• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

more Ram or Raptor?

X

xhail

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 21, 2002
Messages
187
Which of would be a better choice for system performance:

1GB dual channel RAM
or
SATA 10k Raptor

I use this machine for everything from video games, school work, DVDs, video encoding/conversion (divx, vcd, svcd) and other small random things here and there.

My system specs are as follows:
Asus P4P800dlx
512M RAM (non dual channel)
P4 2.4c @ 3.0
WD 160 7200RPM 8M cache IDE HDD
Lite-on DVD/CDRW combo drive
Radeon 9500 unlocked

Which would give me the most bang for the buck?
Buying both as of now is not an option for me... or at least it seems that way :)

Thanks
 
Don't get a Raptor unless your planning on getting 2 of them. I had only one and it didn't fair much better than my WD250 GB. Since you mention not being able to buy both, I'd assume youonly have money for one of each. In that case, go for the RAM.
 
Since you are running your RAM single channel, it is choking the P4 you're using. Get another stick of RAM and run your RAM dual channel. That will be a good performance increase.
 
RAM no doubt your harddrive is decently fast as is...and I doubt your hurting for the 36 gigs that badly.
 
As far as system performance goes, hard drives are the devil. Their interaction should be avoided at all costs. If your activities tax your computer's resources to the point where a mechanical device is needed for caching, there is a problem, and the solution is not a mechanical hard drive, but more system memory.
 
moarram.jpg
 
So the Raptor isn't any faster than a normal WD, I was thinking of upgrading and getting rid of my two 120's, they are such a pain in the ass.

I just want some more speed.
 
Anyone who says the Raptor isn't much faster than a 8mb cache drive probably (1) doesn't have one, and (2) hasn't read any of the reviews. The 36GB Raptor is around 15-20% faster than the JB drive... and the new 74GB one is even faster than that.

I have the 36GB one I use for an OS drive on my main PC and I love it. Some might think 36GB is small but, I think it is big enough for the OS, apps and games - stuff that benefits most from faster disk access.

I have a 250GB JB drive that I map "My Documents" to that I use for my data (mp3s, movies, pictures, documents). That way, whenever I break XP or when it starts to chug along, I just pop the install CD in and repartition, reformat and reinstall. Then I just remap "My Documents" to the D: drive and I'm good to go. Also, XP installs in under 20 mins on the Raptor.


storagereview.com on the WD740GD:

"The single-user performance delivered by this WD740GD engineering sample ranks among the most impressive we have yet measured."

http://storagereview.com/articles/200311/20031111WD740GD_1.html


storagereview.com on the WD360GD:

"WD's drive, however, delivers single-user performance that matches and even exceeds not only 10k RPM SCSI but also that of 15k RPM units."

http://storagereview.com/articles/200303/20030320WD360GD_1.html


anandtech.com review:

"Western Digital's Raptor - Part I: The World's Fastest Desktop Drive ..."

http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.html?i=1799


Also, while Dual Channel ram is a good investment, you are only getting something like a 5% increase in real world performance.

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=ddr400myths&page=5

Having said all that, I would recommend upgrading your memory from 512MB to 1GB first. 512MB is barely enough.
 
souja9,

presuming you've got the 250gig JB formatted ntfs, and you've used computer management/adminstrative tools to map the drive to your 'my documents' folder... doesn't ntfs' encryption come into play if you format/reinstall windows xp?

like, does the data on the 250gig still remain accessible? i've tried this and had an "Access is denied" error. i believe that's because i chose "make my documents private" when i had first created my account.

any thoughts?
 
I personally wouldn't run less then 1 gig of ram for anything any more. So i vote for more ram.
 
like, does the data on the 250gig still remain accessible? i've tried this and had an "Access is denied" error. i believe that's because i chose "make my documents private" when i had first created my account.

any thoughts?

Here's what I dug up from google groups:

thread

"Because you re-installed WinXP, you now have a different identity (SID) than you did when you marked the folder(s) private. You'll need to log in as Administrator, take ownership of the folder(s) and "unmark" them as Private. You will then be able to access them from your new account.

HOW TO Take Ownership of a File or Folder in Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q308421

"

I don't usually make my folders private so I never run into this problem when reinstalling XP. In fact, I've been doing this for awhile and I've even moved older drives between different machines.
 
Originally posted by souja9
like, does the data on the 250gig still remain accessible? i've tried this and had an "Access is denied" error. i believe that's because i chose "make my documents private" when i had first created my account.

any thoughts?

Here's what I dug up from google groups:

thread

"Because you re-installed WinXP, you now have a different identity (SID) than you did when you marked the folder(s) private. You'll need to log in as Administrator, take ownership of the folder(s) and "unmark" them as Private. You will then be able to access them from your new account.

HOW TO Take Ownership of a File or Folder in Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q308421

"

I don't usually make my folders private so I never run into this problem when reinstalling XP. In fact, I've been doing this for awhile and I've even moved older drives between different machines.
Click to expand...

While everything you have said is true, in terms of what is bottlenecking the system, his RAM is holding him back much more than the HD, so...
 
Agreed. My "on-the-fly" recommendation at the end of my first post is more RAM as well.

If you really want to figure out if 512MB memory is your bottleneck based on how you use your computer, grab a performance monitor and log (or just monitor) your memory usage for a couple days. XP has a built in one under Start -> Administrative Tools -> Performance. If the amount of available memory gets fairly low from time to time, then yes, you have a bottleneck in your memory.

Just remember, the bottleneck your hard drive creates is much greater than your memory and there are many instances where disk access cannot normally be avoided/minimized... loading multiple files (mp3s), opening large files (movies), browser cache, etc.

I would love to see a "bang for the buck" type article that compares cpu, video card, memory, hdd upgrades against each other. The extra $50-$100 I spent on
getting Corsair XMS memory instead of generic could have been spent on a better video card or cpu.
 
As long as your hard drives are 7200rpm thats plenty fast for the common user. You can think about upgrading to raptors later on. The 1GB dual channel RAM is definately what you need right now because your only running with half the available bandwidth that that motherboard can give you with dual channel enabled.
 
Originally posted by souja9
Agreed. My "on-the-fly" recommendation at the end of my first post is more RAM as well.

If you really want to figure out if 512MB memory is your bottleneck based on how you use your computer, grab a performance monitor and log (or just monitor) your memory usage for a couple days. XP has a built in one under Start -> Administrative Tools -> Performance. If the amount of available memory gets fairly low from time to time, then yes, you have a bottleneck in your memory.

Just remember, the bottleneck your hard drive creates is much greater than your memory and there are many instances where disk access cannot normally be avoided/minimized... loading multiple files (mp3s), opening large files (movies), browser cache, etc.

I would love to see a "bang for the buck" type article that compares cpu, video card, memory, hdd upgrades against each other. The extra $50-$100 I spent on
getting Corsair XMS memory instead of generic could have been spent on a better video card or cpu.
Click to expand...

There have been benchmarks done here and at anandtech that show the lower timings do help more than that article would seem to show. I've USED generic, and I know for a fact that it doesn't work as well. There are many things other than speed that come into effect, such as the make of the memory chips (see: CH-5 vs BH-5 on the 865/875 boards), the ability of the ram to run at abnormal speeds (I've had Kingston ValueRAM, PC3200, that would ONLY run at 133 and 200. Useless for overclocking), and the ability to go over the clock / push more intense timings than stock (something Corsair does quite nicely). Generic RAM constantly is an issue we chase here with instability and crashes, as it often just doesn't work well, period. Speed aside (and I totally disagree with that article, I get a large performance change by overdoing my timings), there are other reasons to get real memory.

Oh, and personally, having never seen a GamePC article in the serious enthusiast world, I'd be hesitant to trust them, they seem to be out for their own good (selling systems vs just giving info) in telling you what they do.

EDIT: Oh, and you can get XMS for only a little bit more than the normal stuff if you shop around. That place (www.gamepc.com) charges out the ass, and their reseller ratings aren't that good: http://www.resellerratings.com/seller1869.html. Put that all together, and they don't have a whole lot of credability with me. They also DON'T mention any of the conditions of the test which seems a little shady to me. We normally get to know what kind of system specs / processor they are running on. Some (P4's) get more benefit than other processors do. More info needs to be given.

EDIT2: Ok, I found some info on the test. They start out overvolting the memory. It's a pointless move that shortens the life of the memory. I decree that site tripe... over charging, absurd testing (still very limited info), and they start out doing things that are not only unnecessary, but damaging to the chips. Morons be there.
 
I would love to see some links and some tests. I'm am seriously interested in how I spend my money. I'lll look around Anandtech and see if I can find the articles you mention.

Also, generic does not necessarily mean "bottom of the barrel" or no-name brand. They are merely comparing the performance gains from buying the "value" line over the "premium" line.

If you are suggesting someone spend an extra 50% ($75 vs. $100) more money per chip, I would like to see some good real world performance gains. A few hundred extra points on 3Dmark doesn't tell me anything.

For the record, I have some Corsair XMS, OCZ platinum and some "generic" stuff between my three boxes.

And before you get lost in discrediting gamepc.com, ask yourself what would they have to gain by advising people to buy the *cheaper* memory?
 
Originally posted by souja9
I would love to see some links and some tests. I'm am seriously interested in how I spend my money. I'lll look around Anandtech and see if I can find the articles you mention.

Also, generic does not necessarily mean "bottom of the barrel" or no-name brand. They are merely comparing the performance gains from buying the "value" line over the "premium" line.

If you are suggesting someone spend an extra 50% ($75 vs. $100) more money per chip, I would like to see some good real world performance gains. A few hundred extra points on 3Dmark doesn't tell me anything.

For the record, I have some Corsair XMS, OCZ platinum and some "generic" stuff between my three boxes.

And before you get lost in discrediting gamepc.com, ask yourself what would they have to gain by advising people to buy the *cheaper* memory?
Click to expand...

Gain? Easy. Check wholesale on cheap ram. Check their prices.

Samsung 2.5/3/3 (eek) = $105 at gamepc.

Pricewatch: $76.

That's a 38% markup on RETAIL, and you can get wholesale for a good deal (probably 15-20%) cheaper. They're making a SHITLOAD selling generic ram.

Try running Kingston ValueRAM at anything other than 133 and 200, it won't run. They chips they use don't work well at anything other than a normal speed (even though they are rated at DDR400). I've had more stability issues from value ram on overclocked systems than anything else. It just doesn't hold up under stress as well.

Heck. Read the whole 875/865 stuff with ram and 5:4 ratios (it's ON this forum, a stickied thread, in strictly intel). Cheap ram == no go, you need the high quality ram to even boot.

And read their resellerrating. A good old... SHITTY... 6.9. Wow. Wouldn't buy from them, wouldn't trust them. If they can't treat their customers right, why would they do ANYTHING right?

And where is the background info on that test? Which modules of the XMS did they use (LL, C2, or the base XMS)?

No info==no trust.

EDIT: Your info, sir... from tweaknews, a respected site:
"As an often overlooked component in a computer system, memory repeatedly takes a third seat behind the processor and motherboard when a person is considering building a custom computer. If only I had a dollar for every time someone was seeking help with a problematic computer when I would find they have the latest high performance overclocking motherboard, a blistering fast processor and the cheapest bargain-basement generic memory the person could find.

If you don't already know by now, good quality memory is absolutely an essential part of a stable high performance computer. As the main component transferring data from the CPU to the rest of the computer, it more often than not can be the weak link in the computational chain if a user is experiencing poor overclocking, performance and stability"
http://www.tweaknews.net/reviews/xms/

And the kind of info I would want in a review, at minimum:
"The one main difference which will be labeled in every graph is that I test the slower Corsair and OCZ at 2-5-3-2 memory timings whereas I could only test the XMS4000 at 3-8-4-4. Even at DDR400, the XMS4000 would not boot even into the BIOS if 2-5-3-2 timings were applied. But as you will see, timings don't play a huge role in memory performance. When it comes to raw data transfer, megahertz matters and this is where the XMS4000 pulls away from everyone.

Everything else is absolutely identical right down to the software and drivers. I will not be testing this memory at the CPU's highest overclock seeing to do so, I would be using the memory divider and essentially underclocking the memory below it's rated speed. *Note: It did reach 3.45Ghz without a sweat"

If you continue on through their review, you see a decent (8%) difference in = speed ram...


http://www.amdmb.com/article-display.php?ArticleID=177&PageID=3
And here's a comparo between all of them. Notice which ones keep running at extreme speeds and timings? Corsair and Mushkin. Your "value" would have died long ago, just like the Kingmax (and even Crucial) did.

Simply put, you're on an enthusiast board (and welcome), and here, we can't use the value crap. It just won't hold up to overclocking, extreme timings, and the work that we put it through.
 
Originally posted by souja9
I would love to see some links and some tests. I'm am seriously interested in how I spend my money. I'lll look around Anandtech and see if I can find the articles you mention.

Also, generic does not necessarily mean "bottom of the barrel" or no-name brand. They are merely comparing the performance gains from buying the "value" line over the "premium" line.

If you are suggesting someone spend an extra 50% ($75 vs. $100) more money per chip, I would like to see some good real world performance gains. A few hundred extra points on 3Dmark doesn't tell me anything.

For the record, I have some Corsair XMS, OCZ platinum and some "generic" stuff between my three boxes.

And before you get lost in discrediting gamepc.com, ask yourself what would they have to gain by advising people to buy the *cheaper* memory?
Click to expand...

If you dont overclock then dont worry about spending a ton on more expensive OVERCLOCKERS RAM. If you do overclock and you buy generic RAM thinking it will be just about as good i would definately consider you a nOOb to the whole idea. I only use brand name Mushkin, Corsair, Kingston in my rigs no matter if they are overclocked or not. They have the best timings usually unless you can find some other brands with BH-5 chips. Generic RAM is made for people on low budgets that have no idea what overclocking even is.

If you dont plan to overclock i would buy Crucial. Top non-overclocking RAM and they'll stand behind you if you have any problems or compatibility issues.
 
Originally posted by burningrave101
If you dont overclock then dont worry about spending a ton on more expensive OVERCLOCKERS RAM. If you do overclock and you buy generic RAM thinking it will be just about as good i would definately consider you a nOOb to the whole idea. I only use brand name Mushkin, Corsair, Kingston in my rigs no matter if they are overclocked or not. They have the best timings usually unless you can find some other brands with BH-5 chips. Generic RAM is made for people on low budgets that have no idea what overclocking even is.

If you dont plan to overclock i would buy Crucial. Top non-overclocking RAM and they'll stand behind you if you have any problems or compatibility issues.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. I won't use Generic anymore. Crucial it is (if not overclocking).
 
Another thing to consider most people forget is not the speed increase from more expensive RAM but the quality of the RAM. Quality RAM will run error free for those of you that know how to use programs like memtest86. Generic RAM on the other hand has alot more chance of errors and errors can cause data corruption. Errors also affect the overall stability of the system.

Tired of getting the Blue Screen of Death? Stop buying the cheap ass generic RAM then lol.
 
Originally posted by burningrave101
If you dont overclock then dont worry about spending a ton on more expensive OVERCLOCKERS RAM. If you do overclock and you buy generic RAM thinking it will be just about as good i would definately consider you a nOOb to the whole idea.
Click to expand...

No one is questioning which RAM is faster. The questions are "faster by how much" and "is it worth it?"

This type of "enthusiast" marketing is common in many different things. Take tires for example, while it is cool to brag about fitting your street rocket with "Z" rated tires, do you really need tires rated for 150+mph?

Another example: overclocking. Before the Godly celerons a few years back, you could only reliably gain around 10% more performance with a good overclock. After spending good money on AS, premium hsf's, many case fans, and cas2 memory, my system performed only a bit better than someone else who's machine came out of the box. All that trouble and money wasn't worth it at all.

Now recently with the Bartons and the p4's, it is much more worth it to overclock. You really can't beat increasing your performance by 20+% right out of the box with stock parts. I've even recommended overclocking to many of my friends because it's a really good value.

It is good to question and evaluate. Don't be like sheep and just eat whatever grass is put in front of you. If someone came out with an overclockers floppy drive that reads floppys 20% faster, would you buy it? Of course not. Why not? it's faster. Because that speed is not useful in you everyday computing experience. Now use the same line of reasoning with this memory. I mean it doesn't take a smart guy to say that memory clocked at higher speeds with tighter timings is faster, but I'm still waiting for someone to show me by how much.


My question to you, how many more fps does your overclockers memory give you? How much faster does it affect your multimedia performance? How does it affect your desktop experience? ...actually these are the same questions you should be asking the people selling us the premium stuff.
 
Originally posted by burningrave101
Another thing to consider most people forget is not the speed increase from more expensive RAM but the quality of the RAM. Quality RAM will run error free for those of you that know how to use programs like memtest86. Generic RAM on the other hand has alot more chance of errors and errors can cause data corruption. Errors also affect the overall stability of the system.

Tired of getting the Blue Screen of Death? Stop buying the cheap ass generic RAM then lol.
Click to expand...

Do you have any idea how small a market share this "premium" RAM encompasses? Just curious, outside of an overclocker's fragbox, how many other people (work machines, school machines, etc.) do you think is using this premium memory?
 
Originally posted by souja9
Do you have any idea how small a market share this "premium" RAM encompasses? Just curious, outside of an overclocker's fragbox, how many other people (work machines, school machines, etc.) do you think is using this premium memory?
Click to expand...

No idea, but it's not enough and that's half the reason why a lot of the mass market desktops can have stability issues.
 
Originally posted by emorphien
No idea, but it's not enough and that's half the reason why a lot of the mass market desktops can have stability issues.
Click to expand...

Oops, I guess "half " of "a lot" of the thousands of systems that Dell ships have stability issues since they do not offer premium RAM in any of their online builds.

Come to think of it, with your reasoning, all laptops (including yours) are likely to have stability issues since there is no premium laptop memory.
 
Originally posted by souja9
Oops, I guess "half " of "a lot" of the thousands of systems that Dell ships have stability issues since they do not offer premium RAM in any of their online builds.

Come to think of it, with your reasoning, all laptops (including yours) are likely to have stability issues since there is no premium laptop memory.
Click to expand...

If you would like to misconstrue my comment in that way, be my guest. That would be rather silly however. I am simply saying that some systems come with real crappy memory, whoever was the lowest bidder and that affects stability greatly.

Real crappy memory != normal, perfectly fine memory != premium/performance memory. There's a lot of good memory out there that isn't expensive, however I'm sure there are times where the vendors won't even use that because they got something cheaper.

As far as my laptop goes, it's rock solid.
 
Originally posted by souja9
No one is questioning which RAM is faster. The questions are "faster by how much" and "is it worth it?"

This type of "enthusiast" marketing is common in many different things. Take tires for example, while it is cool to brag about fitting your street rocket with "Z" rated tires, do you really need tires rated for 150+mph?

Another example: overclocking. Before the Godly celerons a few years back, you could only reliably gain around 10% more performance with a good overclock. After spending good money on AS, premium hsf's, many case fans, and cas2 memory, my system performed only a bit better than someone else who's machine came out of the box. All that trouble and money wasn't worth it at all.

Now recently with the Bartons and the p4's, it is much more worth it to overclock. You really can't beat increasing your performance by 20+% right out of the box with stock parts. I've even recommended overclocking to many of my friends because it's a really good value.

It is good to question and evaluate. Don't be like sheep and just eat whatever grass is put in front of you. If someone came out with an overclockers floppy drive that reads floppys 20% faster, would you buy it? Of course not. Why not? it's faster. Because that speed is not useful in you everyday computing experience. Now use the same line of reasoning with this memory. I mean it doesn't take a smart guy to say that memory clocked at higher speeds with tighter timings is faster, but I'm still waiting for someone to show me by how much.


My question to you, how many more fps does your overclockers memory give you? How much faster does it affect your multimedia performance? How does it affect your desktop experience? ...actually these are the same questions you should be asking the people selling us the premium stuff.
Click to expand...

You need Z rated tires if you AutoX. You're on an enthusiast board. We AutoX. This is not the board for the people driving from one side of the city to the other, or for people only concerned with "desktop and multimedia experience".

That's nice that you didn't get much out of overclocking. For some people, working that hard for anything was the reward. We're enthusiasts. We enjoy it.

How much faster is it?

Well, with Value Ram I got a ZERO % overclock. None. Zippo. Zilch. Period. 0. Nullo. Wouldn't boot.

With Corsair, I'm at 2.1ghz from 1.47ghz. And stable. And the increase is about 30 fps in UT2k3, plus about 8 seconds shaved off of the loading times. From unplayable at 1600x1200 4xaa 16xaf, to playable.

With my secondary system, with Value ram I was only partially stable at 140fsb. With Crucial 2700, it's stable. So from 0fps crashing, to the 40 or so I get in UT2k3 (GF3, Athlon 1.3ghz).

So, as for how many FPS, it's enough, no matter what. I don't drive to drive, I drive to race. I don't compute to word process, I compute to get every possible FPS that I can, so I can enjoy my games with EVERYTHING as high as I can get it. If the Corsair gets me 5 more fps, it's good. I also have a guarantee that it will perform, something that the others DON'T give. It's not that the Generic couldn't do it, it's that I don't want to worry about it doing it right. I'm guaranteed stability and the speeds with the Corsair, I can run on the bleeding edge, and have a margin of error. Try returning Samsung because it doesn't work on the bleeding edge. The fact that I can overclock and be STABLE is greater than no overclock.

I don't give a rip about my desktop experience, or my multimedia experience. That's not why I build computers. If that's what you're concerned with, may I please point you to www.dell.com? Any computer can do multimedia. What WE do is play games and work for FPS. What WE are concerned with is performance. Performance on the bleeding edge. Performance on the extreme, where we're working to get the most out of everything. This is an enthusiast board. We are the racers. We are the ones that take it to the extreme. We are the ones that push the envelope. And generic ram does NOT support us there, as it has been proven and shown time and time again. It's like racing, with no safety equipment, or with a gas leak. It's a problem waiting to happen. Ask anyone here. We ALL have horror stories about trying to save money, and skimping on parts. In fact, the links I posted point this out.

Your site is wrong. The have no basis for their tests. The people with experience know better. The people who run on the extreme use better.

Oh, and yes, it IS a small market. WE, are that small market. WE, are the ones that are on the edge. We push the hardware edge, we don't settle for second best. Ever. We are not sheep. We get the MOST out of our systems. This means supporting them with the best, always.

You don't skimp on a powersupply. You don't skimp on your video card. You don't skimp on memory. Either use the best on all, or get a Dell.
 
Originally posted by souja9
Oops, I guess "half " of "a lot" of the thousands of systems that Dell ships have stability issues since they do not offer premium RAM in any of their online builds.

Come to think of it, with your reasoning, all laptops (including yours) are likely to have stability issues since there is no premium laptop memory.
Click to expand...

Hey, buddy, Dell uses Crucial :rolleyes:

Oh, and Crucial and Kingston both make RAM for Laptops, and the SODIMMS are constructed to the same standards that the high end stuff is made of.

Care to try again?
 
Originally posted by emorphien
If you would like to misconstrue my comment in that way, be my guest. That would be rather silly however. I am simply saying that some systems come with real crappy memory, whoever was the lowest bidder and that affects stability greatly.

Real crappy memory != normal, perfectly fine memory != premium/performance memory. There's a lot of good memory out there that isn't expensive, however I'm sure there are times where the vendors won't even use that because they got something cheaper.

As far as my laptop goes, it's rock solid.
Click to expand...

Bingo. We are not arguing that is doesn't always make sense to use Corsair. Many don't need that. Crucial is often fine, for stock systems (like that Dell, that uses it). But, if you're working your system, you want more.

Souja, let the issue drop. We've all dealt with the problems of crappy ram before, we don't go there any more at all. Maybe you've gotten lucky and haven't had problems, but having built over 80 computers in the past 5 years, I no longer TOUCH anything less than Crucial. Ever.
 
Originally posted by souja9
Do you have any idea how small a market share this "premium" RAM encompasses? Just curious, outside of an overclocker's fragbox, how many other people (work machines, school machines, etc.) do you think is using this premium memory?
Click to expand...

Everyone I know. We all gave up on shitty RAM long ago.

Oh, and we ARE the market share. You're on the wrong forum, buddy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top