Radeon VII reveal burries the hopes for trully High-end Next-gen consoles.

Avatar image for loco145
#1 Posted by loco145 (12126 posts) -

AMD at 7nm is here, and at 300W for $700 it only starts to approach the performance of early 2017 PC tech (1080ti). So, what does this means for the PS5/XB3? Well, next gen consoles will reach the performance of ~1070/oc980ti if we are lucky, and the later is 2015 PC tech! Have next gen consoles been pwned already?

Avatar image for loco145
#2 Posted by loco145 (12126 posts) -

Glitchspot!

Avatar image for vfighter
#3 Edited by VFighter (4884 posts) -

So amazing how you nerds can see into the future.

Avatar image for Shewgenja
#4 Edited by Shewgenja (21419 posts) -

As long as the consoles are X86 APU based, they will never ever be able to compete or even compare to high-end PC builds. Only something wacky and exotic could faithfully compete in raw numbers with PC and then you have the issue with developers, largely from the west, not wanting to stray away from their bread and butter. This is just a reality since XBox is a competitor in consoles. You should temper expectations with this reality.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#5 Edited by ronvalencia (27706 posts) -

@loco145 said:

AMD at 7nm is here, and at 300W for $700 it only starts to approach the performance of early 2017 PC tech (1080ti). So, what does this means for the PS5/XB3? Well, next gen consoles will reach the performance of ~1070/oc980ti if we are lucky, and the later is 2015 PC tech! Have next gen consoles been pwned already?

There's another 7nm+ node improvement after the first gen 7nm. Xbox One X used 2nd gen 16 nm improvements after PS4 Pro's 16 nm and both APUs are similar in size i.e.

PS4 Pro's APU

8 CPU Jaguar

40 CU Polaris IP with selected Vega IP e.g. RPM. 36 CU active with 4.2 TFLOPS.

Xbox One X's APU

8 CPU Jaguar with lower latency

44 CU Polaris IP with near Vega ROPS cache design. 40 CU active with 6 TFLOPS. Can reach near GTX 1070 or GTX 980 Ti performance in some games.

X1X ROPS's 2 MB render cache + TMU's 2MB L2 cache ~= Vega 56/64's ROPS/TMU unified 4MB L2 cache.

VII's Vega 20 silicon has proper support for 64bits floating point while mid-range and game console GCNs has garbage support for 64bits floating point. AMD can reduce transistor usage/reduce power consumption by removing 64bits floating point support.

Avatar image for loco145
#6 Edited by loco145 (12126 posts) -

@vfighter said:

So amazing how you needs can see into the future.

Lucky for us, technology is not magic so we can make reasonable predictions of near future products.

Avatar image for goldenelementxl
#7 Posted by GoldenElementXL (3117 posts) -

Yeah, AMD needs to build a 4K capable APU at about 200W. Things aren't looking too great right now. We aren't getting Navi and Zen 2 until later this year on the PC side, so things are looking even worse for a holiday 2020 set of consoles at a sub $400 price-point with capable hardware.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#9 Posted by uninspiredcup (33269 posts) -

Yea but, consoles will have games.

Avatar image for Telekill
#10 Posted by Telekill (8438 posts) -

Funny how Sony devs get more out of 2013 console tech than most devs get out of 2018 PC tech.

Avatar image for dreman999
#11 Posted by dreman999 (11514 posts) -

@Telekill: that is false

Avatar image for jasonofa36
#13 Edited by JasonOfA36 (1265 posts) -
@Telekill said:

Funny how Sony devs get more out of 2013 console tech than most devs get out of 2018 PC tech.

They barely squeezed 60fps and 1080p on the base PS4 lol. It's always Variable 30 FPS and dynamic resolutions up to 1080p.

Avatar image for Telekill
#14 Posted by Telekill (8438 posts) -

Lol. I knew that would get to you PC elitist f**ks.

Lol

Avatar image for rzxv04
#15 Posted by rzxv04 (686 posts) -

@ronvalencia said:
@loco145 said:

AMD at 7nm is here, and at 300W for $700 it only starts to approach the performance of early 2017 PC tech (1080ti). So, what does this means for the PS5/XB3? Well, next gen consoles will reach the performance of ~1070/oc980ti if we are lucky, and the later is 2015 PC tech! Have next gen consoles been pwned already?

There's another 7nm+ node improvement after the first gen 7nm. Xbox One X used 2nd gen 16 nm improvements after PS4 Pro's 16 nm and both APUs are similar in size i.e.

PS4 Pro's APU

8 CPU Jaguar

40 CU Polaris IP with selected Vega IP e.g. RPM. 36 CU active with 4.2 TFLOPS.

Xbox One X's APU

8 CPU Jaguar with lower latency

44 CU Polaris IP with near Vega ROPS cache design. 40 CU active with 6 TFLOPS. Can reach near GTX 1070 or GTX 980 Ti performance in some games.

X1X ROPS's 2 MB render cache + TMU's 2MB L2 cache ~= Vega 56/64's ROPS/TMU unified 4MB L2 cache.

VII's Vega 20 silicon has proper support for 64bits floating point while mid-range and game console GCNs has garbage support for 64bits floating point. AMD can reduce transistor usage/reduce power consumption by removing 64bits floating point support.

Hey ron! You were right about the 128 rops you told me a few months ago.

Avatar image for jasonofa36
#16 Posted by JasonOfA36 (1265 posts) -
@Telekill said:

Lol. I knew that would get to you PC elitist f**ks.

Lol

Lol, admitting to trolling. Nice.

Avatar image for rzxv04
#17 Posted by rzxv04 (686 posts) -

@loco145 said:

AMD at 7nm is here, and at 300W for $700 it only starts to approach the performance of early 2017 PC tech (1080ti). So, what does this means for the PS5/XB3? Well, next gen consoles will reach the performance of ~1070/oc980ti if we are lucky, and the later is 2015 PC tech! Have next gen consoles been pwned already?

I think the general output would be like those in traditional compute but I believe it'll have some of the later features of 2020/2021 GPUs.

Closer to 1070, 1070 Ti, Vega 64, definitely above Vega 56 or equivalent.

I seriously think the next gen systems will have emphasis on better upscaling (DLSS/CB) and maybe dedicated hardware for it that might not be on the RVII.

They might also consider shifting towards more CPU grunt the next round, at least possibly more impressive than this gen's GPU jump towards the next gen's GPUs.

Avatar image for jasonofa36
#18 Posted by JasonOfA36 (1265 posts) -

On topic:

Unless consumers are ready to shell out some serious moolah, consoles will never catch up to PC tech. Not that they need to, though. I never game on the PS4 expecting shit to look as good as what my PC can display.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#19 Edited by ronvalencia (27706 posts) -

@rzxv04 said:
@ronvalencia said:
@loco145 said:

AMD at 7nm is here, and at 300W for $700 it only starts to approach the performance of early 2017 PC tech (1080ti). So, what does this means for the PS5/XB3? Well, next gen consoles will reach the performance of ~1070/oc980ti if we are lucky, and the later is 2015 PC tech! Have next gen consoles been pwned already?

There's another 7nm+ node improvement after the first gen 7nm. Xbox One X used 2nd gen 16 nm improvements after PS4 Pro's 16 nm and both APUs are similar in size i.e.

PS4 Pro's APU

8 CPU Jaguar

40 CU Polaris IP with selected Vega IP e.g. RPM. 36 CU active with 4.2 TFLOPS.

Xbox One X's APU

8 CPU Jaguar with lower latency

44 CU Polaris IP with near Vega ROPS cache design. 40 CU active with 6 TFLOPS. Can reach near GTX 1070 or GTX 980 Ti performance in some games.

X1X ROPS's 2 MB render cache + TMU's 2MB L2 cache ~= Vega 56/64's ROPS/TMU unified 4MB L2 cache.

VII's Vega 20 silicon has proper support for 64bits floating point while mid-range and game console GCNs has garbage support for 64bits floating point. AMD can reduce transistor usage/reduce power consumption by removing 64bits floating point support.

Hey ron! You were right about the 128 rops you told me a few months ago.

128 ROPS is only part of the bottleneck fix. Rasterization (large scale floating point to integer conversion hardware) is another pipeline bottleneck.

RTX 2080 has 6 rasterization (from six GPC) units with 64 ROPS up to +1900 Mhz clock speed

VII has 128 ROPS and seems to be quad rasterization units up to 1800Mhz clock speed. For VII, AMD doubled HBM v2 stack count and doubled the ROPS units. I would be surprise if VII has 8 rasterization units with 128 ROPS which is doubled Vega 64's classic GPU hardware.

Mainstream NAVI 12 has 40 CU, 64 ROPS(?) with 256bit GDDR6 memory. At 1800 Mhz, yields 9.216 TFLOPS. 40 CU is 66 percent from VII's 60 CU.

Avatar image for npiet1
#20 Posted by npiet1 (2231 posts) -

Either the next gen will be a bit more powerful than the x1x with a pro version half way through or they might have tech in development that's not announced yet. Next gen will be more powerful the question is by how much

Avatar image for vaidream45
#21 Posted by Vaidream45 (1882 posts) -

Yeah I’m not really seeing the point in next gen consoles coming out in less than 3 years from now. They will essentially just be refined versions of the Pro and X. No major leaps this coming gen.

Avatar image for Pedro
#22 Posted by Pedro (34423 posts) -

@loco145 said:

AMD at 7nm is here, and at 300W for $700 it only starts to approach the performance of early 2017 PC tech (1080ti). So, what does this means for the PS5/XB3? Well, next gen consoles will reach the performance of ~1070/oc980ti if we are lucky, and the later is 2015 PC tech! Have next gen consoles been pwned already?

"Moore's Law used to grow at 10X every five years [and] 100X every 10 years," Huang said during a Q&A panel with a small group of reporters and analysts at CES 2019. "Right now Moore's Law is growing a few percent every year. Every 10 years maybe only 2X. ... So Moore's Law has finished."

Avatar image for rmpumper
#23 Posted by rmpumper (607 posts) -

Just like I said multiple times on this forum - 7nm will not fix AMD's power draw issues. Here we are: 7nm VII is higher TDP than it's 12nm competitor 2080.

I hope people won't be repeating the RX3080 price/performance/TDP hoax anymore after this announcment.

Avatar image for Gaming-Planet
#24 Edited by Gaming-Planet (19941 posts) -

I'm a bit worried for next gen.

Avatar image for pc_rocks
#25 Edited by PC_Rocks (2247 posts) -

@Telekill said:

Funny how Sony devs get more out of 2013 console tech than most devs get out of 2018 PC tech.

Probabaly in a world where pigs fly but definitely not in this world at sub 30 FPS, 4xAF, almost no AA, almost totally baked lighting, baked physics, no GI, garbage Draw Distance, garbage textures, almost no dynamic shadows, extremely static worlds etc etc. It's 9 years and Sony have yet to make a game with fully dynamic lighting outside of a simple world indie game.

Avatar image for pc_rocks
#26 Edited by PC_Rocks (2247 posts) -

I said it before in one of the threads that next gen consoles will likely be around 1070/1070Ti levels if they were to release in 2020 and I was trolled to heck and back. Seems like I was right unless consolites are willing to shell $600 and even the problem of TDP is there.

Avatar image for djoffer
#27 Posted by djoffer (1310 posts) -

Sigh that is just sad, with the pro and x being a thing I have no idea what the point of next gen will be these ridiculous spec!

Avatar image for Random_Matt
#28 Posted by Random_Matt (4118 posts) -

I'm always amazed at fellow PC gamers insecurities, pathetic really.

Avatar image for rzxv04
#29 Posted by rzxv04 (686 posts) -

@ronvalencia said:
@rzxv04 said:
@ronvalencia said:
@loco145 said:

AMD at 7nm is here, and at 300W for $700 it only starts to approach the performance of early 2017 PC tech (1080ti). So, what does this means for the PS5/XB3? Well, next gen consoles will reach the performance of ~1070/oc980ti if we are lucky, and the later is 2015 PC tech! Have next gen consoles been pwned already?

There's another 7nm+ node improvement after the first gen 7nm. Xbox One X used 2nd gen 16 nm improvements after PS4 Pro's 16 nm and both APUs are similar in size i.e.

PS4 Pro's APU

8 CPU Jaguar

40 CU Polaris IP with selected Vega IP e.g. RPM. 36 CU active with 4.2 TFLOPS.

Xbox One X's APU

8 CPU Jaguar with lower latency

44 CU Polaris IP with near Vega ROPS cache design. 40 CU active with 6 TFLOPS. Can reach near GTX 1070 or GTX 980 Ti performance in some games.

X1X ROPS's 2 MB render cache + TMU's 2MB L2 cache ~= Vega 56/64's ROPS/TMU unified 4MB L2 cache.

VII's Vega 20 silicon has proper support for 64bits floating point while mid-range and game console GCNs has garbage support for 64bits floating point. AMD can reduce transistor usage/reduce power consumption by removing 64bits floating point support.

Hey ron! You were right about the 128 rops you told me a few months ago.

128 ROPS is only part of the bottleneck fix. Rasterization (large scale floating point to integer conversion hardware) is another pipeline bottleneck.

RTX 2080 has 6 rasterization (from six GPC) units with 64 ROPS up to +1900 Mhz clock speed

VII has 128 ROPS and seems to be quad rasterization units up to 1800Mhz clock speed. For VII, AMD doubled HBM v2 stack count and doubled the ROPS units. I would be surprise if VII has 8 rasterization units with 128 ROPS which is doubled Vega 64's classic GPU hardware.

Mainstream NAVI 12 has 40 CU, 64 ROPS(?) with 256bit GDDR6 memory. At 1800 Mhz, yields 9.216 TFLOPS. 40 CU is 66 percent from VII's 60 CU.

Where can we get info of "Rasterization"?

Where did the Navi 12 info come from? Thanks again.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#30 Edited by ronvalencia (27706 posts) -

@rzxv04 said:
@ronvalencia said:

128 ROPS is only part of the bottleneck fix. Rasterization (large scale floating point to integer conversion hardware) is another pipeline bottleneck.

RTX 2080 has 6 rasterization (from six GPC) units with 64 ROPS up to +1900 Mhz clock speed

VII has 128 ROPS and seems to be quad rasterization units up to 1800Mhz clock speed. For VII, AMD doubled HBM v2 stack count and doubled the ROPS units. I would be surprise if VII has 8 rasterization units with 128 ROPS which is doubled Vega 64's classic GPU hardware.

Mainstream NAVI 12 has 40 CU, 64 ROPS(?) with 256bit GDDR6 memory. At 1800 Mhz, yields 9.216 TFLOPS. 40 CU is 66 percent from VII's 60 CU.

Where can we get info of "Rasterization"?

Where did the Navi 12 info come from? Thanks again.

The above diagram is for R9-290X "Hawaii".

Each Shader Engine has a rasterizer hardware unit.

RB includes color ROPS and z-ROPS and these are traditional graphics read/write units.

Hawaii's basic layout was recycled up to Vega series. Vega IP introduces ROPS being connected to L2 cache and triangle binning (early triangle culling).

--------

For NVIDIA... using GTX 1080 example

Each GPC includes Raster Engine.

NVIDIA's "Raster Engine" and AMD's rasterizer are major fix function hardware that separates GPUs from DSP (Digital Signal Processor).

Both Vega 64 and GTX 1080 has similar raster power (ie. quad raster, 64 ROPS read/write units) while GTX 1080 Ti's raster hardware is superior.

RTX 2080 has six GPC, hence six raster engines with 64 ROPS read-write units at +1900 Mhz stealth overclock mode.

VII has unknown rasterizer (I guess four rasterizer setup) with 64 ROPS read-write units at 1800 Mhz

TFLOPS are meaningless since it doesn't include graphics read/write units nor rasterizer hardware scale.

https://wccftech.com/exclusive-first-amd-navi-gpu-will-have-40-cus-and-is-codenamed-navi-12/

"Navi 12" has 40 CUs.

Avatar image for blackhairedhero
#31 Posted by Blackhairedhero (3235 posts) -

@pc_rocks: You're delusional..1070 is barely better then a X1X.

Avatar image for loco145
#32 Posted by loco145 (12126 posts) -

@blackhairedhero said:

@pc_rocks: You're delusional..1070 is barely better then a X1X.

Wrong.

Avatar image for blackhairedhero
#34 Posted by Blackhairedhero (3235 posts) -

@loco145: Yea sorry but that's not a generational jump for consoles. Not even close.

Avatar image for gamecubepad
#35 Posted by gamecubepad (7926 posts) -

I'm expecting 2020 launch with whatever GPU is in AMD's $200-300 tier, but underclocked by 15-20%. Expecting it to be weaker than the RTX 2060, so maybe like a 1070/1070ti.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#36 Edited by ronvalencia (27706 posts) -

@loco145 said:
@blackhairedhero said:

@pc_rocks: You're delusional..1070 is barely better then a X1X.

Wrong.

X1X GPU is not RX-580 e.g. Far Cry 5 results are different from RX-580.

X1X GPU is based on GCN with 44 CU i.e. Hawaii GCN with Polaris IP updates and selected Vega IP. RX-580 does NOT have ROPS with 2MB render cache!

X1X dev kit version has the full 44 CU activated GPU.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#37 Edited by ronvalencia (27706 posts) -

@gamecubepad said:

I'm expecting 2020 launch with whatever GPU is in AMD's $200-300 tier, but underclocked by 15-20%. Expecting it to be weaker than the RTX 2060, so maybe like a 1070/1070ti.

It depends on rasterziation hardware scaling for year 2020 and 7nm+ has 10 percent lower power consumption improvements.

On certain games, X1X's 40 CU GPU can nearly reach GTX 1070 or GTX 980 Ti level while RX-580 remains in the lower tier GPU e.g. Far Cry 5

X1X dev kit with 44 CU is 10 percent faster than X1X retail version. X1X GPU only has 32 ROPS with 2 MB render cache + TMU has 2MB L2 cache while GTX 1070 has TMUs and 64 ROPS with ~2 MB L2 cache unified. 64 ROPS enables any future Xbox One improve games with heavy ROPS read-write usage.

X1X GPU's ROPS improvements are half way house between Vega ROPS and Polaris ROPS.

RX-580's 32 ROPS is missing X1X's 2MB render cache unable to perform software cache tile render optimizations.

X1X's 44 CU GPU area size is ~280 mm2 at 16 nm process tech with near zero FP64 support.

RX-580 36 CU GPU area size is ~232 mm2 at 14 nm process tech with near zero FP64 support.

Avatar image for stereointegrity
#38 Posted by stereointegrity (12148 posts) -

but this gpu is based on Vega.

next gen consoles are using navi (atleast the ps5 is)

Avatar image for goldenelementxl
#39 Posted by GoldenElementXL (3117 posts) -

@ronvalencia: You spent a year+ telling us the Xbox One X GPU was equal to a GTX 1070. (and at one point you started talking 1080) What did we end up with???



Source


Avatar image for pc_rocks
#40 Edited by PC_Rocks (2247 posts) -

@loco145 said:
@blackhairedhero said:

@pc_rocks: You're delusional..1070 is barely better then a X1X.

Wrong.

I wouldn't if I were you. That cows makes his own facts and disregards anything that contradicts with his view of Sony.

On topic, the history shows us this that I already shared in another thread way back:

PS4 - the most powerful console in 2013 was an equivalent of 570 from 2010

PS4 Pro - released in 2016 was still weaker than 970 from 2014

X1X - released in 2017 was barely faster than 970 from 2014 and weaker than 1060

Any console coming in 2020 will match 1070Ti at best regardless of how many AMD's TFLOPS it has and the history will again repeat it self.

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
#41 Posted by DragonfireXZ95 (25239 posts) -
@pc_rocks said:
@loco145 said:
@blackhairedhero said:

@pc_rocks: You're delusional..1070 is barely better then a X1X.

Wrong.

I wouldn't if I were you. That cows makes his own facts and disregards anything that contradicts with his view of Sony.

On topic, the history shows us this that I already shared in another thread way back:

PS4 - the most powerful console in 2013 was an equivalent of 570 from 2010

PS4 Pro - released in 2016 was still weaker than 970 from 2014

X1X - released in 2017 was barely faster than 970 from 2014 and weaker than 1060

Any console coming in 2020 will match 1070Ti at best regardless of how many AMD's TFLOPS it has and the history will again repeat it self.

It'll be interesting to see how the next gen console plays out. Are they going to push 4k and lower settings or do the whole dynamic scaling thing, again? My money is stick with dynamic scaling and push higher settings, but PC will be so far ahead at that point. We might even get the 3080/2180 Ti by then. Ray tracing will be much more ubiquitous, and yeah, it's gonna be interesting.

Avatar image for blackhairedhero
#42 Edited by Blackhairedhero (3235 posts) -

@pc_rocks: An X1X stomps a 970. And you say I make up my own facts?

Avatar image for pc_rocks
#43 Edited by PC_Rocks (2247 posts) -

@loco145:

^ See I told you. And this is not the first time, I have already presented these graphs as well as several DF articles/comparions/benchmarks but the cow has his (alternate reality) reasons...Cow logic: X1X stomps(8%) the 970 but 1070/Ti is barely(50-60%) faster than X1X, LOL.

Avatar image for pc_rocks
#44 Edited by PC_Rocks (2247 posts) -

@DragonfireXZ95 said:
@pc_rocks said:
@loco145 said:
@blackhairedhero said:

@pc_rocks: You're delusional..1070 is barely better then a X1X.

Wrong.

I wouldn't if I were you. That cows makes his own facts and disregards anything that contradicts with his view of Sony.

On topic, the history shows us this that I already shared in another thread way back:

PS4 - the most powerful console in 2013 was an equivalent of 570 from 2010

PS4 Pro - released in 2016 was still weaker than 970 from 2014

X1X - released in 2017 was barely faster than 970 from 2014 and weaker than 1060

Any console coming in 2020 will match 1070Ti at best regardless of how many AMD's TFLOPS it has and the history will again repeat it self.

It'll be interesting to see how the next gen console plays out. Are they going to push 4k and lower settings or do the whole dynamic scaling thing, again? My money is stick with dynamic scaling and push higher settings, but PC will be so far ahead at that point. We might even get the 3080/2180 Ti by then. Ray tracing will be much more ubiquitous, and yeah, it's gonna be interesting.

Yup, I'm expecting the same although my money is on they will push 4K because resolution wars however I'm 100% certain quite a number of games miss the 4K mark just like this gen many games missed 1080p.

On that comparison, I would also like to add that X1X achieved the barely faster feat than 970 by adding $100 to the price a year later than Pro. So there's that too.

Avatar image for blackhairedhero
#45 Edited by Blackhairedhero (3235 posts) -

@pc_rocks: An X1X as a complete console cost $100 more then just a GPU that it still outperforms? Thats a bad thing now?

Lol hermit logic!

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#46 Edited by ronvalencia (27706 posts) -

@goldenelementxl said:

@ronvalencia: You spent a year+ telling us the Xbox One X GPU was equal to a GTX 1070. (and at one point you started talking 1080) What did we end up with???

Source

That's 1080p resolution

1. Gears of War 4 4K sustain 30 fps story mode, GTX 1060 and RX-580 fails to reach X1X's 4K results

2. Forza Motorsport 7 4K wet scenes sustain 60 fps, GTX 1060 and RX-580 fails to reach X1X's results

3. Far Cry 5 4K sustain 30 fps, GTX 1060 and RX-580 fails to reach X1X's results

4. Kill Instinct Season 3 4K nearly sustain 60 fps, GTX 980 Ti or GTX 1070 level. GTX 1060 fails to reach X1X's results.

At lower resolution like 1920x1080p, it's mostly CPU bound.

Avatar image for loco145
#47 Edited by loco145 (12126 posts) -

@ronvalencia:

The 1060 sustains 4k on Gears of War 4 just fine. So does Forza H 4.

I'm sure the others can achieve that too.

Anyway, MS PC ports aren't the best. For third party games, the 1060 and 580 perform even better in comparison.

Avatar image for gamecubepad
#48 Posted by gamecubepad (7926 posts) -

The X1X is indeed faster than a stock 1060 6GB and also a 6TF RX-480 8GB, but when you OC the 1060 to 2GHz and jump the memory clock it beats the X1X in almost everything. Effectively 4K/30fps in Crookback Bog in TW3, where the X1X drops to 1800p. Same with FM7 and FH4. The OC is the kicker.

It should be taken into account the X1X has a shitty Jag CPU, and I'm using Ryzen 1600 @4GHz, no self-respecting PC gamer is going to mix a $300 GPU with a $50 CPU.

Avatar image for zaryia
#49 Posted by Zaryia (8498 posts) -
@Telekill said:

Lol. I knew that would get to you PC elitist f**ks.

Lol

lmao, gets destroyed and then "bu bu I was trolling guyz ;-("

Avatar image for Telekill
#50 Posted by Telekill (8438 posts) -

@zaryia: There was no destroying going on. Go have your diaper baby tantrum somewhere else.