Bitcoin Forum
November 24, 2017, 01:33:39 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 [205] 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 ... 2138 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com  (Read 3012811 times)
Nemo1024
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554



View Profile WWW
July 22, 2013, 08:57:07 AM
 #4081

With a 59% or more rise in difficulty next increase (https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate) I wonder whether I should cancel my Saturn order?

All manufacturers seem to have large orders due to be shipped before KnCMiner ships so Jumps of 110,000GH/s per fortnight may continue several more times if not each difficulty change.

Current jump is more than total capacity beginning of June!

I had been thinking of upgrading Saturn to Jupiter. Now it's unlikely. More likely I cancel during next few weeks while I still can!

Hopefully their planned March 2014 offering will make a good investment & ROI.

Your estimates are highly exaggerated. You'll see tonight Wink

#101Life
Save Donbass

“Dark times lie ahead of us and there will be a time when we must choose between what is easy and what is right.”
“We are only as strong as we are united, as weak as we are divided.”
“It is important to fight and fight again, and keep fighting, for only then can evil be kept at bay, though never quite eradicated.”
1511530419
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511530419

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511530419
Reply with quote  #2

1511530419
Report to moderator
1511530419
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511530419

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511530419
Reply with quote  #2

1511530419
Report to moderator
1511530419
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511530419

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511530419
Reply with quote  #2

1511530419
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now Coinlancer is Disrupting the Freelance marketplace!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511530419
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511530419

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511530419
Reply with quote  #2

1511530419
Report to moderator
titomane
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 389



View Profile
July 22, 2013, 08:58:42 AM
 #4082

Now that there is new data on die size, I updated the GH/wafer table:
Code:
wafer(mm)   chip         process(nm)  die(mm^2)   GH/s(per die)      DpW   GH/s(per wafer)
300         KnC              28        441,00          25            128          3200,00
300         bitfury          55         14,44           2           4717          9434,00
300         bfl              65         56,25           4           1167          4668,00
300         asciminer(?)    130         17,50           0,333       3877          1291,04
300         avalon          110         16,13           0,282       4214          1188,35
300         asciminer(?)    130         21,7            0,333       3112          1036,30
(DpW, die per wafer; yield percentage not taken into account)

Die size is less than 336mm2.
I think 18x18mm


Another detail for a better table. As far as I know, 130nm(110nm) are still manufactured based on 200mm wafers. 65nm(55nm) nodes were the first built with 300mm.

Ummmm. KnC is doing a 28nm process and getting only a third of the GH/s per wafer that bitfury is getting at 55nm?
What's more concerning is the 25GH/s per die. Where is the data that says they are using 4 dies per package?



HERE

Otago
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 16


View Profile
July 22, 2013, 09:14:33 AM
 #4083

With a 59% or more rise in difficulty next increase (https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate) I wonder whether I should cancel my Saturn order?

All manufacturers seem to have large orders due to be shipped before KnCMiner ships so Jumps of 110,000GH/s per fortnight may continue several more times if not each difficulty change.

Current jump is more than total capacity beginning of June!

I had been thinking of upgrading Saturn to Jupiter. Now it's unlikely. More likely I cancel during next few weeks while I still can!

Hopefully their planned March 2014 offering will make a good investment & ROI.

Your estimates are highly exaggerated. You'll see tonight Wink

Yip, your right.

Have since learned difficulty changes based on speed last 2016 blocks solved. Current set was due 25th so completed way to quickly.

If 297TH/s figure I saw becomes average over future 2016 blocks they'll be solved very quickly. Then my estimate will apply. Only off by a week or so Grin

donate at: 1MdvZGoGBMVZShaoZhgdYBfYrpPicJ8RaW
Ytterbium
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238



View Profile WWW
July 22, 2013, 09:27:11 AM
 #4084

Anyone know if these things have Wifi?
ROFLMAO
After all the recent nonsense being posted, this was a refreshing chuckle!
The answer is no by the way.
Ethernet connect to a wireless router, you'll be fine.

Haha, I didn't think so - Isn't the Avalon technically a router?  Has anyone ever gotten it to work as a wireless router? It has an ethernet port sitting there doing nothing  Wink

HyperMega
Full Member
***
Online Online

Activity: 124


View Profile
July 22, 2013, 09:31:17 AM
 #4085

Now that there is new data on die size, I updated the GH/wafer table:
Code:
wafer(mm)   chip         process(nm)  die(mm^2)   GH/s(per die)      DpW   GH/s(per wafer)
300         KnC              28        441,00          25         128          3200,00
300         bitfury          55         14,44           2           4717          9434,00
300         bfl              65         56,25           4           1167          4668,00
300         asciminer(?)    130         17,50           0,333       3877          1291,04
300         avalon          110         16,13           0,282       4214          1188,35
300         asciminer(?)    130         21,7            0,333       3112          1036,30
(DpW, die per wafer; yield percentage not taken into account)

Die size is less than 336mm2.
I think 18x18mm


Another detail for a better table. As far as I know, 130nm(110nm) are still manufactured based on 200mm wafers. 65nm(55nm) nodes were the first built with 300mm.

Ummmm. KnC is doing a 28nm process and getting only a third of the GH/s per wafer that bitfury is getting at 55nm?
What's more concerning is the 25GH/s per die. Where is the data that says they are using 4 dies per package?



HERE


The slides says that it's only one die, containing 4 self-contained cores (quads).
A more correct table looks like that:
-> KnC die size estimated based on technology scaling
-> Source for Bitfury die size? Seems to be wrong. And chips are specified for 5GH/s per chip (not 2 GH/s)


Code:
wafer(mm)   chip         process(nm)  die(mm^2)   GH/s(per die)      DpW   GH/s(per wafer)
300         KnC              28        120,00           100         589          58904,00
300         bitfury          55         14,44           2           4847          9694,00
300         bfl              65         56,25           4           1244          4976,00
200         asciminer(?)    130         17,50           0,333       1795          597,74
200         avalon          110         16,13           0,282       1947          549,05
200         asciminer(?)    130         21,7            0,333       1447          477,51
(DpW, die per wafer; yield percentage not taken into account)

That is the real 28nm world! Wink
timmmers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


View Profile
July 22, 2013, 09:33:24 AM
 #4086

With a 59% or more rise in difficulty next increase (https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate) I wonder whether I should cancel my Saturn order?

All manufacturers seem to have large orders due to be shipped before KnCMiner ships so Jumps of 110,000GH/s per fortnight may continue several more times if not each difficulty change.

Current jump is more than total capacity beginning of June!

I had been thinking of upgrading Saturn to Jupiter. Now it's unlikely. More likely I cancel during next few weeks while I still can!

Hopefully their planned March 2014 offering will make a good investment & ROI.

Based on this, the game is over. No point in anyone buying any ASICs anymore as they will never return anything worthwhile, so not much point in anyone thinking about building a next gen machine never mind selling one as they are always going to be fighting a losing battle?

IF a KnC machine that's not even built yet can't profit, why would the next gen be any different?
Bitcoinorama
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532



View Profile
July 22, 2013, 09:39:47 AM
 #4087

With a 59% or more rise in difficulty next increase (https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate) I wonder whether I should cancel my Saturn order?

All manufacturers seem to have large orders due to be shipped before KnCMiner ships so Jumps of 110,000GH/s per fortnight may continue several more times if not each difficulty change.

Current jump is more than total capacity beginning of June!

I had been thinking of upgrading Saturn to Jupiter. Now it's unlikely. More likely I cancel during next few weeks while I still can!

Hopefully their planned March 2014 offering will make a good investment & ROI.

Your estimates are highly exaggerated. You'll see tonight Wink

Yip, your right.

Have since learned difficulty changes based on speed last 2016 blocks solved. Current set was due 25th so completed way to quickly.

If 297TH/s figure I saw becomes average over future 2016 blocks they'll be solved very quickly. Then my estimate will apply. Only off by a week or so Grin

You may be interested in taking a look here if you want to get your hands dirty, it's the code within the protocol limiting hashrate increase;

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/d62a1947be5350ed60066ccacc7aba43bbdf48fb/src/main.cpp#L875

Make my day! Say thanks if you found me helpful Smiley BTC Address --->
1487ThaKjezGA6SiE8fvGcxbgJJu6XWtZp
Otago
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 16


View Profile
July 22, 2013, 09:48:14 AM
 #4088

With a 59% or more rise in difficulty next increase (https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate) I wonder whether I should cancel my Saturn order?

All manufacturers seem to have large orders due to be shipped before KnCMiner ships so Jumps of 110,000GH/s per fortnight may continue several more times if not each difficulty change.

Current jump is more than total capacity beginning of June!

I had been thinking of upgrading Saturn to Jupiter. Now it's unlikely. More likely I cancel during next few weeks while I still can!

Hopefully their planned March 2014 offering will make a good investment & ROI.

Based on this, the game is over. No point in anyone buying any ASICs anymore as they will never return anything worthwhile, so not much point in anyone thinking about building a next gen machine never mind selling one as they are always going to be fighting a losing battle?

IF a KnC machine that's not even built yet can't profit, why would the next gen be any different?

Same thing as when CPU, GPU, FPGA & ASIC gen1. Will be reduction in pricing & increase in performance.

BFL offered 4.5GH to start raising this to 1,500Gh/s (when they thought they could build it into one machine). Gen2 will probably start close to 1Th/s maybe around Mercury pricing if the growth continues. And we only have to wait till March!

BTW my difficulty projection is off by one cycle. Will be following set of 2106 block hit by recent days huge increase if maintained.

donate at: 1MdvZGoGBMVZShaoZhgdYBfYrpPicJ8RaW
erk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


View Profile
July 22, 2013, 10:05:22 AM
 #4089

With a 59% or more rise in difficulty next increase (https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate) I wonder whether I should cancel my

How did you come up with 59%?  The next difficulty increase is predicted at 20% in a few hours time.


Otago
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 16


View Profile
July 22, 2013, 10:20:40 AM
 #4090

With a 59% or more rise in difficulty next increase (https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate) I wonder whether I should cancel my

How did you come up with 59%?  The next difficulty increase is predicted at 20% in a few hours time.




Difficulty change is based on speed of last 2016 blocks solved. Current set was due for completion on 25th.

If 297TH/s figure I saw becomes average over next 2016 blocks they'll be solved very quickly. Then my estimate would apply for the following set of 2106 blocks.

BTW: hash rate has dropped back to 256TH/s. Someone was testing a lot of capacity.

donate at: 1MdvZGoGBMVZShaoZhgdYBfYrpPicJ8RaW
titomane
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 389



View Profile
July 22, 2013, 10:51:05 AM
 #4091

Now that there is new data on die size, I updated the GH/wafer table:
Code:
wafer(mm)   chip         process(nm)  die(mm^2)   GH/s(per die)      DpW   GH/s(per wafer)
300         KnC              28        441,00          25         128          3200,00
300         bitfury          55         14,44           2           4717          9434,00
300         bfl              65         56,25           4           1167          4668,00
300         asciminer(?)    130         17,50           0,333       3877          1291,04
300         avalon          110         16,13           0,282       4214          1188,35
300         asciminer(?)    130         21,7            0,333       3112          1036,30
(DpW, die per wafer; yield percentage not taken into account)

Die size is less than 336mm2.
I think 18x18mm


Another detail for a better table. As far as I know, 130nm(110nm) are still manufactured based on 200mm wafers. 65nm(55nm) nodes were the first built with 300mm.

Ummmm. KnC is doing a 28nm process and getting only a third of the GH/s per wafer that bitfury is getting at 55nm?
What's more concerning is the 25GH/s per die. Where is the data that says they are using 4 dies per package?



HERE


The slides says that it's only one die, containing 4 self-contained cores (quads).
A more correct table looks like that:
-> KnC die size estimated based on technology scaling
-> Source for Bitfury die size? Seems to be wrong. And chips are specified for 5GH/s per chip (not 2 GH/s)


Code:
wafer(mm)   chip         process(nm)  die(mm^2)   GH/s(per die)      DpW   GH/s(per wafer)
300         KnC              28        120,00           100         589          58904,00
300         bitfury          55         14,44           2           4847          9694,00
300         bfl              65         56,25           4           1244          4976,00
200         asciminer(?)    130         17,50           0,333       1795          597,74
200         avalon          110         16,13           0,282       1947          549,05
200         asciminer(?)    130         21,7            0,333       1447          477,51
(DpW, die per wafer; yield percentage not taken into account)

That is the real 28nm world! Wink


It is more likely that each chip is 4 DIE.
If die has 4cores with total size is 120mm^2 . 20 wafers are more than 1PHs. Why go to work on the second gen?

HyperMega
Full Member
***
Online Online

Activity: 124


View Profile
July 22, 2013, 11:21:01 AM
 #4092

Now that there is new data on die size, I updated the GH/wafer table:
Code:
wafer(mm)   chip         process(nm)  die(mm^2)   GH/s(per die)      DpW   GH/s(per wafer)
300         KnC              28        441,00          25         128          3200,00
300         bitfury          55         14,44           2           4717          9434,00
300         bfl              65         56,25           4           1167          4668,00
300         asciminer(?)    130         17,50           0,333       3877          1291,04
300         avalon          110         16,13           0,282       4214          1188,35
300         asciminer(?)    130         21,7            0,333       3112          1036,30
(DpW, die per wafer; yield percentage not taken into account)

Die size is less than 336mm2.
I think 18x18mm


Another detail for a better table. As far as I know, 130nm(110nm) are still manufactured based on 200mm wafers. 65nm(55nm) nodes were the first built with 300mm.

Ummmm. KnC is doing a 28nm process and getting only a third of the GH/s per wafer that bitfury is getting at 55nm?
What's more concerning is the 25GH/s per die. Where is the data that says they are using 4 dies per package?



HERE


The slides says that it's only one die, containing 4 self-contained cores (quads).
A more correct table looks like that:
-> KnC die size estimated based on technology scaling
-> Source for Bitfury die size? Seems to be wrong. And chips are specified for 5GH/s per chip (not 2 GH/s)


Code:
wafer(mm)   chip         process(nm)  die(mm^2)   GH/s(per die)      DpW   GH/s(per wafer)
300         KnC              28        120,00           100         589          58904,00
300         bitfury          55         14,44           2           4847          9694,00
300         bfl              65         56,25           4           1244          4976,00
200         asciminer(?)    130         17,50           0,333       1795          597,74
200         avalon          110         16,13           0,282       1947          549,05
200         asciminer(?)    130         21,7            0,333       1447          477,51
(DpW, die per wafer; yield percentage not taken into account)

That is the real 28nm world! Wink


It is more likely that each chip is 4 DIE.
If die has 4cores with total size is 120mm^2 . 20 wafers are more than 1PHs. Why go to work on the second gen?

No offence here! Finally is just a question how they dice the wafers. Maybe it would be even wise, to have 4 dies 25 GH/s each in Multi-Chip-Package. But as you said, in sum they probably will have 100 GH/s per 120mm2.

Funny detail, the minimum count of wafers one can order at a foundry is 25 (1 lot)! Wink

It's really a good question, why invest another $1.5M - $2M for a new 28nm full mask set for gen 2 ASIC if you dominate the market with gen 1?


Bitcoinorama
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532



View Profile
July 22, 2013, 11:32:17 AM
 #4093



No offence here! Finally is just a question how they dice the wafers. Maybe it would be even wise, to have 4 dies 25 GH/s each in Multi-Chip-Package. But as you said, in sum they probably will have 100 GH/s per 120mm2.

Funny detail, the minimum count of wafers one can order at a foundry is 25 (1 lot)! Wink

It's really a good question, why invest another $1.5M - $2M for a new 28nm full mask set for gen 2 ASIC if you dominate the market with gen 1?




Because Gen 1 is purely a rough draft to reach an ASIC race goal.

The chips will do their job, albeit be crude and unrefined.

This chip design is all about minimising risk and playing safe whilst delivering in a timeframe that meets ROI for their crowd sourced investors.

It's literally a prototype that future revisions will expand upon, of which there is a lot of room for improvement.

They couldn't achieve this without pre-orders, and what customers want are ASICs and quickly. So that dictates the design priorities.  Likewise the window for opportunities for requesting pre-orders by start-up ASIC manufacturers and resellers closes after this has been achieved, much the same as competition from non-professional engineering firms like Butterfly Labs, as the benchmark will have been set if KnC realises their ambition and will require genuine specialists to compete successfully, therefore securing a more competent and professional mining landscape for all involved in Bitcoin mining hardware...

Also because as Johan and Sam have both said at the Openday Marcus and team are perfectionists which is why they had to be so hard on them with respect to timeframe. September is the priority. Marcus is not happy with his design, it will work, but not optimally as he would like. So after this first run is out the way, they get to let him of his leash...

Make my day! Say thanks if you found me helpful Smiley BTC Address --->
1487ThaKjezGA6SiE8fvGcxbgJJu6XWtZp
erk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


View Profile
July 22, 2013, 11:34:51 AM
 #4094



No offence here! Finally is just a question how they dice the wafers. Maybe it would be even wise, to have 4 dies 25 GH/s each in Multi-Chip-Package. But as you said, in sum they probably will have 100 GH/s per 120mm2.

Funny detail, the minimum count of wafers one can order at a foundry is 25 (1 lot)! Wink

It's really a good question, why invest another $1.5M - $2M for a new 28nm full mask set for gen 2 ASIC if you dominate the market with gen 1?



It may not require new wafers, it might be just an updated product line. eg. 2000watt with 8 chips.

HyperMega
Full Member
***
Online Online

Activity: 124


View Profile
July 22, 2013, 12:22:26 PM
 #4095

Also because as Johan and Sam have both said at the Openday Marcus and team are perfectionists which is why they had to be so hard on them with respect to timeframe. September is the priority. Marcus is not happy with his design, it will work, but not optimally as he would like. So after this first run is out the way, they get to let him of his leash...

Sorry, but my reality looks different. Engineers can't go to their CFOs and say:

"Gen 1 ASIC is working as specified. No major bugs, we can put them into the miners and sell them. But the design is not perfect, please let me do a Gen 2 ASIC."
"Ok, how much would it be?"
"Just another $2M."
"No way! Are you crazy, that are 10 Ferraris!". Wink

Just kidding. But would you invest so much for an gen 2 ASIC without any major technical reason? With respect to efficiency Gen 2 (assuming still in 28nm) will probably have something like 25% more performance while having less power consumption and silicon area (due to design optimization and less margins). Not much compared to the steps in difficulty. Is that another $2M NRE worth?

Developing Gen2 Miners based on Gen1 ASICs (extended product line) would of course make sense commercially and technically.
titomane
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 389



View Profile
July 22, 2013, 12:22:51 PM
 #4096



No offence here! Finally is just a question how they dice the wafers. Maybe it would be even wise, to have 4 dies 25 GH/s each in Multi-Chip-Package. But as you said, in sum they probably will have 100 GH/s per 120mm2.

Funny detail, the minimum count of wafers one can order at a foundry is 25 (1 lot)! Wink

It's really a good question, why invest another $1.5M - $2M for a new 28nm full mask set for gen 2 ASIC if you dominate the market with gen 1?




The hypothesis does not offend ever. Also if you are well explained, like yours so appreciated.

It is important to know ETA chips. It seems that the request was not made ​​in June.

I rely on package change after the 26th June.
https://www.kncminer.com/news/news-22



They say 2046 Balls & now say 2797 Balls
Why and when they decided to change the number of pads?


Ytterbium
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238



View Profile WWW
July 22, 2013, 12:26:46 PM
 #4097


Because Gen 1 is purely a rough draft to reach an ASIC race goal.

The chips will do their job, albeit be crude and unrefined.

This chip design is all about minimising risk and playing safe whilst delivering in a timeframe that meets ROI for their crowd sourced investors.

It's literally a prototype that future revisions will expand upon, of which there is a lot of room for improvement.

That doesn't really make a lot of sense, once the fixed cost is taken care of, what's the per-chip cost of running another set of wafers?  The first run had to be priced in order to cover the (expensive) R&D costs.  Sure, they could tweak the design but they'd need to run another set of masks, pretty expensive.

The other thing to keep in mind is that their design is probably pretty close to optimal.  Outside of die shrink the amount of improvement per chip by tweaks probably isn't that great.

On the other hand, now that R&D is paid for, they can go ahead and lower the cost of their chips.  Their Gen-2 could simply be 2x as many chips, running at a 75% slower clock, which should reduce power demand and thermal issues per chip - remember, the cooler silicon is, the lower the resistance, which means you get increasing returns on power and temperature if you can reduce power (lower energy from lower clock, means lower temperatures, which means even lower energy due to reduced resistance)  

Mota
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 800


View Profile
July 22, 2013, 12:27:33 PM
 #4098



No offence here! Finally is just a question how they dice the wafers. Maybe it would be even wise, to have 4 dies 25 GH/s each in Multi-Chip-Package. But as you said, in sum they probably will have 100 GH/s per 120mm2.

Funny detail, the minimum count of wafers one can order at a foundry is 25 (1 lot)! Wink

It's really a good question, why invest another $1.5M - $2M for a new 28nm full mask set for gen 2 ASIC if you dominate the market with gen 1?




The hypothesis does not offend ever. Also if you are well explained, like yours so appreciated.

It is important to know ETA chips. It seems that the request was not made ​​in June.

I rely on package change after the 26th June.
https://www.kncminer.com/news/news-22



They say 2046 Balls & now say 2797 Balls
Why and when they decided to change the number of pads?


And why do you assume they HAVE to tell you anything? They told us from the beginning that the specs are not written in stone. They were very forthcoming with information up until now, but some people just can't get enough.

Who wants to be a billionaire? Me!
You could help Wink 1Dvja1RFCqxdnYRgjTntwGvdCeUisU4xp
titomane
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 389



View Profile
July 22, 2013, 12:38:17 PM
 #4099


And why do you assume they HAVE to tell you anything? They told us from the beginning that the specs are not written in stone. They were very forthcoming with information up until now, but some people just can't get enough.

Fanboy answer.


I do not assume anything.
Just saying it's a major change in 2046-2797.



Bitcoinorama
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532



View Profile
July 22, 2013, 12:38:44 PM
 #4100

Personally I'd rather they keep schtum about any design details from now until the chips are in hand.

This gives away wayy too much competitive advantage. I think they've said too much as is.

The money's been raised and spent, there is no doubt they are real and actually undertaking this. All these assumptions and demands for clarification serve no purpose for onlookers aside competitng entities.

I'm happy to switch off and watch from the sidelines for all of 4-6 weeks...

Make my day! Say thanks if you found me helpful Smiley BTC Address --->
1487ThaKjezGA6SiE8fvGcxbgJJu6XWtZp
Pages: « 1 ... 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 [205] 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 ... 2138 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!