RX 480 is apparently killing pcie slots

Starting to sound like a whole lot of nothing unless you're running a 10 year old motherboard. I hope AMD pulls an Nvidia and puts their head in the sand until the fanboy flaming and manufactured outrage is over.
 
Trimlock said:
I think it was a re-use, in either way this is a real legitimate situation to purchase the card for (breathing new life into an ancient/cheap system) and proposes a limitation. That is, if it isn't a fluke.
Click to expand...

Also not to mention the amount of OEM-built systems out there that has an adequate CPU but only integrated graphics. Many of them can be repurposed into a decent couch gaming machine with this card if it didn't this problem.
 
trandoanhung1991 said:
Also not to mention the amount of OEM-built systems out there that has an adequate CPU but only integrated graphics. Many of them can be repurposed into a decent couch gaming machine with this card if it didn't this problem.
Click to expand...
I would consider it too, I was going to plop down for a ref board today and go aftermarket, but for now i'm waiting for AIB. :)

And my HTPC is a repurposed HP computer as well. The MB is rather ... limited.
 
Trimlock said:
Considering the whole system works with a 980ti, it is the video card preventing it. Apart from the system crashing when the benchmark becomes demanding, what else would you assume it to be?
Click to expand...
If you build computers, at some point you'll find hardware that doesn't play nice with other hardware. It happens, and what's the worst part of PC gaming. This is where you hunt down BIOS updates and pray that someone else had your issue and you aren't alone.

The other and more likely situation is the motherboard has worn components. A weak VRM, or a weak capacitor. Fun fact, just cause the capacitor isn't bulging or leaking doesn't mean it isn't bad. This is even worse for solid capacitors. You figure this out with a ESR tester. The electronic components on your motherboard don't last forever, and certainly won't last within spec either. This is electronics 101.

Make matters worse he admited to using a cheap crap 400W power supply. Which if the motherboard had weak components the ripple from the PSU could have finally weakened something. But rather than debate what went wrong, the easy solution is to find another motherboard that's exactly the model he used and rerun the test. Given the other motherboard isn't badly used like this one. Or find another board with the same chipset and test again.
 
JustReason said:
definitely the card but wasn't it a Foxconn MoBo? I am not seeing this as great mobo purchase, I usually look for ASUS MSI or Gigabyte when I look for a new mobo, but they do exist so the issue needs to be fixed.
Click to expand...
Seriously, a Foxconn? We found his problem. I would not consider a Foxconn a stable motherboard. Not good experiences with them.
 
Nenu said:
You have misunderstood the need for the specs headroom.
Its to protect against heat damage, and fire.
Its not sensible to deliberately flout the specs unless you know exactly what you are doing.

You cannot assume you have the ability to exceed the spec.
No manufacturer can otherwise they open themselves up to liability claims when things go wrong.
Click to expand...
And you still keep spouting the spec with no proof that the spec is a verifiable limit ie: fires from 6pins when run at 80W. I am sure we all get why specs exist but in all of creation most times people operate outside of spec because they can. Probably why these 6pins in fact can handle over 3 TIMES their spec.

This is the most reasonable solution. Your hatred for AMD limits your ability to see the most rational response as the best response simply because you want a catastrophic failure.
 
DukenukemX said:
If you build computers, at some point you'll find hardware that doesn't play nice with other hardware. It happens, and what's the worst part of PC gaming. This is where you hunt down BIOS updates and pray that someone else had your issue and you aren't alone.

The other and more likely situation is the motherboard has worn components. A weak VRM, or a weak capacitor. Fun fact, just cause the capacitor isn't bulging or leaking doesn't mean it isn't bad. This is even worse for solid capacitors. You figure this out with a ESR tester. The electronic components on your motherboard don't last forever, and certainly won't last within spec either. This is electronics 101.

Make matters worse he admited to using a cheap crap 400W power supply. Which if the motherboard had weak components the ripple from the PSU could have finally weakened something. But rather than debate what went wrong, the easy solution is to find another motherboard that's exactly the model he used and rerun the test. Given the other motherboard isn't badly used like this one. Or find another board with the same chipset and test again.
Click to expand...

I have built computers for way too long and I know your first point all too well. But it isn't this, if it was a BIOS issue then the system wouldn't boot, if it was having issues with other components he wouldn't be able to load games or he would get blue screens instead of sudden shut downs.

Second point, his motherboard ran fine with a 980ti, which uses more power than the RX 480 (A LOT MORE). If we are going based off of this then we can conclude that it is due to the RX 480 pulling too much power over the PCIe.

Third point again same thing, he used the same shitty 400 watt but he also said he used a high end 750 watt and the same thing happened.

He did a lot of testing and it seemed very thorough, there is very little to say that it wasn't anything other than a power issue.
 
JustReason said:
And you still keep spouting the spec with no proof that the spec is a verifiable limit ie: fires from 6pins when run at 80W. I am sure we all get why specs exist but in all of creation most times people operate outside of spec because they can. Probably why these 6pins in fact can handle over 3 TIMES their spec.

This is the most reasonable solution. Your hatred for AMD limits your ability to see the most rational response as the best response simply because you want a catastrophic failure.
Click to expand...
I already stated that I have had a burned out connector (this was 8 pin) due to a bad connection.

A bad connection is much worse then a missing connection because heat rapidly builds up in a very small space to the point of melting the plastic surround and even fire.
The higher the current that can flow in the well connected wire, the less current will flow through the bad connection.
Having highly over specced wires is to protect from heat and fire.
There is no other protection from this, the PSU will not shut down.

No matter what you or I say, AMD cannot ignore the spec otherwise they will be liable for any damage, fires or deaths.
Corporate manslaughter charges could be brought.

Your bias for AMD prevents you from thinking straight!
 
Well here's hoping undervolting the RX 480 solves the PCI-E power draw problem. I feel like it may still manifest but at higher clock speeds, which wouldn't be a problem as it would be overclocking, not stock settings. Still quite the embarrassing screw-up for AMD, but seems to be an easy, cheap fix. Maybe the new Brazilian forum member can bang out an undervolted power consumption and performance test this weekend (hint hint).
 
Nenu said:
I already stated that I have had a burned out connector (this was 8 pin) due to a bad connection.

A bad connection is much worse then a missing connection because heat rapidly builds up in a very small space to the point of melting the plastic surround and even fire.
The higher the current that can flow in the well connected wire, the less current will flow through the bad connection.
Having highly over specced wires is to protect from heat and fire.
There is no other protection from this, the PSU will not shut down.

Your bias for AMD prevents you from thinking straight!
Click to expand...
So your whole argument hinges on faulty wiring and that is why you base the specs as max despite showing 3 times higher Wattage pulls. That is some shaky ground you tread there.

Unlike you I am not fanboying here. AMD has a problem, somewhat serious, they need to fix. That solution is to move the current pull to the PCI-e connection over the PCI slot as to deter any mobo damage. I am admitting fault on AMDs part, no excuses and giving sound ideas for remedying the situation. Whereas all you have done is give absolutely no solutions or any credible facts as to why any one solution is better. In fact you have given no solutions at all. You have done nothing more than flame and antagonize those here that have offered sound ideas (not all have some on both sides have given abhorrent opinions).
 
JustReason said:
So your whole argument hinges on faulty wiring and that is why you base the specs as max despite showing 3 times higher Wattage pulls. That is some shaky ground you tread there.

Unlike you I am not fanboying here. AMD has a problem, somewhat serious, they need to fix. That solution is to move the current pull to the PCI-e connection over the PCI slot as to deter any mobo damage. I am admitting fault on AMDs part, no excuses and giving sound ideas for remedying the situation. Whereas all you have done is give absolutely no solutions or any credible facts as to why any one solution is better. In fact you have given no solutions at all. You have done nothing more than flame and antagonize those here that have offered sound ideas (not all have some on both sides have given abhorrent opinions).
Click to expand...
Even if I am wrong (I'm not), AMD cannot use the method you suggest.
Your bias blinds you though, its pointless explaining to you.

Why the fuck is it my responsibility to find cures for AMDs problems all of a sudden?
Who made you the slave recruiter?
If you want to take that on, be my guest.
I'll gladly discuss ideas with decent people, not you.
 
JustReason said:
So your whole argument hinges on faulty wiring and that is why you base the specs as max despite showing 3 times higher Wattage pulls. That is some shaky ground you tread there.

Unlike you I am not fanboying here. AMD has a problem, somewhat serious, they need to fix. That solution is to move the current pull to the PCI-e connection over the PCI slot as to deter any mobo damage. I am admitting fault on AMDs part, no excuses and giving sound ideas for remedying the situation. Whereas all you have done is give absolutely no solutions or any credible facts as to why any one solution is better. In fact you have given no solutions at all. You have done nothing more than flame and antagonize those here that have offered sound ideas (not all have some on both sides have given abhorrent opinions).
Click to expand...

I think a lot of us here can at least agree that running something over spec will shorten the lifespan of any product, whether it is tomorrow or 5 years from now. I just hope AMD will address the issue and come up with a reasonable solution soon, the longer AMD let this run, the longer it will hurt AMD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nenu
like this
Trimlock said:
I have built computers for way too long and I know your first point all too well. But it isn't this, if it was a BIOS issue then the system wouldn't boot, if it was having issues with other components he wouldn't be able to load games or he would get blue screens instead of sudden shut downs.
Click to expand...
There have been times when motherboards need an update to be compatible with graphic cards or other components. It's not a matter of not booting sometimes. A lot of these things aren't predictable when components are weak or bad.
Second point, his motherboard ran fine with a 980ti, which uses more power than the RX 480 (A LOT MORE). If we are going based off of this then we can conclude that it is due to the RX 480 pulling too much power over the PCIe.
Click to expand...
That's assuming a lot. Yes the RX 480 pulls more power, but that's not likely the cause. Again, find motherboard with the same chipset and perform a test. But then again, who has a AM2 Foxconn motherboard that they went out and bought a RX 480?

You know what they say when you assume.
Third point again same thing, he used the same shitty 400 watt but he also said he used a high end 750 watt and the same thing happened.
Click to expand...
If the motherboard has a weak component, you could use a PSU made by Steve Jobs himself and it wouldn't matter. For example a weak or bad VRM is more likely the culprit. And what do VRM's do? They manage voltage.

True testing needs someone with a oscilloscope, which I'm sure many of us here, including that YouTuber, don't have. To not look like an ass, he should buy a similar motherboard using the same chipset and rerun the test. NOT FROM FOXCONN! If you build PC's then you should know to never buy a Foxconn motherboard. I've done it, and I'm sure many people here have as well, and will quickly find out they're shit. If a similar motherboard with similar chipset works fine, it's that particular Foxconn motherboard.
 
DukenukemX said:
True testing needs someone with a oscilloscope, which I'm sure many of us here, including that YouTuber, don't have. To not look like an ass, he should buy a similar motherboard using the same chipset and rerun the test. NOT FROM FOXCONN! If you build PC's then you should know to never buy a Foxconn motherboard. I've done it, and I'm sure many people here have as well, and will quickly find out they're shit. If a similar motherboard with similar chipset works fine, it's that particular Foxconn motherboard.
Click to expand...

There have been a few already.
This is PCPers
Power Consumption Concerns on the Radeon RX 480 | PC Perspective
 
Nenu said:
Even if I am wrong (I'm not), AMD cannot use the method you suggest.
Your bias blinds you though, its pointless explaining to you.

Why the fuck is it my responsibility to find cures for AMDs problems all of a sudden?
Who made you the slave recruiter?
If you want to take that on, be my guest.
I'll gladly discuss ideas with decent people, not you.
Click to expand...
Well start by explaining why they cant, if you can be bothered to do so. And by the by I am not asking to offer any solution, but you are in this thread debating with those offering solutions acting as if it is your job to critique them. And being you can offer no real concrete proof against these said solutions then most of your argument are therefore easily considered null and void.
 
JustReason said:
Well start by explaining why they cant, if you can be bothered to do so. And by the by I am not asking to offer any solution, but you are in this thread debating with those offering solutions acting as if it is your job to critique them. And being you can offer no real concrete proof against these said solutions then most of your argument are therefore easily considered null and void.
Click to expand...
Lol nope.
Good night :)
 
Is it out of spec stock out of the box with default driver settings? Is that what TomsHardware showed? Spec looks like it is amps that are the limits, 6.5a on the 12v rail = 78w. With lower voltage and same power you will have more amps drawn. On Tomshardware how do they stress test? I could not find their methology.
 
noko said:
Is it out of spec stock out of the box with default driver settings? Is that what TomsHardware showed? Spec looks like it is amps that are the limits, 6.5a on the 12v rail = 78w. With lower voltage and same power you will have more amps drawn. On Tomshardware how do they stress test? I could not find their methology.
Click to expand...
Seems at stock it is out of spec but just a tad. Most reasonable sites/testers have about 160-170W with a 50/50 split between the PCI slot and PCI-e cable giving ~80-85W each. Not a huge redflag at stock but OCing will create an even greater issue and likely warrant that huge redflag. Now if reports of over-volting is the cause and simply reducing the voltage fixes it then that would remedy the present situation but not the OCing one. Fixing that 50/50 split with power is an absolute must fix now situation.
 
JustReason said:
Seems at stock it is out of spec but just a tad. Most reasonable sites/testers have about 160-170W with a 50/50 split between the PCI slot and PCI-e cable giving ~80-85W each. Not a huge redflag at stock but OCing will create an even greater issue and likely warrant that huge redflag. Now if reports of over-volting is the cause and simply reducing the voltage fixes it then that would remedy the present situation but not the OCing one. Fixing that 50/50 split with power is an absolute must fix now situation.
Click to expand...

I would think limiting the motherboard 12v power usage to less than 75w regardless of OC would be prudent. The spec of 75 w is roughly the limit for the 12v rail (if you have 12v DC and 6.5amps = 78w) and does not include the 3.3v rail. TomsHardware game test had the 12v rail at 79w, the real spec is amps and not power (since current and resistance is what will give you heat and thus possible damage). If you had 24 volts or 5 volts would not make a difference in heat generation if your current is the same at 6.5a through the pins, traces or conductors. It looks to be 1w out of spec on the 12v rail if the testing is accurate.

Adding in the 3.3v wattage which comes from a separate power source is incorrect. More interested in how they tested on the stress test.
 
noko said:
I would think limiting the motherboard 12v power usage to less than 75w regardless of OC would be prudent. The spec of 75 w is roughly the limit for the 12v rail (if you have 12v DC and 6.5amps = 78w) and does not include the 3.3v rail. TomsHardware game test had the 12v rail at 79w, the real spec is amps and not power (since current and resistance is what will give you heat and thus possible damage). If you had 24 volts or 5 volts would not make a difference in heat generation if your current is the same at 6.5a through the pins, traces or conductors. It looks to be 1w out of spec on the 12v rail if the testing is accurate.

Adding in the 3.3v wattage which comes from a separate power source is incorrect. More interested in how they tested on the stress test.
Click to expand...

The spec dictates that total wattage from both 12v and 3.3v rails should not exceed 75W as well.

PCIe%20Power%20Rail-2_0.png
 
trandoanhung1991 said:
The spec dictates that total wattage from both 12v and 3.3v rails should not exceed 75W as well.

PCIe%20Power%20Rail-2_0.png
Click to expand...
Your right and thanks for the clarification - I also see it is 5.5a and not 6.5a as I stated above for the 12v rail. So 5.5v x 12v is 66w for the 12v rail from the motherboard and Toms had it at 79w. Out of spec by 13w non-stress test. I say that is significant.
 
DukenukemX said:
For example, to see if a particular VRM is weak or bad.
Click to expand...

So... You want to drag a multimeter out to make sure the vrms are running within spec... So your video card doesn't have to? I dont buy that whole "incompatible" with the mobo bs. I owned 2 foxconn mobos from the c2d era, lasted 8 years each, never complained about anything i threw in them, but caps will be caps and never cease to fail. Only issues ive ever had was with a dell oem board. Regardless, I think the real solution will be to simply drop the boost on the sucker and move on. No big deal (as in, should be a simple fix), just seems like the flavor of the month headline grabber in tech circles.
 
As others probably mentioned here (this is a big thread), Pcper's analysis seems solid. The problem is with that continuous draw through the motherboard connector over spec. This guy was having abrupt shutdown issues with an older cheap motherboard (basically the safety feature kicking in), which seems to fit what I would expect the issue to cause with low-end gear.

I don't really know how AMD missed this or though it was alright, though maybe they wanted to get their reviewed performance up enough to meet expectations yet had yield problems that required more voltage or whatever than they planned for when they decided on a 6-pin connector.

The problem won't likely be any problem with 3rd party cards like the Sapphire 480 Nitro that's said to have an 8-pin connector. Though, that still would likely need a corrected driver/bios that properly limits draw from the motherboard connector to ~50 watts.

I'm still considering a 480 (3rd party 8-pin variant) but also the RX 470 and Nivida's rumored 1060 depending on price. I'm wondering how the 470 will turn out as it initially should have 6-pin as well. I'm thinking the RX 470 was AMD's true Polaris starter card, but they basically used overclocking for the 480 performance level because they thought backlash would have been bad with 470 as the starter. I'm still scratching my head as to why the 480 has only 32 ROPs.
 
For the ROPs, if you expect a higher clock speed you will need less of them which will allow the die to be smaller cheaper to make. I would like to know what P10 clock can go up to once properly powered and cooled. We are already hearing 1600+, how much higher? Plus when does ram bandwidth limitation start really kicking in on the 480?
 
So now we got confirmation that RX480 fries PCIe slots. And we know AMD is trying to see if they can solve it via a software update. That most likely will reduce performance.

But if they cant do that, then we are over in either board redesign or even worse. A chip redesign.
 
Morning guys, don't have too much time to read throigh all the new comments right now, but can I get a quick tl:dr as far as the reported issues go?

Any more pictures of dead mobos?

Is the pictures we had from ocn by 'roquen' correct? Someone annotated it earlier but I can't find the posts thanks :)

Over on amd reddit mods are fighting me again, seems like renewed effort to take the post down >_>

They changing the flair to 'rumor/fud'. But the thread saying pcie spec allows for >300w and that the limit is entirely in hands of the motherboard isn't 'rumor/fud' heh.
 
Ieldra said:
Morning guys, don't have too much time to read throigh all the new comments right now, but can I get a quick tl:dr as far as the reported issues go?

Any more pictures of dead mobos?

Is the pictures we had from ocn by 'roquen' correct? Someone annotated it earlier but I can't find the posts thanks :)

Over on amd reddit mods are fighting me again, seems like renewed effort to take the post down >_>

They changing the flair to 'rumor/fud'. But the thread saying pcie spec allows for >300w and that the limit is entirely in hands of the motherboard isn't 'rumor/fud' heh.
Click to expand...

No more pictures of dead mobos. There might be if people don't stop fucking with the power slider. That should be first thing amd patches. Cuz some idiot will raise the power slider to 50% again and blow up his board again.

first thing I want to ask the guy is how the fuck do you game 7 hours straight. Jesus! lol
 
NKD said:
No more pictures of dead mobos. There might be if people don't stop fucking with the power slider. That should be first thing amd patches. Cuz some idiot will raise the power slider to 50% again and blow up his board again.
Click to expand...

Indeed. You know I don't understand how they could allow such a feature with the board apparently having a 50/50 power distribution and it already being past the limit at stock... What were they thinking.

Anyway if there are any updates proving/disproving reports please let me know
 
Shintai said:
So now we got confirmation that RX480 fries PCIe slots. And we know AMD is trying to see if they can solve it via a software update. That most likely will reduce performance.

But if they cant do that, then we are over in either board redesign or even worse. A chip redesign.
Click to expand...

Why a chip redesign over only selling AIB cards or adding a 8 pin connector?
 
Vercinaigh said:
So if i'm reading this right it "should" mean that a 6 pin only uses 2 of 3 for power, 8 pin uses 3? If I'm reading this right. But I'm not sure that's how any of my PSU's are, looking at them, maybe I should crack one open...
Click to expand...

Yes and for Molex auxiliary and based upon standard spec (ignoring HCS for now as that is not usually on mainstream boards-PSU) it works out as following:
8A and 12V.
6-pin with 2x12V contacts gives a total rating of 192W
8-pin with 3x12V contacts gives a total rating of 288W.
Now these are not PCIe spec but the ATXV12/Molex ratings, which is why it was possible for GPUs like the 295x2 to push comfortably outside of the PCIe specification.
The issue though is the x16 PCIe slot has nothing to do with the ATX-Molex spec/ratings and so is tightly defined by only the PCIe specification of 5.5A per slot for 12V giving 66W and the other 9W coming from the 3.3V contact.

Another point about the auxiliary connectors and ATX 24-pin motherboard connector.
While the ATX 24-pin motherboard connector is also part of the ATX12V-Molex spec-rating, it is actually rated lower at 6A for standard, with 2x12V contacts giving 144W total but this is shared between all the PCIe slots AND also devices that do not have power provided by other connectors.

All 3 of the ATX12V-Molex connectors also have an HCS rating, which is a fair bit higher, more important to the ATX 24-pin motherboard connector and I think if that is implemented increases it to 9A and so giving 216W - again note the motherboard ATX 24-pin standard is not same as the auxiliary connectors.
Cheers
 
Last edited:
Dayaks said:
Why a chip redesign over only selling AIB cards or adding a 8 pin connector?
Click to expand...

I dont think 8 pin will solve this.

The 6 pin connector isn't the issue. Normally, like when you OC, you would simply just draw more power from there. With an 8 pin connector I dont see why there would be any change. The card would still draw too much power from the PCIe slot if nothing else was changed. Software/board/chip is simply broken and one or more of these need a redesign. If you talk about a new custom designed AIB board. Then yes, maybe. Assuming its not the chip.
 
Last edited:
Imhotep said:
Or it could be that

Stop posting such things you may blow this powergate out of the water causing some head explosions. :D
Click to expand...
That table with the ATX12V-Molex spec/rating is NOT applicable to the PCIe mainboard slot.....
It would be applicable to the ATX 24-pin motherboard connector, but that has a lower rating as I explained earlier at 144W in standard implementation and shared by all the PCIe slots and also some other devices.

BTW one critical point about those assumed Watts, none of it is taking into consideration de-rating......
Not only would de-rating be calculated for the copper traces, but also temperature as it is usually rated at a specific temp, usually around 30celcius I think for ATX.
Yeah not much of a change, but a reason you would not want sustain too close to those limits.
Anyway the powergate issue is about the x16 PCIe slot, and to a lesser extent but still has several considerations the shared ATX 24-pin connector.

So they need to redistribute power demand more to the auxiliary connector pushing further out of spec but that should be fine from a stability consideration (although would possibly look at it from 145-150W sustained limit over this as 480 card is focused for mainstream and budget mainstream), or more likely lower the power demand by changing the performance envelope in terms of voltage-power target.
I see AMD combining both to get over this problem, how well they can do this to the power management solution on the GPU and for those cards already out there will be seen but some solution should be possible even if it is not the most elegant for existing cards and could have performance implications.
BUT that still raises consideration of mGPU in a PC and OCing for the reference cards even after a solutions is implemented - these will probably need a custom AIB and one where the power demand is heavily distributed over the auxiliary connectors that are more likely to be 8-pin and probably 8-pin + 6-pin to stay within PCIe spec.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
Shintai said:
I dont think 8 pin will solve this.

The 6 pin connector isn't the issue. Normally, like when you OC, you would simply just draw more power from there. With an 8 pin connector I dont see why there would be any change. The card would still draw too much power from the PCIe slot if nothing else was changed. Software/board/chip is simply broken and one or more of these need a redesign. If you talk about a new custom designed AIB board. Then yes, maybe. Assuming its not the chip.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure I saw a breakdown where this had the same controller as the 290x/390x/Fury series. Problem is even if it's "just" a BIOs flash I am not sure that's something many end users can do... My only experience was Maxwell where I told my Titan X to draw 75W from the PCIe, and around 400 from the 6 + 8 pin. You could set it individually right in BIOs.

Really should be a recall.
 
Why would you need a chip redesign? The board has a 6+1 power design right? Usually the distribution is based on some partioning of the power phases to determine load ratios no? Am I right?

A 1:2 ratio on a 150w board should result in 2 phases pushing 50w from the motherboard, and the remaining 4 pushing 100w from the six pin
 
This is getting even more interesting than the Nexus 6P Bendgate controversy!

I'm still going to take a wait & see approach, as I just built a new system and want to make sure I get the best GPU for a budget price. After a few weeks this issue will probably be put to rest in some way.
 
Dan said:
Computer is still cranking furmark, I think it's safe to say 9 hours straight of furmark in crossfire and my PC is fine. Not saying this isn't a issue but might be more situational then everyone makes it out to be
Click to expand...
Rename the furmark executable. I believe the AMD drivers look for furmark.exe when running and alter the p-state accordingly. BTW: I will not be responsible when that happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top