is NOT as well anecdotal evidence

Which part? Where I say I got good support from Gigabyte and ASUS? Yep, it is anecdotal evidence, just like his. I meant that he might have had a bad experience with them before, but there's millions of us on other other side of the fence who haven't. And that no company would get so big with bad support, or that they wouldn't care if they provided bad support thus damaging their reputation and ending up losing their large share of a lucrative market. And as you said, ASrock and ASUS are the same group, and it would be kind of funny if the "prestige" division (ASUS) offered lesser support than their "value" division (ASRock)

your post contains the SAME *whatever*

I'm not saying the same thing at all:
I said I don't like ASRock products as much (as in, not a real fan of their actual mobo designs -- call it nitpicking), not that they're a bad product, but it's rather a personal preference, so I'd pick another OEM first.
Whereas he claims that both of the most popular OEMs, which also happen to have fantastic reviews everywhere (and countless millions of happy customers) have poor support, without providing anything to back it up. That's something else entirely.

Then again, if someone has a spare ASRock X79 Extreme11 taking up space, I'm taking donations ;) Seven x16 slots (two PLX chips!), 8 DIMM slots, 14 SATA ports (8 actually being SAS ports on a fancy LSI logic controller), 8 USB3 ports,etc. It's quite a beast, but it'll be incredibly pricey too.
Coffee: \ˈkȯ-fē, ˈkä-\. noun. Heaven in a cup. Life's only treasure. The meaning of life. Kaffee ist wunderbar. C8H10N4O2 FTW.

#21
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,520 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

I've had great support from both ASUS and Gigabyte (even smaller players like Zotac recently), and I'm hardly the only one. Their products are very solid and reliable, and they are top rated on every site with reviews as well. There's nothing wrong with liking ASRock (I'm just not a big fan of their products myself) but to say the two biggest both suck is preposterous.

They don't really offer anything special in the lower segment of the market though. If you compare two cheap motherboards (same price) - one from ASUS and one from ASRock then in most cases it'll be much better deal to choose the latter.
Posted Image
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#22
submix8c

submix8c

    Inconceivable!

  • Patrons
  • 4,263 posts
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

AMD had some decently priced alternatives (Athlon era), and then they peaked with the Athlon64. That was a far better CPU than the P4 (architecture, speed, etc)

I really don't want to hijack this thread, but...
Can I assume you also refer to the x2-series? I plan on reloading this Dell E521 sitting in the corner and have changed the 3800+ for an x2 3800+, later ($ permitting) the "max" the AM2 will take. Accepts 4g RAM, has 2 PCI-e slots (the shortie and longie) for upgrades (a dual-head VID card when $ permits). SATA-only :( - bass-ackwards MoBo.
It does seem pretty snappy on boot-up/running with the "stock" XP-MCE.
[/hijack]

Edited by submix8c, 13 July 2012 - 02:34 PM.

Someday the tyrants will be unthroned... Jason "Jay" Chasteen; RIP, bro!

Posted Image


#23
CoffeeFiend

CoffeeFiend

    Coffee Aficionado

  • Super Moderator
  • 5,399 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

They don't really offer anything special in the lower segment of the market though. If you compare two cheap motherboards (same price) - one from ASUS and one from ASRock then in most cases it'll be much better deal to choose the latter.

I never claimed that ASUS was a "value" OEM either :) I'll typically buy the ASUS or Gigabyte boards if there's a good deal on them (which ends up being most of the time) but as you can see in my previous parts list (or my previously mentioned Zotac mini ITX mobo), I'm not married to a particular OEM. They all have their strengths and weaknesses, and it changes with every generation of new products.

Can I assume you also refer to the x2-series? I plan on reloading this Dell E521 sitting in the corner and have changed the 3800+ for an x2 3800+, later ($ permitting) the "max" the AM2 will take.

As you can see in benches that were out at the time, you'd get a very modest boost from that upgrade (the main thing you'd get from it is not speed but extra responsiveness, being a dual core i.e. the PC not "locking up" when a core is pegged at 100%). Google easily finds some people who managed to get some faster CPUs working in that Dell but you might have to search pretty hard to find the perfect AM2 chip for an upgrade (it seemingly doesn't accept AM3 CPUs which is the "oldest" thing you can buy new today). If the upgrade is dirt cheap then sure, why not. But I wouldn't sink too much money in an old machine either as an i3 upgrade would provide a huge boost for not too much money (relatively speaking) either. DDR2 RAM is pretty expensive too these days (twice the price of DDR3)
Coffee: \ˈkȯ-fē, ˈkä-\. noun. Heaven in a cup. Life's only treasure. The meaning of life. Kaffee ist wunderbar. C8H10N4O2 FTW.

#24
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,520 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

But I wouldn't sink too much money in an old machine either as an i3 upgrade would provide a huge boost for not too much money (relatively speaking) either.

Isn't Athlon II X4 631 a better choice if someone wants an inexpensive upgrade? It's slightly slower in general but costs half as much as the i3 and is better everywhere where all 4 cores are used.

Edited by tomasz86, 13 July 2012 - 03:39 PM.

Posted Image
Unofficial Service Pack 5.2 for MS Windows 2000 <- use this topic if you need help with UURollup, Update Rollup 2 and other unofficial packages

#25
CoffeeFiend

CoffeeFiend

    Coffee Aficionado

  • Super Moderator
  • 5,399 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Isn't Athlon II X4 631 a better choice if someone wants an inexpensive upgrade?

Socket Type: FM1

Nope. His motherboard is AM2 (not AM2+), so no AM3, AM3+ or FM1 CPUs supported. At least if he had a AM2+ socket then he could still buy a new AM3 CPU from a store. That wouldn't be a bad option for a cheap yet meaningful upgrade.His only option right now is the used market (and sellers seem to want $60 for a X2 6000+ with no HSF which is more than it's worth)

Then again, I wouldn't necessarily pick the Athlon X4 631 as a clear cut winner over an i3 after seeing most benches (the i3 is definitely more expensive though)

In fact, I'm considering buying a pair of AMD Athlon II X4 645's ($80/ea) to upgrade a pair of older PCs with Athlon X2's that are mostly used for light tasks like web browsing. $80 for a new CPU (keeping existing mobo and DDR2) vs an i3 + mobo + DDR3 (over $200 per PC) makes it a pretty simple choice to make considering the performance will be adequate either ways. By the time the Athlon II X4 645 won't cut it anymore for light-ish usage the i3 will be very outdated too.
Coffee: \ˈkȯ-fē, ˈkä-\. noun. Heaven in a cup. Life's only treasure. The meaning of life. Kaffee ist wunderbar. C8H10N4O2 FTW.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



How to remove advertisement from MSFN