|
Nvideas rsx pipelines vs 360 ATI pipelines 360 core vs ps3 cell
|
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
19. December 2005 @ 12:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
Sony Vaio computers beat M$ computers. But the prices are too pricy, but everywhere i go, they're always out of stock.
>_<
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
20. December 2005 @ 08:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
ill be frank, kookoo u dont know what u on about again.
Graphics is DIRECTLY linked to FRAMERATE and performance.
The 360 will have a better framerate because the xenon is the most powerful card (card power = more FPS), if u lecture this you have just contradicted urself BIG TIME.
because it has more power the game developers can TUNE UP the ingame settings making it look much nicer. SO THE GRAPHCIS WILL BE BETTER.
THE ONLY settings the actual card affects on IMAGE quality (graphics) is AA and Anisotropic filtering. the rest is the game's engine.
the Xenon WILL HAVE better graphical quality because it can have AA (adaptive) with HDR lighting at the SAME TIME, the RSX CANT so why do you say the RSX will have better quality graphics. IT WONT.
it will have less performance and lesser quality AA/AF. ALL THE other graphics ARE TO DO WITH THE GAME. you dont even know what you are saying kookoo.
if you took an old card and a brand new one and played the same game on each, and u turned all the ingame setings onto FULL and took screen shots of BOTH graphics cards, the GRAPHIC QUALITY will be the SAME, the differenace is that the new card can actually *play* the game at those settings, the old one cant at all.
so do that with the RSX and the Xenon, the image quality (if you dont have AA and AF or HDR on) will be the EXACT SAME on both. but the Xenon will have a higher framerate when playing on those settings because its a faster (more powerful) card, it has better performance.
If you turnded on AA/AF and HDR the ATI card will have better graphical screen shots/ingame graphics because it can have AA with HDR lighting. KOOKOO fails to REALISE THAT THOUGH DOESNT HE. he JUST IGNORES THE HDR with AA PART, BUT ITS IMPORTANT, this PROVES that Xenon has better ingame graphics with better framerates (even though DHR with AA will run slower, but it can use its extra FPS over the RSX for powering those awsome looking graphics) so the Xenon can eother have same looking graphics and better performance than RSX, or better looking graphics and same framerate as RSX (when saying graphics im on about AA/AF and HDR lighting). both are better than what the RSX has to offer.
kookoo when i went on about the cards architecture (memory architecture is NOT the RAM you fool, which you thought it was) i never said shit about the RAM, as it was irrelevant. even faster RAM doesnt matter kookoo, the Xenon still has better overall power (performance) to power better looking graphics.
the Architecture is VERY IMPORTANT too, so why the hell did you say that it doesnt matter (then referring to your WRONG memory take, as you thought it was RAM). IT DOES.
when talking about the revolution i meant that they can use the new design/type of cards to HELP with future cards, the revolution starts with them. (NOT nintendo's console by the way,lol)
your last post aimed at me, showed me CLEARLY that you dont know about the AA/AF HDR thing, which are the 3 MOST IMPORTANT things (out of 4 - the last is resolution, but thats sorted with HDTV) to do with graphics. they are the only main things that the actual card affects the quality of how they look. and as explained above Xenon comes out on top with them, therefore winning the graphical quality war too.
SO NOW why do you still BELIEVE the RSX is better. ITS NOT. do you have problems failing to engage your brain properly to UNDERSTAND that. Xenon *IS* better.
if you still think RSX is better then ur demented.
Don't judge the consoles by specs, more isnt always better, espec in PS3 specs.i know the truth, ask if u wanna know.......
Do not compete without valid correct technicality on your terms of the argument.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 20. December 2005 @ 08:40
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
20. December 2005 @ 09:39 |
Link to this message
|
|
to last poster. the cell can to many more tsks at once, just a bit less in the output by like nothing. the vid card lso renders vertexes and all the polygons, shades, lights and all that too. the rsx is more powerful in graphics. the load times on a ps3 will be insane to tht of 360 because of the mega speed ram and the blueray with a read of like 36gbs. now on top of that, the cell can run, as i said, many more things at one time with its 7 spes all going at 3.2ghz. sure it has less threads but the 360 games wont even be using all of those threads even close to to end of its life. even the top pc's today use no more than two on average. 3 if you payed like 3287623 dollars. the performance can be better,over time , but the graphics no.
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
20. December 2005 @ 10:12 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
with HDR lighting at the SAME TIME, the RSX CANT so why do you say the RSX will have better quality graphics
Truthman, you have no clue what you are talking about, you just stated what the ati xenos has. nvidea didnt release that type of information. I'm simply just going to let you make a fool of your self. Ill come back to this post.
Your just thinking, oh the geforce 7800 cant have aa and hdr enabled. You would think that the rsx wont. No proofe. Anyways, with both enabled you would only recieve 10% better graphics. So 10% better opperations. so 1.1x96=105.6.
I have read many articles where the geforce 7800 was compaired when hdr only enabled compaired to a spec equivelent ati card. the ati was 10% better in graphics in some games. but the two cards were equivelent in specs. So now rsx being way more powerfull, it wont mattter.
Your confueing this all up. HDR AND aa enabled on the xenos would only affect the ati cenos graphically. It wont be 10% than the rsx because the rsx is more powerfull than the ati xenos. RSX being more than 10% mroe powerfull.
>_<
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 20. December 2005 @ 11:28
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
21. December 2005 @ 01:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
kookoo wont you understand, THE GRAPHICS ARE THE GAME's ENGINE.
the GPU just renders them. i can tell you are getting confused so you are accusing me of being confused. im about as Unconfused as you can get.
10% better graphics is A LOT did you know. not just a tid bit.
YOU even said that the ATI card will have more performance than the RSX, that CAME DIRECTLY FROM YOUR mouth (i already knew that). But yet you say that ITS WEAKER than the RSX. DUDE that doesnt MAKE ANY SENSE WHATSOEVER. If its faster (better performance) then ITS MORE POWERFUL, unless you have very stupid definations of power.
power IS speed. not graphics.
and as i said, THE ONLY GRAPHICS THE CARD AFFECTS THE QUALITY OF IS AA/AF/HDR. both RSX and ATI can have Highquality AF which is 16x AF with more enchancements, good eh for both PS3 and 360. but ATI card is better with AA because it has got adaptive AA and ONLY IT can have AA with HDR enabled and have it working properly.
regardeless both 360 Xenon and RSX will kick the sh*t out of anygames that stand in front of them. especially when games become multi-threaded because the processor can step in to the equation more, plus developers can enchance ingame physic effects when games are multi-threaded as all cores can work at once on the game, (so it will look better and still run MUCH faster than before with single threaded games)
ps. you will be glad to know kookoo that the 7800GTX is MUCH weaker than the RSX, the RSX is a generation above the new GTX512. that reasons dude, he is so wrong about the RSX 7800 thing, its much beter than the 7800.
saying that the Xenon is MUCH better than the new X1800XT PE (its not even out yet that) the Xenon is 1 generation above it. they are 8th generation cards, the BRAND NEW BEST PC CARDS are 7th Generation.
so the consoles are SH*T HOT!!!
*lets try to slow the argument now its getting WAY to repetitive* lets just finish it quick (after your next post countering mine - as i know you will, lol).
lets talk about what the consoles CAN do and how fast they will play etc. regardless of which is faster or has better quality graphical enchancements
Don't judge the consoles by specs, more isnt always better, espec in PS3 specs.i know the truth, ask if u wanna know.......
Do not compete without valid correct technicality on your terms of the argument.
|
|
zelda64
Senior Member
|
21. December 2005 @ 02:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
TruthMan seeing as we are on the discusion now of how well games will perform, Please go and download 'Gears of War' on www.xbox360news.com. It has the best in-game graphics you have ever set your eyes on/
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
21. December 2005 @ 02:42 |
Link to this message
|
Rsx beats xenos in power. I dont know what the hell you are saying.
Rsx better clock speed
better core
ops
ect
Quote:
AA because it has got adaptive AA and ONLY IT can have AA with HDR enabled and have it working properly.
Having hdr enabled only increases the graphics from 5-10% but then decreases performance.
This is how much graphics improve for xenos with hdr enabeld.
10%+96=106sops (still lower than rsx)
10%of500=550(equivalent)
Not to mention most game developers are avoiding having HDR and AA enabled at the same time.
I dont know how the hell you think the rsx is less powerfull when i have already proved it to be more powerfull.
"And the ONLY it" part. What are you talking about? Nvidea hasnt released if it will or will not have adapted AA. You got no clue if it will or will not, why are you making assumptions?
From anandtech
"At 720p, the G70 is entirely CPU bound in just about every game we?ve tested, so the RSX should have no problems running at 720p with 4X AA enabled, just like the 360?s Xenos GPU. At 1080p, the G70 is still CPU bound in a number of situations, so it is quite possible for RSX to actually run just fine at 1080p which should provide for some excellent image quality."
Proves you more wrong.
>_<
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. December 2005 @ 14:49
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
21. December 2005 @ 16:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
Amd just before you start blabering about Performing AA and hdr.
As you know the ps2 CPU did the AA, while the GPU did HDR ect.
Your going to talk about memory bandwith. I know you will.
the
The 360 has the ebram doing the AA work.Which enables the 360 to have AA and HDR enabled at the same time.
Its opposite for the ps3, As you know ps2 also had aa and HDR enabled.
Ps3 has 8 spe's in total. One of these spe's can easily do the work for AA, and stil have power to spare.
Now we have bandwith come to play.
Lets take this for example.
Lets say a game takes 10gb\s bandwith
xbox360 has 15gb\s bandwith left. And ps3 has 22.4gb bandwith left.
AA does not take 22.4 gb of bandwith.(xenos ati would have to share its bandwith with the CPU, which is why the 360's memory is bad.)
Which enables AA and HDR.
ps3 does somthing similar, instead of using edram, the ps3 uses its xdr ram, to make the ps3 cell to do the AA work. And since the memories speed is 3.2ghz, the ram is still alote usefull.
and then writing the frame buffer to XDR memory, allowing Cell to do the AA.
Which just proves you wrong that you saying that the ps3 cannot do AA and HDR enabled both.
5gb of bandwith is enought for AA. Still leaves ps3 with more bandwith. Xbox360 edram is doing the AA.
RSX better than Xenos ATI, get over it.
>_<
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. December 2005 @ 17:34
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
21. December 2005 @ 21:20 |
Link to this message
|
|
right on the dot again, kookoo
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. December 2005 @ 10:15 |
Link to this message
|
Truthman, dont even think about saying that the 360's 10mb of edram is more powerfull than a 3.2ghz spe.
The 10mb edram does the AA for xbox360, while the ati xenos does the hdr.
Game developers have the choice to enable both hdr and aa in there games. Some knnow that it has cons along with it. EX: the worsening of performance.
Got any more things i can counter for you?
Quote:
YOU even said that the ATI card will have more performance than the RSX, that CAME DIRECTLY FROM YOUR mouth
No, i said that the 360 cpu has better performanec you fool. Stop putting things in my mouth. maybe you should read my posts more properly.
Dont even think to say that the CPU cannot do addaptive AA, the ps2 did.
>_<
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. December 2005 @ 10:19
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
23. December 2005 @ 03:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
dude MORE SOPS DONT makie the graphcis better, WTF r u on about, u really think they do dont you. and ive said it FKING MILLIUONS OF TIMES, BETTER CLOCKSPEED DOESNT MEAN EVERYTHING FFS.
you can only compare clockspeeds for the same family of things, like with processsors, someone comparing AMD clockspeeds in direct comparison to intel ones then deciding that intel's are faster for everything because of their much better clcokspeed, IS SO WRONG, YOU CANT TO THAT UNLESS YOU ARE A MUPPET (not aimed at you that one, im speaking in general).
AMD processors are faster in games than intel ones but they have a lower clockspeed, the very same principle applies to the XENON and the RSX, the Xenon has a lower core speed because it doesnt need a higher one, but the RSX does, because if has got less of other things like good parallel processing, 64 bit memory architecture etc.
and about HDR you DO NOT add 10% to shader ops calculations you idiot, you made out the *incorrect* point that the 10% better graphcis will have a 10% performance increase, you fish barrel totally wrong. you have lost the plot totally here.
this is boring, i hate replying to this argument its too much of the same. End of!
lets be positive about the consoles. ps. 360 rulez! PS3 is great but not as great.
Don't judge the consoles by specs, more isnt always better, espec in PS3 specs.i know the truth, ask if u wanna know.......
Do not compete without valid correct technicality on your terms of the argument.
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
23. December 2005 @ 08:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ha, you avoided the HDR + AA on the ps3. (avoiding that you were wrong)
PS, you an "idiot" for saying that the ati xenos is like an amd64 processor. GPU's and processors are different.
The performance goes down with hdr and aa enabled. The graphics get 10% greater, but performance goes way down. fool, games will run slower with hdr+aa on. Thats why game developers avoid that.
>_<
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. December 2005 @ 21:28
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
23. December 2005 @ 17:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
Now, for the conclusion
I'm going to introduce how everything on the Cell processor works.
we have these current specs for the ps3 cell
-Cell Processor
-Power PC-base core@3.2ghz
-7xSPE @3.2ghz
-7x128b 128 SIMD GPRS
-1 out of 8 SPE's reserved to render tflops @218GFLOPS
-7x256kb SRAM for each SPE
Now what do we know from this information?
-7 synergistic Processing Elements @ 3.2ghz (spe)
-7x 128bit vector processors(SIMD)
-Each spe has 256kb of SRAM
-Total GFLOPS is 218(2.18TFLOPS)
What else do we know?
SPE's quickly process several pieces of data at once.
SIMD stands for Single Instruction, Multiple Data
Good now we got the base specs for the cell, explained clearly.
Now for the xbox360.
-Three symmetrical cores running at 3.2 GHz each
-Two hardware threads per core; six hardware threads total
-One VMX-128 vector unit per core; three total
-128 VMX-128 registers per hardware thread
-1 MB L2 cache
What do we know from this?
-There are three cores(processors) running at 3.2ghz each.
-6 threads in total
-Each core has 3x-128 vector unit
-Each core has 6x-128 vector registers per thread
-1MB of L2 Cache.
Now we have the Base specs for both CPU's.
What can we compare?
Most people just look at the numbers, and say oh look, this number is higher than this number. So this one is better. No, you have to calculate what is given to you.
So lets calculate everything about the Cell
SPE part is simple you can do that.
All we can do right now is the cache
so
512+(7x256kb)=512+1792=2304=2.304mb
l2 cache SRAM=1792kb
L2cache-512kb
You know now that ps3's cache beats 360's L2Cache by alote
This means each spe can handle numbers very well. And each SPE can process information to each SPE very quickly.
Now how does this affect vectors?
Well the cell has 7x128b vector units.
Now to look at the vectors, each vector is receiving information very quickly. "Vector processors are designed to quickly process several pieces of data at once." You now know that the cell is a very fast CPU.
360 CPU
-1mb of L2 cache(smaller than ps3's
-3 128 vector units
Now you can obviously tell, if you do the operations that the cell is faster, and better than the 360.
1mb speed through each vector
-3vectors
Done, Cell is better than 360 CPU. RSx (reality synthesizer>ATI xenon)...RSX is better, why? It is explained above.
>_<
|
|
zelda64
Senior Member
|
23. December 2005 @ 18:03 |
Link to this message
|
|
So you have taken a look at a set of figure's on technical specification's. Well done. So one number beats another. This does not fully prove to me how much better the PS3 is over the 360.
I know one thing for certain. Big numbers dont nessaseraly mean a better product. I want developers and non-biased technicians to give me thier views and results. With this I strongly believe the PS3 will not have as big a gap in power over the 360 or even they both will be quite equal in power.
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
23. December 2005 @ 18:39 |
Link to this message
|
|
no it doesnt, it would be like compairing apples and oranges.
Like amd and intell
mac, linux and windows
each have its up and downs. While 360 will do bad in one thing, it can do good in another. same thing for ps3
>_<
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
23. December 2005 @ 18:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
i was never quite interested in linux till my hacking days.
its not much of apples and oranges, but more over granny smith and red delicious. one sweet and the other sour. subtle differences that only matter to certain eaters. same thing applies here. ps3 will be more powerful graphically and in processing large chuncks faster than hell. the 360 will be nice over all and have a good online system set up. apples and orangest are almost not way related. while granny smith and red delicious are the same base product but with little differences in certain areas.
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
23. December 2005 @ 19:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
anubis66 , just leave it at apples and bannanas, apples and oranges.
Linux mac windows
And nothing else.
linux has many users in Japan. Lol, whatever though.
>_<
|
|
zelda64
Senior Member
|
23. December 2005 @ 19:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well I am glad you guys have helped me out here with my gorcery shopping. But getting back to the PS3 and 360 disscusion.
First, Kookoo what do you mean by 360 will excell in some areas while PS3 will excell in other's. So far I have seen points made by you suggesting PS3 will excell in nearly everything while 360 will excell in basically nothing.
Moving onto Linux. I have never tried Linux so I cant comment. All I can say is that Window's is a the most common OS used on computers and then you have your apple OS's which I must say are very good. I would like for Linux to get more of a foot hold in the computer world to take some of the monopoly away form M$ but the fact remains that Windows is the most popular and common OS. This I see as an advantage with the 360 as it is compatible with any computer using a Window's OS so it alows people to stream music, video's and other forms of entertainment into thier living room.
It will be interesting to see Sony's Linux OS in January and how it will compare in functions to the 360.
|
|
KainX
Suspended permanently
|
23. December 2005 @ 19:34 |
Link to this message
|
|
Beleive me LINUX IS FAR BETTER THAN WINDOWS
ITS FREE AND THERES LESS VIRUSES
and thinks of this, the ps3 should have downloadable programs for it then
currently have these consoles
Gamecube
Xbox
Ps2
Dreamcast
Phantom
Gba
psp
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 23. December 2005 @ 19:35
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
23. December 2005 @ 20:18 |
Link to this message
|
Zelda, i do remember posting that the 360 will have a bunch of general performance did i not? 360 wil have great online play aswell.
And yea, i used to have linux when i was small. I remember that it was fun. Lol.
The style of linux was really nice aswell.
See linux looks kind of better than windows aswell. Both look similar, but i really want linux right now:D lol
http://omicron.homeip.net/pictures/Screenshots/Morlenxus_-_Linux_...
Now that looks far better than windows os
Ill take the big one off once everyone takes a look at it.
>_<
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 24. December 2005 @ 07:24
|
|
zelda64
Senior Member
|
23. December 2005 @ 20:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
Linux looks ok from the pictures and somthing I would like to give a try. I wasnt doubting anyone to Linux as an OS and when I tryed the new Apple OS I was impressed with that too.
I will have a look into Linux when I go and buy a new computer (when I have the money).
Just one thing to point out. No one knows what the functions and facilities of the PS3 are yet until January. This Linux OS system seems good but I cant assosiate this with the PS3 yet.
One more point. I dont see Sony using the OS as its used on a computer. You have to remember that the PS3 is not a computer but a games machine with multimedia capabilities. If Sony do deside on making the PS3 as a computer I cant see many people buying it for that reason and for that matter the particular advantage it will have over computers.
I think Sony should make a similar system to Microsoft in order for it to do well in the function/multimedia area of the console. Most people who are buying the next generation of console are buying it for improved power and game quality, better multimedia functions with DVD', Music etc and for internet gameplay. Therefore a simple system has to be created for people to turn the console on and simply navigat through the basic options. When it comes to a fully functional OS, people will be using thier computer.
I cant see Sony not relizing what I have just said so I wouldnt be suprised to see Sony releasing the PS3 with a simple general performance system, similar to the 360 that is constructed through linux.
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
24. December 2005 @ 04:15 |
Link to this message
|
|
kookoo i NEVER said that the Xenon WAS LIKE AN AMD64 Processor you fish. they are totally DIFFERENT.
i was using the processors as an example of a SIMILAR SITUATION (xenon and RSX) thats what i said, you clearly didnt understand what i meant, you have trouble understanding examples. when someone says E.g. IT DOESNT MEAN THE ACTUAL thing, its AN EXAMPLE of SOMETHING SIMILAR, JEES you need to pick up MORE KOOKOO.
about your specs thing, you CLEARLY DO NOT KNOW what L2 CACHE is for do you. the cache for each SPE, well you DONT add it all together, you are clearly following the wrong principle. L2 cache is NEEDED for the DAM THINGS to work, it is used to fill all the stages of the pipelines (in the processor). you should ONLY count cache Per thing, you NEVER ADD it together EVER. each SPE has 256MB of it, each ONLY has 256MB not 256+256+256 etc. they can only utilise what they7 each have and 256MB is SH*T, that is apsolutely sod all. nothing to boast about, but they arnt proper processors so it doesnt matter too much.
and L2 CACHE doesnt DO ANY CALCULATIONS AT ALL. all L2 cache is, is the PLACE where all the calculations are done. so each SPE can only do its calcs in ONLY 256MB of space, which is quite shite to be right.
you clearly boast about something you think is good when you are evidently totally wrong (again!).
360 1MB is MUCH better as each core has a bigger space to work in than the PS3's puny SPE's. its the CACHE PER CORE/SOE you count, NOT ALL TOGETHER FFS. there is still some shit u dont know.
and about the RSX, i have COUNTLESSly proced you wrong DOZENS OF TIMES, are u a retard or something, do you have trouble facing facts, it seems you have a VERY BIG PROBLEMING getting to grips that the Xenon GPU IS BETTER than the RSX, cant you take it, it is heartbraking or something. u are VERY CLOSED minded, FACT THAT!
THE XENON GPU+CPU are BETTER THAN THE PS3's AS WEVE EXPLAINED MANYTIMES.
kookoo also you are a big time hypocrit, and you are a self contradictor, you say things then do them urself and you say things and then say something against what you just said, a self contradictor and a hypocrit, stop being like that, + stubborn.
face the F-ING trith FFS, the PS3 is very verty powerful but not as powerful as the 360, come to terms with it, stop being stubborn, i want you to know the truth about what is the muct powerful console.
360, DO NOT ACT LIKE A SMART ARSE like you have dont many times, showing points and shit wthat are totally invalid and mega WRONG and claim something out of it.
DONT try to counter stuff and say oooo lookie PS3 is better because of L2 cache being added together etc, (cos its WAY WAY WRONG as i said above).just end it NOW.
END OF! (the war)
Don't judge the consoles by specs, more isnt always better, espec in PS3 specs.i know the truth, ask if u wanna know.......
Do not compete without valid correct technicality on your terms of the argument.
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
24. December 2005 @ 08:48 |
Link to this message
|
Fool, you do add up cache, just like you add up memory.
360's 1mb of l2 cache is nothing, and each core doesnt have 1mb of cache, that 1 mb of cache is total.
The rsx is better, i just proved you taht ps3 can have aa and hdr. And you avoided it. Because you are wrong.
And if you are going to keep cussing, just dont post on my thread ever again. Nxt time you do, i will report you.
There like compairing apples and oranges. So just shutup allready.
And if you read my post you would of read this
Quote:
You know now that ps3's cache beats 360's L2Cache by alote
This means each spe can handle numbers very well. And each SPE can process information to each SPE very quickly.
fool, i didnt say that the cache calculates the numbers
>_<
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 24. December 2005 @ 10:49
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
24. December 2005 @ 11:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
why is afterdawn not sending me update emails!!!?!? : (
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
24. December 2005 @ 12:30 |
Link to this message
|
|
I seriosly dont know. I cant even report abuse, compose pm, im not recieving updates. Afterdawn is goign through many problems at the moment. It feels bad that when I instulted someone, i got told off by a mod, had a sig big, told off by a mod. Had cuss word in my sig, got bann. But when i am reading all these posts, so many people are insulting other people(truthman), people have long sigs. And are breaking the rules constantly. But no mod bann or told them off. Somehow thay bann my old account.
Ps:I feel bad when i told reasons to stop cussing truthman, but then truthman cusses me? WTF is that? Truthman, your a fool. You got no idea how much i hate you.
N e ways didnt mean to be offtopic.
>_<
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 24. December 2005 @ 12:30
|
