Nintendo Switch is powered by NVIDIA

Page 33 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

poofyhairguy

Lifer
Nov 20, 2005
14,612
318
126
And again, this console seems to be possible to emulate on a smartphone.

And a gaming rig shouldn't need a 1070 and i7 to match a PS4 Pro but it does thanks to console optimizations. Android is not a to the metal OS at all (Vulkan might change some of that), and iOS can't have emulators without jailbreaks.

Hell at worst a Switch is two times as powerful as a Wii U and we don't have full speed Wii U emulators on i7s and 1070s. I don't see how a phone gets there any time soon.
 

caswow

Senior member
Sep 18, 2013
525
136
116
cemu 1.7.0. despite beeing a very young piece of software they made very good progress. games run very smooth.
 

dark zero

Platinum Member
Jun 2, 2015
2,655
138
106
And a gaming rig shouldn't need a 1070 and i7 to match a PS4 Pro but it does thanks to console optimizations. Android is not a to the metal OS at all (Vulkan might change some of that), and iOS can't have emulators without jailbreaks.

Hell at worst a Switch is two times as powerful as a Wii U and we don't have full speed Wii U emulators on i7s and 1070s. I don't see how a phone gets there any time soon.
The reason is simple: the emulator is trying to emulate another architecture, in this case is Power PC.

However in this case is between the same architecture which is ARM.

And the WiiU is not as weak CPU wise, but GPU wise is not a good deal.
 

Sonikku

Lifer
Jun 23, 2005
15,752
4,562
136
And a gaming rig shouldn't need a 1070 and i7 to match a PS4 Pro but it does thanks to console optimizations. Android is not a to the metal OS at all (Vulkan might change some of that), and iOS can't have emulators without jailbreaks.

Hell at worst a Switch is two times as powerful as a Wii U and we don't have full speed Wii U emulators on i7s and 1070s. I don't see how a phone gets there any time soon.
Switch is two times as powerful at worst? Then why doesn't zelda run 60 fps in 720p on the switch? (Or 1080p @ 30fps instead of the 900p it does run at. Wii U runs at 720p)
 

poofyhairguy

Lifer
Nov 20, 2005
14,612
318
126
Switch is two times as powerful at worst? Then why doesn't zelda run 60 fps in 720p on the switch? (Or 1080p @ 30fps instead of the 900p it does run at. Wii U runs at 720p)

Because it was developed all along for the Wii U and got shoe-horned onto the Switch last minute so the console would have a launch title worth buying? That would be my guess. They say they hope to optimize it to 1080p 30 before launch. 60FPS was never in the cards for a Zelda game.

What you expect is exactly what we see with Mario Kart 8 (that comes out months later). Wii U runs it at 720p 60FPS, while the Switch will run it 1080p 60FPS when docked. On paper a Switch is a little more than twice as powerful (more like 3x on the GPU) so it makes sense.
 

SPBHM

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2012
5,058
410
126
Switch is two times as powerful at worst? Then why doesn't zelda run 60 fps in 720p on the switch? (Or 1080p @ 30fps instead of the 900p it does run at. Wii U runs at 720p)

from the footage we have from the Wii U, that version of the game is not hitting 30FPS most of the time under heavy action, it's going for mid 20s or something.
and is the Switch really 2x at everything when running in portable mode? it runs at some pretty low clocks for the GPU side, maybe it would reach 40-50 FPS most of the time and they were not willing to do the sacrifices for the game to run at 60, so 30 it is...
 
Reactions: dark zero

Sonikku

Lifer
Jun 23, 2005
15,752
4,562
136
I'm guessing this game is going to be the pinnacle of what is achievable with the Wii U. I imagine Nintendo scraped every last ounce of power in that system to pull this off.
 
Reactions: dark zero

poofyhairguy

Lifer
Nov 20, 2005
14,612
318
126
I'm guessing this game is going to be the pinnacle of what is achievable with the Wii U. I imagine Nintendo scraped every last ounce of power in that system to pull this off.

It is basically Twilight Princess 2. I will say years out I prefer the GameCube version of that game so that bodes well for the Wii U owners.
 
Reactions: dark zero

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
8,024
6,477
136
After seeing the new Zelda trailer I'm a bit more interested in the Switch. I've been moving away from console gaming and towards PC gaming more and more over the years. There are still a few console-only games or series that I enjoy playing that don't have PC ports, but there are fewer and fewer of those and at least half tend to be on Nintendo's consoles. Maybe what sold it for me the most was that it's portable and can be a 3DS replacement as that's the only current generation "console" that I have.

If I can get a Zelda, Fire Emblem, Dragon Quest, etc. every 6 months that's more than good enough for me.
 

linkgoron

Platinum Member
Mar 9, 2005
2,335
857
136
More and more, I really feel like they should've waited for Parker or contracted some custom Pascal based SOC. The option they took really feels like a bad compromise.

Is there some problem using Parker in a consumer product (i.e., not in a car)? The new Nvidia Shield is also based on Tegra X1.
 
Reactions: dark zero

dark zero

Platinum Member
Jun 2, 2015
2,655
138
106
More and more, I really feel like they should've waited for Parker or contracted some custom Pascal based SOC. The option they took really feels like a bad compromise.

Is there some problem using Parker in a consumer product (i.e., not in a car)? The new Nvidia Shield is also based on Tegra X1.
Agreed, but nVIDIA already had Parker outside... The CPU was around ARM A73 levels and the problem was the ARM A57, which wouls be replaced to down clocked Dual ARM A72/73.

I would see this: Custom Parker SOC:
- 1.5 Ghz ARM Denver 2, docked. 1.0 Ghz when portable.
- 800 Mhz ARM A57, 500 Mhz when portable.

GPU based on Pascal at 850 Mhz docked and 500 Mhz portable.

With that config, even the Snapdragon 835 would end behind GPU wise and would be impossible to emulate.
 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
I usually agree with your posts RS but why on earth are you trying to pass off buying a switch plus 2 extra controllers for a total of 3+ controllers to a ps4/xb1 with 1 controller. That is completely flawed.

Secondly, there's demand for it. The pre-orders, at least here locally, are completely sold out.

Success is a relative term as well. Will this generate an acceptable level of profit for Nintendo? That's the only metric at the end of the day. We don't have a BoM atm but looking at what is included it's not a lot. Software attach rates for first party titles on Nintendo consoles is high. This console's marketing isn't directed at the 15-30 CoD playerbase like ps4/xb1. It's clear they have no desire with competing with Sony/MS.

Frankly all this negativity about the Switch is akin to someone complaining they can't buy pizza at a taco place. You aren't the target audience.

I am not comparing the Switch with 2-3 controllers to a PS4/XB1 with 1 controller. I am saying when purchasing multiple controllers for local co-op, the all-in price keeps increasing - i.e., the more controllers you need, the more the price increases over PS4/XB1. That's not the position a firm wants to be in when tagetting home console users. The Switch costs more but is the least powerful console, has the smallest gaming library, the worst online game perks for online subscription. Don't forget that games on Nintendo consoles take longer to drop in price than on the competing consoles. The overall cost of ownership is higher. Some of PS4's popular games like Ratcher & Clank, Uncharted Collection, Killzone Shadow Fall, Infamous games, God of War 3, The Last of Us, etc. can be purchased for $10-20 (same applied for hundreds of 3rd party titles). Nintendo games are $60 since the console is new. Gamers buying their only console this generation or a 2nd console care about these things.

Some gamers may be comfortable playing 3 hours on the Switch but what if you want to play longer? You pretty much need the Pro Controller. Not everyone wants to use a 9-10 foot charging cable instead of using the wireless Pro controller. As it stands, I would have to shell out $90 Canadian for a Pro Controller when using it in the docked mode. Therefore, for me the console would cost $490 Canadian.

Your other comment about me not being a target market is Nintendo's own fault. I think some of you guys forget why NES/SNES were so popular. Those consoles had a wide variety of 3rd party titles, including mature games too. I am the target audience for Nintendo and owned NES/SNES and N64, but they refuse to cater to consumers who grew up with them. They just care about targeting parents, new generation of 5-18 year olds, and the most hardcore Nintendo loyalists who even bought the Wii/U consoles. With the Switch, they will get decent sales from those gamers who want a handheld.

My point is Nintendo isn't making a console for many of us who enjoyed NES/SNES and N64. They simply don't care about the core market that used to buy their consoles. None of my friends who owned NES->N64 bought GameCube/Wii or Wii U. They aren't interested in the Switch or haven't followed Nintendo and moved to PC/XB/PS eco-system. It's Nintendo who lives in a bubble. They abandoned the home console market 1.5 decades ago and now their excuse is no one buys mature FPS, racing, 3rd person-action adventure, open world or racing games on their consoles. No **** Sherlock! As a gaming company you literally couldn't care less about gamers who grew up with you so what you do is double down on the portable gaming market after Sony leaves the market and hope for the best!

Please tell me why did Nintendo have portable consoles and home consoles in the past, but now it's suddenly not worth it to them to release a traditional home console? Do you honestly believe the target market for a $349-399 Nintendo home console with an RX480/x86 APU is too small? How can MS manage to sell almost 30 million XB1 consoles in barely over 3 years despite a rather weak line-up of 1st party exclusives? Even N64 sold > 30M consoles and it was hampered by expensive and data constrained cartridges.

Everything that's happening to Nintendo is 100% their own fault. How did Nintendo manage to oversee one of the worst selling console generations where 3rd parties abandoned their console, and then they release a 2017 $299 console that for many of us needs a $70 pro controller, but it cannot easily do straight 2013 XB1/PS4 ports since it's again too underpowered?!

Let me put it another way. If Sony/MS, or anyone else released a console 3.5 years after their main competition and it was this expensive and underpowered, it would have gotten obliterated by gamers and the gaming media. Somehow Nintendo gets defended. Nintendo is marketing this primarily as a home console, but how do they expect to compete with PS5/XB2 in what 2-2.5 years from now?

Some of the guys in this thread keep making statements like stop living in a bubble and how you have a need for a portable console. That's great and no one is telling you not to buy the console. It suits your needs fine. But what about 75-80M of XB1/PS4 owners who don't care about handhelds? Should Nintendo simply concede this market? Over the lifetime of XB1/PS4 sales we may see 150M+ in sales from those consoles. That's a huge market of gamers to just ignore. The longer Nintendo stays out of this market, the more they will be viewed as a console for kids and parents. It's going to be even harder to convert XB/PS gamers in 5 years from now since it would mean Nintendo not taking the home console market seriously since that Wii! New generation of teens who never grew up with NES/SNES/N64/GC will go straight towards XB2/PS5/PC.

Nintendo could have easily released the Switch as a 3DS successor and also released a $400 powerful Maxwell/Pascal-based home console and sell games on both systems. The more powerful home console would have a shot of getting 3rd party titles. Even if the home console just sold 20-30M units, it wouldn't directly compete with the Switch. The 1st party development costs of games would be spread across 2 consoles and the profits from game sales would be higher.

Some on you guys aren't seeing this point of view and refuse to even acknowledge it. Nintendo isn't getting the money from many home console gamers not because these gamers aren't the target market, but because Nintendo continues to alienate them with their business strategy. Nintendo is just abandoning this target market. What's going to be after the Switch? Switch 2?

The part about the Switch not needing to sell many units as long as it is profitable is not going to help Nintendo grow its userbase. The new generation of kids are more interested in PC gaming than ever. What happens when the 5-18 years olds gaming on Switch grow up and want more mature gaming experiences and 3rd party games? Nintendo doesn't have a console for them. It's amazing how many of you don't think this matters as long as Nintendo sells you a 3DS successor that hooks up to a TV.

The reasons N64 and GameCube didn't sell that well had a lot to do with Nintendo's decisions of using cartridges and mini-DVDs. The former were costly and both formats were space constrained. With game sizes ballooning to well over 100GB, it's going to be very difficult to do straight XB1/PS4 ports. It means 3rd parties must sell expensive 128GB game cartridges or cut down on game assets or even use older/less advanced generation game engines (say sports games).

As I said already, a lot of gamers on here own multiple consoles and often a PC. There will always be gamers on this forum who don't care one bit for 3rd party games on Nintendo consoles. There will also be gamers who want a portable and the Switch is exactly what they want. There will also be gamers who will buy every Nintendo console for its 1st party games. The problem is that Nintendo is hardly reaching out for more gamers. They are just content on getting these groups and that's it.

But clearly, these gamers must have forgotten or never owned NES/SNES or even N64. Without Rare, N64 would have been a shadow of itself. Even if we stick to the Switch's portability advantage, why shouldn't a gamer want to have a choice to buy 3rd party games to play on the go? Nintendo isn't making it easy to get AAA games like Red Dead Redemption 2, etc. Why should 3rd party developers have to again fight cartridge space limitations and underpowered hardware that makes easy ports unnecessarily difficult and more expensive than they should be? Trying to negatively paint the majority of PS4/XB1 owners as COD and FIFA drones is a weak counter-point. Lots of gamers buy PS4/XB1 and have no interest in COD. Would NES/SNES/N64 even sold as many consoles without 3rd party games? Also, I remember how many of my friends loved Goldeneye on N64 and spent weekends playing it in high school. But I guess now Nintendo is "too cool" for FPS, sports games and racing games? Let's just keep making Mario and Zelda. For someone who loved Goldeneye/Perfect Dark, Mortal Kombat, Streets of Rage/Double Dragon, Conker's Bad Fur Day, and even bought Resident Evil 2 on N64, etc. does it look like I want to play Splatoon 2? Here is Splatoon and Skylanders for 5-17 years olds and if you want Resident Evil 7, sorry, go buy the other consoles or a PC. We don't want you as a customer even though when you were under 18, we loved you hurting our consoles and games! Brilliant strategy!!!

Almost everyone on here defending the Switch was going to buy one anyway. 3DS owners were probably going to buy one as well. Those customers are easy for Nintendo, but given how the Wii U flopped and the sales of New 3DS are nowhere near 3DS's sales, the number of gamers who keep buying Nintendo consoles is getting smaller and smaller. That is very worrying for the console industry as we get even closer to having just 2 major players and an "also ran."

Nintendo is out of touch with the average gamer. Gamers continue to get older and will be gaming for a long time after their early 20s and mid-30s.

"Super Mario Run has been downloaded 90 million times but only 3 million have bought it"
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.vg2...-times-but-only-3-million-have-bought-it/amp/

The fact that the Switch is sold out means nothing from the demand side. Nintendo underproduced. They cannot even get that right or it's another Nintendo moment of making it seem that the demand is high. After the first 12 months of the Switch on the market, we will see just how many gamers want this console.

And now that Nintendo has a partnership with NV, it's going to be very difficult to create a true home console in 2022 with Zen and AMD GPUs, and not piss off NV. So what are we getting after the Switch? Another ARM+NV underpowered Switch 2?

If specs don't matter, how come Scalebound was cancelled on XB1? How come the Wii U died a painful death? Specs 100% matter in the 2nd part of the console's life. Nintendo isn't large enough to release 20-30 AAA 1st party games.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: IEC and Rifter

beginner99

Diamond Member
Jun 2, 2009
5,223
1,598
136
But I guess now Nintendo is "too cool" for FPS, sports games and racing games? Let's just keep making Mario and Zelda. For someone who loved Goldeneye/Perfect Dark, Mortal Kombat, Streets of Rage/Double Dragon, Conker's Bad Fur Day, and even bought Resident Evil 2 on N64, etc. does it look like I want to play Splatoon 2? Here is Splatoon and Skylanders for 5-17 years olds and if you want Resident Evil 7, sorry, go buy the other consoles or a PC

So much this. I actually have a GameCube and no other console (PC...). The Gamecube was pretty solid and I don't own a single typical Nintendo game on it. As far as I remember Mario Kart was released years after so a failure really. However James Bond game was pretty solid and played it a lot, TimeSplitters, Eternal Darkness, Resident Evil 4, Star Wars and so forth. So not just Zelda and diverse Mario games.
 
Reactions: RussianSensation

Headfoot

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2008
4,444
641
126
Honestly for quite some time now the Nintendo console really makes the most sense in a 1 PC 1 Console household, PC for my AAA games at better quality and control than console and Nintendo for nintendo exclusives. That's how I've been running since n64. Nintendo's my side piece.
 

poofyhairguy

Lifer
Nov 20, 2005
14,612
318
126
But what about 75-80M of XB1/PS4 owners who don't care about handhelds? Should Nintendo simply concede this market?

I feel like they did years ago when they sold the Wii instead of a console that could do high def. Every device since then has been behind the market in specs, loaded with childish games, and targeted towards a Japanese audience over an American one. The Nintendo of old that tried to compete with the best has been dead for at least a decade now.

The question isn't if Nintendo can compete with Microsoft or Playstation, they can't. They question is if they can carve out a new niche of "casual but more serious than iOS freemium" market.

I mean hell, Mario is finally on a third party platform but it isn't Xbox or PS4- he is on iOS. If Nintendo wanted to attract hardcore gamers they would have gone to them, instead Super Mario Run and every mobile game after it exists to try an get casual mobile gamers to consider buying a Nintendo platform.

Nintendo really needs to up their game on the tablet usability side to compete there though. Like it needs a web browser, Netflix and maybe HBO Go and it needs them yesterday.
 

moonbogg

Lifer
Jan 8, 2011
10,637
3,095
136
This thing looked pretty lame to me, but then I saw the new Mario Kart. I don't care how weak the hardware is. That Mario Kart game looks STRONG. Damn strong. I really don't get the appeal of the whole portable aspect. Battery life issues are the worst thing on earth to deal with when gaming. I read you can at least play with the controllers plugged in at home. I hope that's at least true. If you have to constantly worry about controllers running out of battery at home, then that just plain sucks.
That Mario Kart though. Mario kart is so much fun, they could release a console that does nothing but play just that game and they'd sell a ton of them (ok maybe not quite, but very close)
 

tential

Diamond Member
May 13, 2008
7,355
642
121
This thing looked pretty lame to me, but then I saw the new Mario Kart. I don't care how weak the hardware is. That Mario Kart game looks STRONG. Damn strong. I really don't get the appeal of the whole portable aspect. Battery life issues are the worst thing on earth to deal with when gaming. I read you can at least play with the controllers plugged in at home. I hope that's at least true. If you have to constantly worry about controllers running out of battery at home, then that just plain sucks.
That Mario Kart though. Mario kart is so much fun, they could release a console that does nothing but play just that game and they'd sell a ton of them (ok maybe not quite, but very close)

The largest reason I'm interested and many people I know are is the portability aspect. It's a console+portable to them. To me as well. The weak hardware....
Nintendo always makes games that run great and feel great to play. So don't care. I mean, it's a completely different style of game. I would prefer SLI Titan XP level of performance. Hence why I want Vega GPU x 2. But that's for realistic immersive games. For something designed like this.. Nintendo always makes it work. I can't name a Nintendo game I put down because it ran poorly. I never knew how low FPS Ocarina was until recently.
 

Sonikku

Lifer
Jun 23, 2005
15,752
4,562
136
This thing looked pretty lame to me, but then I saw the new Mario Kart. I don't care how weak the hardware is. That Mario Kart game looks STRONG. Damn strong. I really don't get the appeal of the whole portable aspect. Battery life issues are the worst thing on earth to deal with when gaming. I read you can at least play with the controllers plugged in at home. I hope that's at least true. If you have to constantly worry about controllers running out of battery at home, then that just plain sucks.
That Mario Kart though. Mario kart is so much fun, they could release a console that does nothing but play just that game and they'd sell a ton of them (ok maybe not quite, but very close)
My criticisms of the Switch and Nintendo's behavior have been numerous. But let me tell you something.

First Zelda cried. Then I cried. Then I became $400 poorer. God damnit Nintendo.
 

dark zero

Platinum Member
Jun 2, 2015
2,655
138
106
I've checked the specs and I tought that the Nintendo Switch used a variant to the Tegra X1 which has ARM A53 cores. Sadly I see that is a Quad ARM A57 SOC and that would easen a LOT the emulation of this device.

Still, I can see that the only CPU capable to emulate the device without any issue is the Snapdragon 820 and then the Kirin 960 and the Snapdragon 653 could do the job too.
 

moonbogg

Lifer
Jan 8, 2011
10,637
3,095
136
I just did some more reading, and holy crap. They are releasing this thing with no games. None are included. You are allowed to buy Zelda, some boxing game and a few tech demos, all of which you have to pay high prices for. Oh man, they really should have had a Mario game included with launch.
When I got my N64, I had Mario to play and that game all by itself was so good I was happy until I got more games later. Zelda is a good brand, but this is Nintendo, and Nintendo needs a Mario game. Its going to be 9 months before their traditional Mario game comes out and who knows when Mario kart is coming out.
I can't imagine people buying this unless they are looking forward to that Zelda game. This looks more like a holiday 2017 console to think about buying.
I got my Mario fix taken care of with my Raspberry pie 3 for now. I guess I'll have to wait another year before Nintendo decides to release some actual Nintendo games for this thing. Maybe then I will consider one.
 

poofyhairguy

Lifer
Nov 20, 2005
14,612
318
126
That's not too bad of a wait I suppose. Rainbow road looks sick.

The real change is it will have the old school battle mode (that can be played online against others), complete with music from the original and a battle track lifted right out of the original.

My response to Nintendo?

 

moonbogg

Lifer
Jan 8, 2011
10,637
3,095
136
Oh man I loved battle mode from the SNES days. I played that with friends after school and we laughed our asses CLEAN OFF playing that game. They would shoot their shells at me and I would bounce like a mad man and evade them. I'd bounce repeatedly and say "wee wee wee" as I bounced. The shells missed me and hit the wall and they'd say, "Stop weeing your way out of it. Not fair"
 
Reactions: Headfoot

poofyhairguy

Lifer
Nov 20, 2005
14,612
318
126
Nintendo just can't get out of its own way:

"In our view, the Nintendo 3DS and the Nintendo Switch are going to live side-by-side," Nintendo of America President Reggie Fils-Aime told Wired in a recent interview. "They’re going to coexist just fine. We’ve done this before, managing two different systems."

While it's definitely true that Nintendo has managed two (or more) systems at the same time in the past, the company does not usually maintain two portable systems concurrently for very long. Back in 2004, for instance, Nintendo revealed the Nintendo DS as a "third pillar" in its hardware line up, alongside the existing Game Boy Advance and GameCube platforms.

While Nintendo would technically support the Game Boy Advance by printing new games through 2008 and producing hardware through 2010, internal and external attention for the system dried up quickly as the DS quickly put an end to the long-running Game Boy line.

This time, however, Fils-Aime told Wired that "3DS has a long life in front of it," and that Nintendo sees the Switch as "at its heart, it’s a home console that you can take with you on the go." That suggests the 3DS will continue to be the place Nintendo funnels games designed to be played portably, while the Switch gets games more tailored to the TV experience.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/01/nintendo-says-switch-wont-replace-the-3ds/
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |