Bitcoin centralization is bad, and that's what companies such as ASICminer do ! big power / hashrarte in one hand !
when will the change in BitCoin algorithm eliminates ASICs ?
non-specialized equipment -> specialized equipment = more centralization not that it really matters in this case
|
|
|
payment on this would be in bitcoins up front, or cash in person
i'm definitely not shipping overseas w/o getting the bitcoins first. but, yes, if you want to pay me the bitcoins then i can see how much it'd cost.
i'll also make the same offer i made that other guy:
i could also toss in another 5870 that doesn't post at all, but still has value i assume (heatsink is on it, if nothing else... and some handy pins you could solder on to the card that's missing 2). it doesn't have a backplate or shroud
and a 5970, which i'm 95% sure doesn't work, but not positive. it used to be watercooled and i don't have the original heatsink & fan for it. i was told it didnt work & never really bothered to test for myself. just the card itself, no heatsink or anything else.
they are useless to me and just taking up space
|
|
|
make me an offer on 4 working 5870s, 1 "sorta damaged" 5870? the damaged one is just missing two of the pins for the fan power connector on the card. two of them are missing backplates. four of them have the ATI reference fans in them & still working, the fifth "sorta damaged" one has a fan ziptied on it and the shroud removed. can send shroud separately & also a reference fan that works. don't have the two backplates, no clue where they ran off to. in essence, 2 are in "normal" condition, one has a backplate with a fan ziptied on to it, w/ a shroud I can include, but the fan power connector doesn't work because a couple of the pins have broken off, the other 2 are in normal condition except for a missing backplate. 2 are asus, 1 is HIS, 1 is XFX, and 1 is unknown. all are reference cards, 1GB memory i could also toss in another 5870 that doesn't post at all, but still has value i assume (heatsink is on it, if nothing else... and some handy pins you could solder on to the card that's missing 2). it doesn't have a backplate or shroud ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) and a 5970, which i'm 95% sure doesn't work, but not positive. it used to be watercooled and i don't have the original heatsink & fan for it. i was told it didnt work & never really bothered to test for myself. just the card itself, no heatsink or anything else.
|
|
|
Ah, that's part of the issue of avoiding eBay! I did just go ahead and look and there's only one that I can't easily determine the model of (w/o pulling it from computer)... because if they weren't ASUS, then they got a different bios, where I could overclock easier =p Two are ASUS, one is a HIS, one is XFX, and I'm not sure about the fifth. They're all reference model 5870's & 1GB memory. I still have screenshots of them "in action" at www.nogleg.com/temp/1.png www.nogleg.com/temp/2.png www.nogleg.com/temp/4.png (I removed 3 & 5, 3 was obsoleted due to one of the fans being pulled & 5 was unnecessary) ... note that even though the screenshots were taken at ~7am, ambient temp in room was probably around 85oF, up to 110oF in the afternoons... bottom right of pic 1 is to show the system uptime of 7 days, afterburner was never turned off, so those were the max temps the cards hit.. 4.png just shows piddling with the clocks, back when it was colder in winter. now they mostly run at 1.063v (hence the 390-430mhash).... the card that is showing the 54o temp and 68o on sensor 2 needs a new thermal paste job =p the other two are @ www.nogleg.com/temp/5870-1.png and www.nogleg.com/temp/5870-2.png ... in that case, cgminer had been running like 7 days straight... i still run both of those cards at 1.163/1.15v since they're double spaced.. also shows logfile on the 2nd screenshot... where I changed some bios that was defaulting the card to 1.212v in performance level 3 (guess I could have used RBE or something also) (the high number of rejected shares is because of the nature of p2pool) another ed: also, the discrepancies between the clock times shown on cgminer/afterburner is because i use barelyclocked on the 5870s
|
|
|
Hop 1 is to my router which is <1ms and I've removed. Hop 2 would be my DSL latency, the last hop is the latency to the IP running p2pool. Here is a log of my shares from roughly 4:00PM central time onwards: log:2013-06-11 16:15:59.144244 GOT SHARE! MrT bab783a2 prev 92e2927f age 2.89s log:2013-06-11 16:51:13.272338 GOT SHARE! Pandaemonium a6d3cf72 prev 0b640f2b age 1.66s log:2013-06-11 17:16:53.168319 GOT SHARE! Pandaemonium c2aed4f2 prev 60efa42f age 16.31s log:2013-06-11 17:25:01.871837 GOT SHARE! Altgard b0c4413f prev ea8fd70e age 2.77s log:2013-06-11 17:25:36.690128 GOT SHARE! Altgard 5f0dfbfc prev 4ededa38 age 21.35s log:2013-06-11 17:27:45.292548 GOT SHARE! MrT badbc46c prev bb3fe3aa age 4.02s log:2013-06-11 17:48:34.515212 GOT SHARE! Pandaemonium fcd0270f prev e5bb6882 age 1.12s log:2013-06-11 17:51:26.236705 GOT SHARE! Pandaemonium 018c1e21 prev 0b9a5cfc age 9.90s log:2013-06-11 18:20:53.325194 GOT SHARE! Altgard 748c3653 prev ef7d5934 age 2.62s log:2013-06-11 18:31:44.319511 GOT SHARE! MrT 69a9e53d prev 24e36d6e age 3.19s log:2013-06-11 18:39:11.042228 GOT SHARE! Brusthonin 07d7bf61 prev e53450f7 age 15.11s log:2013-06-11 18:46:31.711466 GOT SHARE! Altgard 31b3c8dd prev bd8899a2 age 7.47s log:2013-06-11 18:54:19.677511 GOT SHARE! Brusthonin 23a09aac prev ea2c121a age 11.17s DEAD ON ARRIVAL log:2013-06-11 19:10:09.639655 GOT SHARE! MrT 3cfea1bc prev da6f80d3 age 4.88s DEAD ON ARRIVAL log:2013-06-11 19:15:58.787474 GOT SHARE! Pandaemonium cf3a066f prev 6704c588 age 6.58s log:2013-06-11 19:34:18.549763 GOT SHARE! Pandaemonium 49edf44c prev 69f93d41 age 3.59s log:2013-06-11 19:36:24.742229 GOT SHARE! Brusthonin af01fd65 prev ba206f9c age 1.38s log:2013-06-11 19:45:09.319976 GOT SHARE! Pandaemonium b5cdefd9 prev adeef95e age 42.91s log:2013-06-11 19:54:32.633016 GOT SHARE! Pandaemonium 12c9a260 prev aa6e334a age 20.10s log:2013-06-11 19:55:14.390967 GOT SHARE! MrT a04f910d prev 0188a750 age 3.51s DEAD ON ARRIVAL log:2013-06-11 19:58:04.727155 GOT SHARE! Pandaemonium bef8f8e9 prev a93386e1 age 7.55s log:2013-06-11 20:24:09.943406 GOT SHARE! Pandaemonium bbd76a15 prev 0ff6593f age 12.61s log:2013-06-11 20:36:33.468076 GOT SHARE! MrT 999e3378 prev 5d842f0d age 4.39s DEAD ON ARRIVAL log:2013-06-11 20:51:52.202080 GOT SHARE! Altgard 6f508a8b prev 4f2ccadc age 7.23s log:2013-06-11 21:14:23.426968 GOT SHARE! Altgard 16814b6a prev f0105104 age 25.33s log:2013-06-11 21:37:40.949988 GOT SHARE! Pandaemonium 327e8884 prev 813d06be age 5.36s log:2013-06-11 21:37:55.679323 GOT SHARE! Pandaemonium a55a51b9 prev 0048847b age 7.25s log:2013-06-11 22:17:32.027947 GOT SHARE! Pandaemonium 01e23d8b prev dd322bbe age 3.29s log:2013-06-11 22:21:09.732581 GOT SHARE! Brusthonin e61cad93 prev c7d57bc7 age 12.48s log:2013-06-11 22:45:33.521705 GOT SHARE! Pandaemonium 89a2bc49 prev da8e5127 age 2.79s log:2013-06-11 22:47:03.131315 GOT SHARE! MrT e675329d prev 1fabbb1a age 6.71s 4 DOAs in ~30 shares. I'm showing 2 orphans out of 90 shares total. I'm not sure which 2 were orphaned, but I guess you could say I had 4.33 DOA/orphaned in 30 shares... that's still >100% efficiency at all times (I don't think I've ever seen p2pool under 13.5% orphan/DOA, at least in the last 6 months). Not 110-115%, but a couple weeks ago I also wasn't dealing with oversold bandwidth. 4.33 out of 30 would probably usually be around 105% efficiency or so. Here's what the link looked like for those times: ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nogleg.com%2Ftemp%2Fconnection2.png&t=663&c=uGPj_XX8f8s3tQ) This is in response to the thing about latency needing to be under 45 or whatever. With my normal latency (180ms, and much less packetloss), I get about 5% DOA, instead of 10-15%..... basically my argument about why the most important thing in choosing a node is the node's orphan rate.. then you look at your latency and see how much DOA that should result in... but I don't see any reason why someone should have <100% unless they're on a satellite connection or something I should really just be mining on a normal pool until my link is fixed, just too lazy to change everything around ed: added two more, link is still crap, 500ms+... this is worst time of day actually, it'll clear up in about 2 hours ed2: well, more like 2 1/2 hrs. my theory is summer break
|
|
|
Germany node:
2013-06-12 02:30:22 received block 00000000000000d9a40124da12aa3c7b26d7adad47eab9dc5cd95113d345a7b6 2013-06-12 02:30:24 received block 000000000000003eb0df7952601d567ed07a1683793c3aeb1c90fae6b378cfaf
that bitparking one came in late =p
US node:
2013-06-12 02:30:22 received block 000000000000003eb0df7952601d567ed07a1683793c3aeb1c90fae6b378cfaf 2013-06-12 02:30:26 received block 00000000000000d9a40124da12aa3c7b26d7adad47eab9dc5cd95113d345a7b6 from 5.9.24.81:25861 2013-06-12 02:30:27 received block 00000000000000d9a40124da12aa3c7b26d7adad47eab9dc5cd95113d345a7b6 from 127.0.0.1:14265
that p2pool one came in late, and was even sent faster from Germany than from my local p2pool
|
|
|
Dang, missed it. And I really wanted the game. All of the promo codes say invalid.
sent you a PM, there was one that might still be available (I posted it to 'friends' on facebook, but not on here...)
|
|
|
not worth my time to sell
redeemable at shop.ubi.com/FC3BDAMD
mh4vwz7n6 bvh2tiw29 wehupe2gq
|
|
|
the one before the block and the one after the block are from 185Kip6odGYs4eSHD6DYsWVDJBg2DNLfiV, though wouldn't that only matter if the next one in the chain was also 185Kip6odGYs4eSHD6DYsWVDJBg2DNLfiV? (as mine would have been sandwiched between the two)
ed: ok, so the real issue here would then be that 185Kip6odGYs4eSHD6DYsWVDJBg2DNLfiV is operating at 2s latency or higher?
all i can think of is that his client tossed out my share as being invalid, then he got another share and his node broadcast that share, and for some reason, my share got replaced by his. that should only happen if he had gotten another one after that though, eh? is there some other explanation? because that could be abused
|
|
|
re: Punishing share for 'Block-stale detected!, etc.
I get a lot of orphans when this happens... because my bitcoind is too fast?
I went to several other pools (my other one in Florida, OVH in Canada, p2pool.org, some others) and they all had my share listed, which means that it was accepted and got orphaned later.
This occuring after several:
2013-06-09 21:34:35.132788 Skipping from block 4bc4be449a7de0c01cb29a9d661045a19393dea2cefc2e26b to block 9b14c16ea0d67eda77564adca4de0ac3e84b1efbd8cfb5adce! 2013-06-09 21:34:36.831062 Punishing share for 'Block-stale detected! 4bc4be449a7de0c01cb29a9d661045a19393dea2cefc2e26b < 9b14c16ea0d67eda77564adca4de0ac3e84b1efbd8cfb5adce'! Jumping from 2ba6238a to e8ee1640! 2013-06-09 21:34:36.917817 Punishing share for 'Block-stale detected! 4bc4be449a7de0c01cb29a9d661045a19393dea2cefc2e26b < 9b14c16ea0d67eda77564adca4de0ac3e84b1efbd8cfb5adce'! Jumping from 2ba6238a to e8ee1640! 2013-06-09 21:34:36.920728 Punishing share for 'Block-stale detected! 4bc4be449a7de0c01cb29a9d661045a19393dea2cefc2e26b < 9b14c16ea0d67eda77564adca4de0ac3e84b1efbd8cfb5adce'! Jumping from 2ba6238a to e8ee1640! 2013-06-09 21:34:40.064626 GOT SHARE! Brusthonin 32cdc8e4 prev e8ee1640 age 2.69s
... and then that share was orphaned. It seems to me like if I modified the source to turn off the whole 'punishing share' stuff, I'd get less orphans?
If I understand correctly, P2Pool doesn't want to build a share on top of one it knows to be stale (built on a previous Bitcoin block). It may be because your bitcoind has better connections to the Bitcoin P2P network and learns of new blocks before others: if the majority of the network is slower it will not see the share as a "Block-stale" as you do and not punish it, refusing your share in the relatively rare case when you submit one just after this "Block-stale". You could lose a bit of income this way, but it should not be noticeable (this can only affect you during the ~5s a block needs to fully propagates the Bitcoin network, which is less than 1% of the block interval: in the worst case you shouldn't lose more than 0.5% of efficiency). If you modified the source to turn off the 'punishing share', you would find your node at the opposite end of the spectrum: it would build on a potential stales and make orphans too. You can find out if it's a problem by computing the number of shares you found just after a block that were orphaned and the number of shares that were accepted. If you have enough logs/hashrate you can get a meaningful sample (one hundred shares generated just after blocks would be adequate) and find if you get more orphans in this population than the orphans you get over the same time period. This would make sure there is some imbalance and I think we could even find out if reversing the logic would benefit you in your case (I'm a bit tired and going to bed, but I think it's simple probabilities). yeah, like this 2013-06-10 06:10:29.076187 Punishing share for 'Block-stale detected! 4d2f83a096d4f50ce5fccfd3d81fb97988ad9eac42ddfad5b6 < 1c3c0e8358b6fe20f6d09bfeef1f9aa0fc897ad634c8da56aa'! Jumping from 5538fa58 to be8220df! 2013-06-10 06:10:31.197403 GOT SHARE! Brusthonin 10823d52 prev be8220df age 1.81s 2013-06-10 06:10:33.597242 Shares: 33 (1 orphan, 4 dead) Stale rate: ~15.2% (6-31%) Efficiency: ~104.6% (85-116%) Current payout: 0.3049 BTC 2013-06-10 06:10:43.603981 Shares: 33 (2 orphan, 4 dead) Stale rate: ~18.2% (8-35%) Efficiency: ~100.9% (80-113%) Current payout: 0.3017 BTC that just happened, again oh, here is what it looked like from my a different node: 2013-06-10 06:10:29.383634 Skipping from block 4d2f83a096d4f50ce5fccfd3d81fb97988ad9eac42ddfad5b6 to block 1c3c0e8358b6fe20f6d09bfeef1f9aa0fc897ad634c8da56aa! 2013-06-10 06:10:30.688724 Punishing share for 'Block-stale detected! 4d2f83a096d4f50ce5fccfd3d81fb97988ad9eac42ddfad5b6 < 1c3c0e8358b6fe20f6d09bfeef1f9aa0fc897ad634c8da56aa'! Jumping from 5538fa58 to be8220df! 2013-06-10 06:10:35.396229 P2Pool: 17360 shares in chain (17364 verified/17364 total) Peers: 64 (8 incoming) 2013-06-10 06:10:35.396380 Local: 0H/s in last 0.0 seconds Local dead on arrival: ![Huh](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/huh.gif) Expected time to share: ![Huh](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/huh.gif) 2013-06-10 06:10:35.396506 Shares: 0 (0 orphan, 0 dead) Stale rate: ![Huh](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/huh.gif) Efficiency: ![Huh](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/huh.gif) Current payout: 0.3049 BTC 2013-06-10 06:10:35.396555 Pool: 736GH/s Stale rate: 18.9% Expected time to block: 1.1 days nobody mining on it though, so doesn't show reports of new work. the US node runs slower since it's on a crappy dual xeon and only using 8 cores. oh, you can see how it did log my share as valid though, since the payout increased to 0.3049 the times: 06/10/2013_06:56:34:620911792 (US) 06/10/2013_06:56:34:634211668 (Germany)
|
|
|
Is there some easy way to take all my auctions down? They haven't sold in 2 days and the prices are lower than what I'd get on ebay - fees anyway
i see a 'select all' button, but nothing that i can do with it except export my list to a csv file
settings -> sell settings -> out of office for anyone else that's interested, just found it
i guess that works. not sure if people can still 'buy' your items if they have the direct link or not. would suck for the instant digital items.
|
|
|
re: Punishing share for 'Block-stale detected!, etc.
I get a lot of orphans when this happens... because my bitcoind is too fast?
I went to several other pools (my other one in Florida, OVH in Canada, p2pool.org, some others) and they all had my share listed, which means that it was accepted and got orphaned later.
This occuring after several:
2013-06-09 21:34:35.132788 Skipping from block 4bc4be449a7de0c01cb29a9d661045a19393dea2cefc2e26b to block 9b14c16ea0d67eda77564adca4de0ac3e84b1efbd8cfb5adce! 2013-06-09 21:34:36.831062 Punishing share for 'Block-stale detected! 4bc4be449a7de0c01cb29a9d661045a19393dea2cefc2e26b < 9b14c16ea0d67eda77564adca4de0ac3e84b1efbd8cfb5adce'! Jumping from 2ba6238a to e8ee1640! 2013-06-09 21:34:36.917817 Punishing share for 'Block-stale detected! 4bc4be449a7de0c01cb29a9d661045a19393dea2cefc2e26b < 9b14c16ea0d67eda77564adca4de0ac3e84b1efbd8cfb5adce'! Jumping from 2ba6238a to e8ee1640! 2013-06-09 21:34:36.920728 Punishing share for 'Block-stale detected! 4bc4be449a7de0c01cb29a9d661045a19393dea2cefc2e26b < 9b14c16ea0d67eda77564adca4de0ac3e84b1efbd8cfb5adce'! Jumping from 2ba6238a to e8ee1640! 2013-06-09 21:34:40.064626 GOT SHARE! Brusthonin 32cdc8e4 prev e8ee1640 age 2.69s
... and then that share was orphaned. It seems to me like if I modified the source to turn off the whole 'punishing share' stuff, I'd get less orphans?
|
|
|
ridiculous price is ridiculous
Oh, now you are the expert on prices of used video cards? If you have nothing to add to a post, please stay the F out of it with your useless opinion. Noticed you didn't even make a low-ball offer.... ![Roll Eyes](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif) 2.9 price is fine, but I think you'll end up having to sell it on ebay or amazon. so far i've sold 1 card via these forums and 4 via ebay/amazon What was your avg ebay price? I hate getting hammered for about 15% of my sale ![Sad](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/sad.gif) Two 5830's on Amazon for $84 + shipping (which amazon reimburses you for). Amazon fees are a lot less than eBay. On eBay, I sold two 5870's for $140 each and "free shipping" (clearing about $115 each, I'd guess, after shipping). I paid a $20 fee to set up a shop (for one month) that reduces the commission amount like 5%.. I may look into that. Thank you. be careful not to double list auctions on amazon (re: have it sell on ebay, then have someone else buy it on amazon)... they are pretty quick to yank your selling privileges for new sellers
|
|
|
ridiculous price is ridiculous
Oh, now you are the expert on prices of used video cards? If you have nothing to add to a post, please stay the F out of it with your useless opinion. Noticed you didn't even make a low-ball offer.... ![Roll Eyes](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif) 2.9 price is fine, but I think you'll end up having to sell it on ebay or amazon. so far i've sold 1 card via these forums and 4 via ebay/amazon What was your avg ebay price? I hate getting hammered for about 15% of my sale ![Sad](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/sad.gif) Two 5830's on Amazon for $84 + shipping (which amazon reimburses you for). Amazon fees are a lot less than eBay. On eBay, I sold two 5870's for $140 each and "free shipping" (clearing about $115 each, I'd guess, after shipping). I paid a $20 fee to set up a shop (for one month) that reduces the commission amount like 5%.. Shipping costs a bit more since (imo) for anything over $50, you should require signature verification
|
|
|
i use maxblocksize 5000, but i restarted this morning to experiment with 3000.
i run p2pool with about 60 nodes added as --p2pool-node and allow another 20 outgoing and 10 incoming
It's the complete opposite of what I advise to do. I have the same efficiency you have (between 110 and 115%), with nearly 10x less connections and 2000 times more maxblocksize. What makes you thing reducing maxblocksize help your efficiency? Or are you trying to solve another problem? what makes you think you know the answer to everything? you state here you have the same efficiency as I do, yet you mention something earlier to the effect of not mining on a node that has >40ms latency? how about this (ed: consolidated into one image): ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nogleg.com%2Ftemp%2Fconnection.png&t=663&c=qqhXyEZCgcVWMQ) Go ahead and get 115% efficiency with 500k blocksize on that, chief that's called oversold DSL bandwidth and sunday afternoon/evening... the last hour is called game of thrones
|
|
|
Update: include report of a remote node with RTT between remote node and miners up to 32ms and latency >110%.
Mining on a remote node should be doable with a RTT <40ms. I'd welcome reports on efficiency with RTT>40ms (please include your configuration details).
sure, I mine on a remote node at 200ms my DSL alone has base latency of 35ms Can you share the efficiency you reach with your bitcoind version and settings (if not default ones) and p2pool settings if tuned? well, if you include the evenings of 500ms ping times and the packetloss, it averages out to around 5-6% DOA (weekends are worse than weekdays), add in 2-3% worth of orphans and so then theoretically efficiency would be anywhere from 110-117. (this would have p2pool as a whole ranging from 18 to 25% doa/orphans) it's hard to say what mine is exactly, since i have multiple people using my pool. the 108% right now is worse than normal, but that's because 2 out of the first 5 were DOA. i reset it this morning at 300 shares, 4 orphans, and like 50 DOA. the DOA mostly from ASIC not working properly with p2pool theoretically with a 1 second delay, you should only get 10% DOA? if you're mining on a european node with plenty of bandwidth that's set up properly, you shouldn't get more than 2-3% orphans. so, you'd still have higher than 100% efficiency i use maxblocksize 5000, but i restarted this morning to experiment with 3000. i run p2pool with about 60 nodes added as --p2pool-node and allow another 20 outgoing and 10 incoming
|
|
|
Update: include report of a remote node with RTT between remote node and miners up to 32ms and latency >110%.
Mining on a remote node should be doable with a RTT <40ms. I'd welcome reports on efficiency with RTT>40ms (please include your configuration details).
sure, I mine on a remote node at 200ms my DSL alone has base latency of 35ms ed: ok, more like 30-32ms oh, it also gets like this in the evenings: ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FTqYZehJ.jpg&t=663&c=iQZAVm8rvhfzJA)
|
|
|
So the node that got it screwed us?
"Screwed" is probably an exaggeration: that's only 3% on one block and the node lost these 3% too. That could be unintentional too (a freshly restarted node which didn't have the time to fill it's memory pool will generate a block with fewer transactions). What's important is that it's not an exception: that's the second time I check recent P2Pool blocks and I found that they were small ones which missed potentially higher fee income. whats the pro and cons of integrating MUCH TX in a P2Pool Block? pro: you get to split an extra 0.96% in fees to everyone else (less than 0.25BTC), going by stat info on http://blockchain.info/stats con: you get a lot more orphans & more processing power is needed, not altogether related to the getblock latency, but actual transferring within the p2pool network itself
|
|
|
I haven't paid a dime over $250 for any of the 7950s I own. at 650khash (that's what I'm getting), that's 2.6, I can get double or more hashrate per mobo AND per watt of electricity, not to mention MUCH better resale/repurpose value.
I wouldn't buy anything slower than a 6970 for mining, and I'd have to be getting them dirt cheap.
Did you buy the 7950's used? I paid $269.99 for mine.... or are you counting rebates + games? People need to get real on pricing.. no reason to as long as they still sell for inflated prices on ebay and amazon I wouldn't buy anything slower than a 6970 for mining, and I'd have to be getting them dirt cheap. i've bought some 7790's, 7850's, and 7870's, just because as of right now if you do the rebates and sell the games, they become profit once they hit your doorstep
|
|
|
|