Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Universal Processor???

PhenomXII
 Share

Summary

 I keep up with tech news on a pretty regular basis. Sometimes coming across articles or presentations before I see that the wonderful team here at LTT have been busily preparing videos on such topics. However, this article is about a product that seems very much in it's infancy yet so advanced they can can make some pretty bold claims.

 

Quotes

Quote

"...Prodigy will be faster than Intel’s Xeon but consume one-tenth the power. It will have 4× lower cost of ownership (TCO) than current server processors. It will occupy less silicon than an ARM design. It will perform both AI and hyperscale server workloads with equal aplomb. A single version of the chip will scale between 16 and 128 cores, all in the same 6400-ball package."

 

My thoughts

 At worst, it's an interesting idea. At best best, it could be revolutionizing for the AI advancement field let alone the possibility of powerful server architecture that, who knows, may compete with the two major teams in various applications in the very near future. I think it may warrant further research.

 

Sources

 https://www.eejournal.com/article/are-you-ready-to-lay-your-hands-on-the-worlds-first-universal-processor/ original article that caught my eye

 

https://www.tachyum.com/ company's homepage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

With the claims as "ready to tape out later this year" and showing nothing else but an FPGA I doubt this is more than just a bait for investors... but I'll give them a benefit of a doubt.

 

But still... everything I've seen so far looks so far fetched it's kinda weird. The PR is also very weird.

 

image.thumb.png.3b547e6464e9c5a6c2c6c880afd506f6.pngimage.thumb.png.629e77ae5e1200a04243e0a4c07d9ad2.png

 

This showcase reminds me of this

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Intel already try this 'general purpose computing'  on their 'original' GPUs?  I'm sure all those were were big banks of Atom cores all scaled up

 With all the Trolls, Try Hards, Noobs and Weirdos around here you'd think i'd find SOMEWHERE to fit in!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah ... I've learned to be very skeptical about marketing messages like those. 

 

For example, let me break down that text for you. 

 

"...Prodigy will be faster than Intel’s Xeon but consume one-tenth the power. It will have 4× lower cost of ownership (TCO) than current server processors. It will occupy less silicon than an ARM design. It will perform both AI and hyperscale server workloads with equal aplomb. A single version of the chip will scale between 16 and 128 cores, all in the same 6400-ball package."

 

...Prodigy will be faster than Intel’s Xeon but consume one-tenth the power.

 

Faster at what? They're not saying (or they're intentionally omitting) at ANYTHING and EVERYTHING. It could be faster AT ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE but consume one tenth power. You can make a CPU with an ethereum / bitcoin mining extension like they make separate ASICs, and then claim the new cpu is 10x-100x faster at mining ethereum and uses 10x less power.

 

"It will have 4× lower cost of ownership (TCO) than current server processors."

 

There's server processors which cost $10-20k each. They could very well say 4x lower TCO if they'll sell the CPU at $5k each... doesn't mean anything. 

It could also be 'marketing speech for  " well, our cpu consumes only 200 watts and does the AI work a 3090 consuming 400 watts does, so if you have 100 servers with 4 such processors, it costs you 4 times less because you pay less for cooling and power, so it's 4 x lower TCO"

TCO (total cost of ownership) includes  motherboard, ram, server case, rack space, power requirements, cooling requirements

 

"It will occupy less silicon than an ARM design."  - which one , the arm cpu in your phone, the 128+ cores arm cpus Amazon and others make? less can also mean just 1-2 mm smaller die.

 

"It will perform both AI and hyperscale server workloads with equal aplomb. "

 

This right here makes me think it's actually a customized chip aimed at AI, neural networks, deep learning ... this is all stuff which uses data types and structures and algorithms which are not typically used in regular processors, so of course if one designs a CPU with such instructions built in from the start, and with structures inside optimized for it, it will run fast and consume less power when used for such things...  Think of it like cpus having an ALU (arithmetical logical unit) and a FPU (floating point unit) ... they're probably bragging about adding multiple AIU (Artififical intelligence units) or something like that into the CPU. 

Hyperscale ... I don't know what that means in this marketing speak context. 

 

"A single version of the chip will scale between 16 and 128 cores, all in the same 6400-ball package.""

 

Yeah, I guess it depends on what they mean by cores ...  A video card has up to 2000+ "cores" each specialized on rendering and doing stuff ... and a video card can render some images 10x times faster and using 10x less power than a software renderer running on a cpu.

 

6400 ball package is not that special ... EPYC cpus go in a socket that has 4094 pins. 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

looks fake as fuck, the fact that there is no wikipedia artical talking about them is a flag even though they have apparently been operating since 2016/2017

not only that SO many companys have tried to create a universal processor and have failed.

you can't create a processor that can cover every use case. it's just not possible. (you can sure try though)

*Insert Witty Signature here*

System Config: https://au.pcpartpicker.com/list/Tncs9N

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm missing a lot of info to gauge much. Maybe one day with new materials we'll have some self shifting processor for xyz purpose or something like from sci-fi.

Ryzen 7 3800X | X570 Aorus Elite | G.Skill 16GB 3200MHz C16 | Radeon RX 5700 XT | Samsung 850 PRO 256GB |Mousepad: Skypad 3.0 XL | Mouse: Zowie S1-C |Keyboard: Corsair K63 MX red | OS: Windows 11

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Salv8 (sam) said:

looks fake as fuck, the fact that there is no wikipedia artical talking about them is a flag even though they have apparently been operating since 2016/2017

not only that SO many companys have tried to create a universal processor and have failed.

you can't create a processor that can cover every use case. it's just not possible. (you can sure try though)

these sort of companies often fly under the radar for a very long time until they actually have a product to show off, so it's not that weird. if anything them being quiet is a good thing, it means this isnt some startup hoping to hit the market after a year of dev time.

 

on topic: i see so many problems with this:

- different architecture means that efficiency is more dependant on propper adoption than on how it compares to 'a xeon'

- competitive products improve year over year, if they compared to a xeon they got in 2016 when the work begun.. their numbers are already way off.

- they should be comparing their efficiency to ARM and risc-V, those are the products to beat when new to market, not x86.

- seeing their architecture is smaller than arm, i expect this to be HIGHLY specialized silicon, so performance may be great for the tasks they are aiming for, but SUUUUCK for everything else. remember intel itanium? this is the new itanic waiting to happen.

- 128 cores tells me they're getting efficiency by underclocking to heck. you better be beating a xeon if you have 128 cores under the hood. (just like zen architecture on amd's side is good at)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the time something saying "10x as efficient" usually ends up meaning "10x as efficient in niche use case"

 

This is described as being matrix oriented (I'm counting 1xn matrices as matrices and not vectors). I don't see how it's THAT much different from a TPU.

I'm skeptical but would love to be proven wrong.

3900x | 32GB RAM | RTX 2080

1.5TB Optane P4800X | 1 TB Adata XPG Pro | 2TB Micron 1100 SSD
QN90A | Emotiva B1+, ELAC OW4.2, PB12-NSD, HD800
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking back one can see that for something to be "10x faster" it would take at least 5 years. And that would have been in the 80s or 90s. Look from today's cutting edge and you have to go back >10 years to find a (top end) CPU that is a 10th of the speed.

 

So yeah obvious nonsense to almost certain scam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Kronoton said:

Looking back one can see that for something to be "10x faster" it would take at least 5 years. And that would have been in the 80s or 90s. Look from today's cutting edge and you have to go back >10 years to find a (top end) CPU that is a 10th of the speed.

 

So yeah obvious nonsense to almost certain scam.

 

Ehh, 5995WX vs 7700k would be around 5 years. Definitely not 10x in ST but very likely in MT.

 

 

 

3900x | 32GB RAM | RTX 2080

1.5TB Optane P4800X | 1 TB Adata XPG Pro | 2TB Micron 1100 SSD
QN90A | Emotiva B1+, ELAC OW4.2, PB12-NSD, HD800
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like a total scam.

Ryzen 1600x @4GHz

Asus GTX 1070 8GB @1900MHz

16 GB HyperX DDR4 @3000MHz

Asus Prime X370 Pro

Samsung 860 EVO 500GB

Noctua NH-U14S

Seasonic M12II 620W

+ four different mechanical drives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe this new processor also comes with a famous bridge and title rights to half of Scotland...

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/27/2022 at 1:47 AM, cmndr said:

Most of the time something saying "10x as efficient" usually ends up meaning "10x as efficient in niche use case"

Usually it's a bit from Column A and bit from Column B, like with the M1. The M1 is "10 times more power efficient than the Intel (fill in the blank worst-case-scenario performance parity)", not the power-parity.

 

That's how you get really dishonest comparisons. Cherry pick the benchmark. As no actual chip exists, making this claim is basically impossible.

 

On 5/27/2022 at 1:47 AM, cmndr said:

This is described as being matrix oriented (I'm counting 1xn matrices as matrices and not vectors). I don't see how it's THAT much different from a TPU.

I'm skeptical but would love to be proven wrong.

Unfortunately, in many cases, the only reason we aren't using "Something better" than what we have now is power envelopes. See the long thread about power limits. A laptop can not pull more than 65 watts and still be called portable. Over 65 it's basically a desktop computer crammed into a laptop chassis, and has the battery life of like 2 hours tops if actually used like a desktop. That's twice where were were in 2004, but sticking a desktop chip in a laptop is usually a terrible idea for noise reasons alone. 240w laptops really should not exist. They're unusable as a portable device, weigh too much to be portable, and require heavy power bricks just to operate.

 

To put it bluntly. It the chip requires so much power that it's not portable, it's not worth the investment. There is no reason to have a 95w TDP CPU in any desktop, and all the "performance gain" we've had in he last 6 years has been at the cost of moving the TDP ceiling higher. Very little "optimization." In fact Intel is pulling the "Grocery shrink ray" on us, the same as nVidia.

 

Intel used to call the i7 the flagship product, now it's the i9. Nvidia used to call the x80 part the flagship product, now it's the x90. Basically, you are no longer gaining anything by buying an i9 CPU or an x90 desktop GPU. Sure you might occasionally have a use case for something this powerful, but the amount of energy it has to consume, and amount of cooling required, doesn't justify the increase in noise or power supply upgrades. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kisai said:

Usually it's a bit from Column A and bit from Column B, like with the M1. The M1 is "10 times more power efficient than the Intel (fill in the blank worst-case-scenario performance parity)", not the power-parity.

 

That's how you get really dishonest comparisons. Cherry pick the benchmark. As no actual chip exists, making this claim is basically impossible.

 

Cherry picking benchmarks aligns to "10x more power efficient" in niche uses cases.


At some level it's very rare to have a truly great new change, you're just swapping one set of tradeoffs for another.
https://www.lighterra.com/papers/modernmicroprocessors/

 

The M1 is often better because it leans hard on hardware acceleration (very very efficient but very narrow use cases, so you need more die area overall) and then optimizes the heck out of its design towards non-accelerated use cases. This is arguably the way of the future. It's what's going on in cell phones and cell phones seem to be influencing the future design direction of the market.

3900x | 32GB RAM | RTX 2080

1.5TB Optane P4800X | 1 TB Adata XPG Pro | 2TB Micron 1100 SSD
QN90A | Emotiva B1+, ELAC OW4.2, PB12-NSD, HD800
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Kisai said:

There is no reason to have a 95w TDP CPU in any desktop, and all the "performance gain" we've had in he last 6 years has been at the cost of moving the TDP ceiling higher. Very little "optimization." In fact Intel is pulling the "Grocery shrink ray" on us, the same as nVidia.

That's not true. Performance/Watt increased massively. So did the TDP.

Just compare the 6600k (Q3 2015) to the 12600k (Q4 2021) with roughly 6 years in-between. 

6600k: ~ 3950 pt in R23 MC, ~ 70 W --> 56 pt/W

12600k: ~ 17600 pt in R23 MC, ~ 120 W (DDR-5) --> 147 pt/W

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

That's not true. Performance/Watt increased massively. So did the TDP.

Just compare the 6600k (Q3 2015) to the 12600k (Q4 2021) with roughly 6 years in-between. 

6600k: ~ 3950 pt in R23 MC, ~ 70 W --> 56 pt/W

12600k: ~ 17600 pt in R23 MC, ~ 120 W (DDR-5) --> 147 pt/W

Again. It's cherry picking.

 

 

image.png.83e29d290d7b23113ba193ef55a685d5.png

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/power_performance.html

 

The most power efficient Intel parts are the 35w T parts, which aren't parts you can typically buy, and have base clocks half the clock of the K parts. The K parts are so far down the list they're not even on this chart. See that lonely green dot at the 35000 line? That's the 12900T. Nearly every part on the chart is a laptop part. That lone blue dot at the 105w? The AMD 5950X. The M1 has nearly the exact same passmark score as the i9-12900K but  yet has a power draw that is amazing.

 

Side note, I wonder if the website is aware they've reversed Intel and AMD's colors.

 

image.png.4e888757e4b12ceb2e9b4c87fc9f40e3.png

 

But let's be serious, this is a Apples to Oranges comparison. Intel arbitrarily decides what to bin the 12900K/T/non-K/F/non-KF parts at, and we all know the K parts are the worst value if you were to actually minmax a system around it. You would have to quite literately have to design a cooling system around that 241TDP which burns even more energy just to use the CPU at the unlimited boost speed. 

 

Remember, cherry picking:

image.png.5c2577ae4601f2433915edabecf270ea.png

If you believe this chart at first glance, you'd notice the Ulta is "150 performance at 40w" compared to the 12900K. There's still head room for the M1 to hit 175 or something at 60w.

 

At some point you have to ask yourself is it worth spending nearly double the price on the CPU for non-existing performance gains that you have to have the right mixture parts for. Clearly Dell can't do this.

image.thumb.png.6e65d2009d8a3f793dfb53ee4c7678ac.png

 

As Steve would said, Dell engineered this system so poorly that the i9 you're paying for has the performance of the i7, (yet burns more power.) Imagine what the performance of the M1 Ultra would be if it was permitted to hit a 250w TDP with a properly engineered cooler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/27/2022 at 7:32 AM, PhenomXII said:

6400-ball package

BGA CPUs in servers?!

Every time a CPU dies you will have to use a replacement motherboard...

On 5/27/2022 at 7:32 AM, PhenomXII said:

It will occupy less silicon than an ARM design.

What kind of magic instruction set is that?

On 5/27/2022 at 8:21 AM, Salv8 (sam) said:

SO many companys have tried to create a universal processor and have failed.

True,That's because a single processing unit cannot achieve optimal performance at every workload.

That's why we are not using CPUs to render graphics anymore and instead have dedicated silicon real estate for graphics whether it's an iGPU or a dedicated GPU.

That's also why we have Tensor cores for AI processing and scientific simulations,quantum processors for scientific research,etc.

A PC Enthusiast since 2011
AMD Ryzen 5 2600@4.1GHz | GIGABYTE GTX 1660 GAMING OC @ Core 2085MHz Memory 5000MHz
Cinebench R15: 1349cb | Unigine Superposition 1080p Extreme: 3566
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Kisai said:

Again. It's cherry picking.

How? I just took a processor I once owned and compared it to its successor, using actual power consumption (the 6600k had a 91 W TDP but only used around 70 W fully loaded) and not arbitrary TDP values.

 

And you are trying to make sense out of the completely worthless Passmark scatter plot, which uses "suggested manufacturer TDP" as the point of reference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

How? I just took a processor I once owned and compared it to its successor, using actual power consumption (the 6600k had a 91 W TDP but only used around 70 W fully loaded) and not arbitrary TDP values.

 

And you are trying to make sense out of the completely worthless Passmark scatter plot, which uses "suggested manufacturer TDP" as the point of reference.

If you look at the single thread performance, you'll notice that you've never seen a 200% gain generation to generation, (which you'd expect from a die shrink) you've only seen the TDP go up while the clock speed has stayed the same or gone down, while increasing the cache. There is a reason the 6th thru 10th gen CPU's have been meme'd on as "14nm+++++"

 

image.thumb.png.5589c57c142961bef4b7dad61b3b2c66.png

image.thumb.png.3d39e59c1c48dd85b450740c0acc5762.png

The only way intel could squeeze more performance out of the same node was to creep the TDP, and there was no real value in upgrading a 6th gen until you got to the 12th gen. Because that's when the die shrink was supposed to happen on Intel's "Intel 7" process.

 

Ask yourself, was it really a important to upgrade to a chip that requires an enormous cooler for small improvements? No. And then we get the i9 where the TDP is basically a shrug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/30/2022 at 9:57 AM, Kisai said:

Imagine what the performance of the M1 Ultra would be if it was permitted to hit a 250w TDP with a properly engineered cooler.

 

That's assuming the M1 can even go that far,  TDP is not the spec everyone thinks it is.  Saying imagine the performance you could get if you could push the M1 to 250w TDP is like saying imagine the performance you'd get from a reliant Robyn if you could keep it on the road at 250Km/h.   Sure you might get it there with decent mods (in the case of the M1 decent cooling mods), but there is not guarantee it will operate the same as when running within the 70watt design range. 

 

For all we know the M1 night shit the bed and become unstable once it draws more than 100Watts regardless of Jt.

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

That's assuming the M1 can even go that far,  TDP is not the spec everyone thinks it is.  Saying imagine the performance you could get if you could push the M1 to 250w TDP is like saying imagine the performance you'd get from a reliant Robyn if you could keep it on the road at 250Km/h.   Sure you might get it there with decent mods (in the case of the M1 decent cooling mods), but there is not guarantee it will operate the same as when running within the 70watt design range. 

 

For all we know the M1 night shit the bed and become unstable once it draws more than 100Watts regardless of Jt.

True, but the point I was trying to make was in the graph.

 

image.thumb.png.8b570eeeb67755b9475ad4c1602ac4b2.png

When a chart doesn't draw the lines to the end of the graph, you're left to interpret where that line goes.

 

I imagine the M1 CPU probably curves gently (the lower line) rather than the upper line which scales nearly linearly. Where as the Intel CPU undoubtedly falls off a cliff, just we don't know if that's at 180w or at 250w.

 

Like that's the entire problem we've seen with CPU's since inception. When we hit 3Ghz, we had to stop increasing the clock frequency in favor of refinement. Those refinements went hand in hand with die shrinks, which is why the CPU's got faster without really increasing in clock speed. Except for when Intel stuck to 14nm for 5 generations, and had to rely entirely on refinements and showed nearly no improvement over that time, thus the increase in TDP bloat. Had that TDP been locked to where it was on the 4th gen, you'd notice those optimizations entirely came from raising the TDP limit, which we know isn't efficient.

 

The bigger problem, going back to the OP Topic, is that if we could get the same performance of a 250w TDP i9 in a 25w processor, why would anyone make it? Just make a 250w TDP "new universal processor"  that has 10 times the power.

 

And that's basically where people don't understand how this works. To use a car analogy, the M1 is a Honda Civic, and the Intel i9 is a Mustang, but they both get capped to 55MPH. The Honda is going to go farther on the same amount of fuel. 

 

Like it's been speculated ever since the A-series CPU's reached parity with Intel's 35w chips, that Apple would release ARM parts as laptop and desktop CPU's. Which they did, at a much lower TDP than the Intel part. Ideally we would have "mobile/laptop" CPU designs that required no cooler or only passive cooling to lower the noise. Because at this point laptops are unreasonably loud and comparing their performance to a desktop is a complete joke. You are not getting a desktop i9 performance in a laptop, under any circumstances. You are with an M1.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Kisai said:

True, but the point I was trying to make was in the graph.

 

image.thumb.png.8b570eeeb67755b9475ad4c1602ac4b2.png

When a chart doesn't draw the lines to the end of the graph, you're left to interpret where that line goes.

 

I imagine the M1 CPU probably curves gently (the lower line) rather than the upper line which scales nearly linearly. Where as the Intel CPU undoubtedly falls off a cliff, just we don't know if that's at 180w or at 250w.

 

Like that's the entire problem we've seen with CPU's since inception. When we hit 3Ghz, we had to stop increasing the clock frequency in favor of refinement. Those refinements went hand in hand with die shrinks, which is why the CPU's got faster without really increasing in clock speed. Except for when Intel stuck to 14nm for 5 generations, and had to rely entirely on refinements and showed nearly no improvement over that time, thus the increase in TDP bloat. Had that TDP been locked to where it was on the 4th gen, you'd notice those optimizations entirely came from raising the TDP limit, which we know isn't efficient.

 

The bigger problem, going back to the OP Topic, is that if we could get the same performance of a 250w TDP i9 in a 25w processor, why would anyone make it? Just make a 250w TDP "new universal processor"  that has 10 times the power.

 

And that's basically where people don't understand how this works. To use a car analogy, the M1 is a Honda Civic, and the Intel i9 is a Mustang, but they both get capped to 55MPH. The Honda is going to go farther on the same amount of fuel. 

 

Like it's been speculated ever since the A-series CPU's reached parity with Intel's 35w chips, that Apple would release ARM parts as laptop and desktop CPU's. Which they did, at a much lower TDP than the Intel part. Ideally we would have "mobile/laptop" CPU designs that required no cooler or only passive cooling to lower the noise. Because at this point laptops are unreasonably loud and comparing their performance to a desktop is a complete joke. You are not getting a desktop i9 performance in a laptop, under any circumstances. You are with an M1.

 

 

 

Because all TDP tells you is how much heat has to be dissipated in order to maintain jT for a given load/frequency.   It literally tells you nothing else about the processor beyond basic power draw for comparable/specific workloads.     

 

Using TDP as a performance comparison spec is like using minimum radiator size to determine how good a car can plow a field.  There are just way too many variables beyond TDP that determine the best processor for a given end use.

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/27/2022 at 8:21 AM, Salv8 (sam) said:

you can't create a processor that can cover every use case. it's just not possible. (you can sure try though)

You can create a general purpose processor that can do everything (badly). The Master of None CPU!

My System: i7-8700 // Noctua NH-U9B SE2 CPU Cooler + Noctua 2X120mm 2X140mm system fans// Gigabyte Z370 HD3// 2x8GB DDR4-3000 Corsair // Asus TUF 3080 10GB // Itek Replay2.0 Modified for airflow // Corsair RM650x Gold modular // 32GB M.2 Optane + 2X120GB Kingston A400 + 2X1TB WD10EZEX 7200 RPM +1X USB3.0 External 6TB 5400RPM // Displays: LG 27GL850 IPS 1440p 144Hz + Philips 273V5LHAB TN 1080p 60Hz + Acer ka220hq TN 1080p 60Hz // https://pcpartpicker.com/list/dL42q3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/26/2022 at 11:37 PM, WereCat said:

This showcase reminds me of this

I have seen variants of revolutionary ASICs, FPGA, and ARM chips in similar small hodge podge clusters for almost a decade now.

ƆԀ S₱▓Ɇ▓cs: i7 6ʇɥפᴉƎ00K (4.4ghz), Asus DeLuxe X99A II, GT҉X҉1҉0҉8҉0 Zotac Amp ExTrꍟꎭe),Si6F4Gb D???????r PlatinUm, EVGA G2 Sǝʌǝᘉ5ᙣᙍᖇᓎᙎᗅᖶt, Phanteks Enthoo Primo, 3TB WD Black, 500gb 850 Evo, H100iGeeTeeX, Windows 10, K70 R̸̢̡̭͍͕̱̭̟̩̀̀̃́̃͒̈́̈́͑̑́̆͘͜ͅG̶̦̬͊́B̸͈̝̖͗̈́, G502, HyperX Cloud 2s, Asus MX34. פN∩SW∀S 960 EVO

Just keeping this here as a backup 9̵̨̢̨̧̧̡̧̡̧̡̧̡̡̢̢̡̢̧̡̢̡̡̢̧̛̛̛̛̛̛̱̖͈̠̝̯̹͉̝̞̩̠̹̺̰̺̲̳͈̞̻̜̫̹̱̗̣͙̻̘͎̲̝͙͍͔̯̲̟̞͚̖̘͉̭̰̣͎͕̼̼̜̼͕͎̣͇͓͓͎̼̺̯͈̤̝͖̩̭͍̣̱̞̬̺̯̼̤̲͎̖̠̟͍̘̭͔̟̗̙̗̗̤̦͍̫̬͔̦̳̗̳͔̞̼̝͍̝͈̻͇̭̠͈̳͍̫̮̥̭͍͔͈̠̹̼̬̰͈̤͚̖̯͍͉͖̥̹̺͕̲̥̤̺̹̹̪̺̺̭͕͓̟̳̹͍̖͎̣̫͓͍͈͕̳̹̙̰͉͙̝̜̠̥̝̲̮̬͕̰̹̳͕̰̲̣̯̫̮͙̹̮͙̮̝̣͇̺̺͇̺̺͈̳̜̣̙̻̣̜̻̦͚̹̩͓͚̖͍̥̟͍͎̦͙̫̜͔̭̥͈̬̝̺̩͙͙͉̻̰̬̗̣͖̦͎̥̜̬̹͓͈͙̤̜̗͔̩̖̳̫̑̀̂̽̈́̈́̿͒̿̋̊͌̾̄̄̒̌͐̽̿̊͑̑̆͗̈̎̄͒̑̋͛̑͑̂͑̀͐̀͑̓͊̇͆̿͑͛͛͆́͆̓̿̇̀̓͑͆͂̓̾̏͊̀̇̍̃́̒̎̀̒̄̓̒̐̑̊̏̌̽̓͂͋̓̐̓͊̌͋̀̐̇̌̓̔͊̈̇́̏͒̋͊̓̆̋̈̀̌̔͆͑̈̐̈̍̀̉̋̈́͊̽͂̿͌͊̆̾̉͐̿̓̄̾͑̈́͗͗̂̂́̇͂̀̈́́̽̈́̓̓͂̽̓̀̄͌̐̔̄̄͒͌̈́̅̉͊̂͒̀̈́̌͂̽̀̑̏̽̀͑̐̐͋̀̀͋̓̅͋͗̍́͗̈́̆̏̇͊̌̏̔̑̐̈́͑̎͑͆̏̎́̑̍̏̒̌̊͘͘̚̕̚̕̕̚̕̚̕̕͜͜͜͜͜͝͝͠͠͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͠͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅͅͅ8̵̨̛̛̛̛̮͍͕̥͉̦̥̱̞̜̫̘̤̖̬͍͇͓̜̻̪̤̣̣̹̑͑̏̈́̐̐́̎͒̔͒̌̑̓̆̓͑̉̈́́͋̌͋͐͛͋̃̍̽̊͗͋͊̂̅͊͑́͋͛̉̏̓͌̾̈́̀͛͊̾͑̌̀̀̌̓̏̑́̄̉̌͂́͛̋͊̄͐͊̈́̀̌̆̎̿̓̔̍̎̀̍̚̕̕͘͘͘̕̚͝͝͠͠͠0̶̡̡̡̢̨̨͕̠̠͉̺̻̯̱̘͇̥͎͖̯͕̖̬̭͔̪̪͎̺̠̤̬̬̤̣̭̣͍̥̱̘̳̣̤͚̭̥͚̦͙̱̦͕̼͖͙͕͇̭͓͉͎̹̣̣͕̜͍͖̳̭͕̼̳̖̩͍͔̱̙̠̝̺̰̦̱̿̄̀͐͜͜ͅͅt̶̡̨̡̨̧̢̧̢̨̧̧̧̧̢̡̨̨̢̨̢̧̢̛̛̛̛̛̠͍̞̮͇̪͉̩̗̗͖̫͉͎͓̮̣̘̫͔̘̬̮̙̯̣͕͓̲̣͓͓̣̹̟͈̱͚̘̼̙̖̖̼̙̜̝͙̣̠̪̲̞̖̠̯̖̠̜̱͉̲̺͙̤̻̦̜͎̙̳̺̭̪̱͓̦̹̺͙̫̖̖̰̣͈͍̜̺̘͕̬̥͇̗̖̺̣̲̫̟̣̜̭̟̱̳̳̖͖͇̹̯̜̹͙̻̥̙͉͕̜͎͕̦͕̱͖͉̜̹̱̦͔͎̲̦͔̖̘̫̻̹̮̗̮̜̰͇̰͔̱͙̞̠͍͉͕̳͍̰̠̗̠̯̜̩͓̭̺̦̲̲͖̯̩̲̣̠͉̦̬͓̠̜̲͍̘͇̳̳͔̼̣͚̙͙͚͕̙̘̣̠͍̟̪̝̲͇͚̦̖͕̰̟̪͖̳̲͉͙̰̭̼̩̟̝̣̝̬̳͎̙̱͒̃̈͊̔͒͗̐̄̌͐͆̍͂̃̈́̾͗̅̐͒̓̆͛̂̾͋̍͂̂̄̇̿̈͌̅̈́̃̾̔̇̇̾̀͊͋̋̌̄͌͆͆̎̓̈́̾̊͊̇̌̔̈́̈́̀̐͊̊̍͑̊̈̓͑̀́̅̀̑̈́̽̃̽͛̇́̐̓̀͆̔̈̀̍̏̆̓̆͒̋́̋̍́̂̉͛̓̓̂̋̎́̒̏̈͋̃̽͆̓̀̔͑̈́̓͌͑̅̽́̐̍̉̑̓̈́͌̋̈́͂̊́͆͂̇̈́̔̃͌̅̈́͌͛̑̐̓̔̈́̀͊͛̐̾͐̔̾̈̃̈̄͑̓̋̇̉̉̚̕̚͘̕̚̚̕̕͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͝͝͠ͅͅͅͅͅi̵̢̧̢̧̡̧̢̢̧̢̢̢̡̡̡̧̧̡̡̧̛̛͈̺̲̫͕̞͓̥̖̭̜̫͉̻̗̭̖͔̮̠͇̩̹̱͈̗̭͈̤̠̮͙͇̲͙̰̳̹̲͙̜̟͚͎͓̦̫͚̻̟̰̣̲̺̦̫͓̖̯̝̬͉̯͓͈̫̭̜̱̞̹̪͔̤̜͙͓̗̗̻̟͎͇̺̘̯̲̝̫͚̰̹̫̗̳̣͙̮̱̲͕̺̠͉̫̖̟͖̦͉̟͈̭̣̹̱̖̗̺̘̦̠̯̲͔̘̱̣͙̩̻̰̠͓͙̰̺̠̖̟̗̖͉̞̣̥̝̤̫̫̜͕̻͉̺͚̣̝̥͇̭͎̖̦̙̲͈̲̠̹̼͎͕̩͓̖̥̘̱̜͙̹̝͔̭̣̮̗̞̩̣̬̯̜̻̯̩̮̩̹̻̯̬̖͂̈͂̒̇͗͑̐̌̎̑̽̑̈̈́͑̽́̊͋̿͊͋̅̐̈́͑̇̿̈́̌͌̊̅͂̎͆̏̓͂̈̿̏̃͑̏̓͆̔̋̎̕͘͘͘͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͝͝͠͠ͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅZ̴̧̢̨̢̧̢̢̡̧̢̢̢̨̨̨̡̨̧̢̧̛̛̬̖͈̮̝̭̖͖̗̹̣̼̼̘̘̫̠̭̞͙͔͙̜̠̗̪̠̼̫̻͓̳̟̲̳̻̙̼͇̺͎̘̹̼͔̺̹̬̯̤̮̟͈̭̻͚̣̲͔͙̥͕̣̻̰͈̼̱̺̤̤͉̙̦̩̗͎̞͓̭̞̗͉̳̭̭̺̹̹̮͕̘̪̞̱̥͈̹̳͇̟̹̱̙͚̯̮̳̤͍̪̞̦̳̦͍̲̥̳͇̪̬̰̠͙͕̖̝̫̩̯̱̘͓͎̪͈̤̜͎̱̹̹̱̲̻͎̖̳͚̭̪̦̗̬͍̯̘̣̩̬͖̝̹̣̗̭͖̜͕̼̼̲̭͕͔̩͓̞̝͓͍̗̙̯͔̯̞̝̳̜̜͉̖̩͇̩̘̪̥̱͓̭͎͖̱̙̩̜͎̙͉̟͎͔̝̥͕͍͓̹̮̦̫͚̠̯͓̱͖͔͓̤͉̠͙̋͐̀͌̈́͆̾͆̑̔͂͒̀̊̀͋͑̂͊̅͐̿́̈́̐̀̏̋̃̄͆͒̈́̿̎́́̈̀̀͌̔͋͊̊̉̿͗͊͑̔͐̇͆͛̂̐͊̉̄̈́̄̐͂͂͒͑͗̓͑̓̾̑͋̒͐͑̾͂̎̋̃̽̂̅̇̿̍̈́́̄̍͂͑̏̐̾̎̆̉̾͂̽̈̆̔́͋͗̓̑̕͘̕͘͜͜͜͜͜͝͝͝͝͠͠͝ͅo̶̪͆́̀͂̂́̄̅͂̿͛̈́̿͊͗́͘͝t̴̡̨̧̨̧̡̧̨̡̢̧̢̡̨̛̪͈̣̭̺̱̪̹̺̣̬̖̣̻͈̞̙͇̩̻̫͈̝̭̟͎̻̟̻̝̱͔̝̼͍̞̼̣̘̤̯͓͉̖̠̤͔̜̙͚͓̻͓̬͓̻̜̯̱̖̳̱̗̠̝̥̩͓̗̪̙͓̖̠͎̗͎̱̮̯̮͙̩̫̹̹̖͙̙͖̻͈̙̻͇͔̙̣̱͔̜̣̭̱͈͕̠̹͙̹͇̻̼͎͍̥̘͙̘̤̜͎̟͖̹̦̺̤͍̣̼̻̱̲͎̗̹͉͙̪̞̻̹͚̰̻͈͈͊̈́̽̀̎̃̊́̈́̏̃̍̉̇̑̂̇̏̀͊̑̓͛̽͋̈́͆́̊͊̍͌̈́̓͊̌̿̂̾̐͑̓̀́͒̃̋̓͆̇̀͊̆͗̂͑͐̀͗̅̆͘̕͘̕̕͜͜͝͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅͅḁ̶̢̡̨̧̡̡̨̨̧̨̡̡̢̧̨̡̡̛̛̛͍̱̳͚͕̩͍̺̪̻̫̙͈̬͙̖͙̬͍̬̟̣̝̲̼̜̼̺͎̥̮̝͙̪̘̙̻͖͇͚͙̣̬̖̲̲̥̯̦̗̰̙̗̪̞̗̩̻̪̤̣̜̳̩̦̻͓̞̙͍͙̫̩̹̥͚̻̦̗̰̲̙̫̬̱̺̞̟̻͓̞͚̦̘̝̤͎̤̜̜̥̗̱͈̣̻̰̮̼̙͚͚̠͚̲̤͔̰̭̙̳͍̭͎̙͚͍̟̺͎̝͓̹̰̟͈͈̖̺͙̩̯͔̙̭̟̞̟̼̮̦̜̳͕̞̼͈̜͍̮͕̜͚̝̦̞̥̜̥̗̠̦͇͖̳͈̜̮̣͚̲̟͙̎̈́́͊̔̑̽̅͐͐͆̀͐́̓̅̈͑͑̍̿̏́͆͌̋̌̃̒̽̀̋̀̃̏̌́͂̿̃̎̐͊̒̀̊̅͒̎͆̿̈́̑̐̒̀̈́̓̾͋͆̇̋͒̎̈̄̓̂͊̆͂̈́̒̎͐̇̍̆̋̅̿̔͒̄̇̂̋̈́͆̎̔̇͊̊̈́̔̏͋́̀͂̈́̊͋͂̍̾̓͛̇̔̚͘̚̕̚͘͘̕̕̕̚͘͘̚̕̚̕͜͜͜͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅç̵̧̢̨̢̢̢̧̧̡̨̡̢̧̧̧̨̡̡̨̨̢̢̢̧̨̢̨̢̛̛͉̗̠͇̹̖̝͕͚͎̟̻͓̳̰̻̺̞̣͚̤͙͍͇̗̼͖͔͕͙͖̺͙̖̹̘̘̺͓̜͍̣̰̗̖̺̗̪̘̯̘͚̲͚̲̬̞̹̹͕̭͔̳̘̝̬͉̗̪͉͕̞̫͔̭̭̜͉͔̬̫͙̖̙͚͔͙͚͍̲̘͚̪̗̞̣̞̲͎͔͖̺͍͎̝͎͍̣͍̩̟͈͕̗͉̪̯͉͎͖͍̖͎̖̯̲̘̦̟̭͍͚͓͈͙̬͖̘̱̝̜̘̹̩̝̥̜͎̬͓̬͙͍͇͚̟̫͇̬̲̥̘̞̘̟̘̝̫͈̙̻͇͎̣̪̪̠̲͓͉͙͚̭̪͇̯̠̯̠͖̞̜͓̲͎͇̼̱̦͍͉͈͕͉̗̟̖̗̱̭͚͎̘͓̬͍̱͍̖̯̜̗̹̰̲̩̪͍̞̜̫̩̠͔̻̫͍͇͕̰̰̘͚͈̠̻̮͊̐̿̏̐̀̇̑̐̈͛͑͑̍̑̔̃̈́̓̈́̇̐͑̐̊̆͂̀̏͛̊̔̍̽͗͋̊̍̓̈́̏̅͌̀̽́̑͒͒̓͗̈́̎͌͂̕̚͘͘͜͜͜͜͜͠͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅͅͅS̵̡̡̧̧̨̨̡̢̡̡̡̡̧̧̡̧̢̫̯͔̼̲͉͙̱̮̭̗͖̯̤͙̜͚̰̮̝͚̥̜̞̠̤̺̝͇̻̱͙̩̲̺͍̳̤̺̖̝̳̪̻̗̮̪̖̺̹̭͍͇̗̝̱̻̳̝̖̝͎̙͉̞̱̯̙̜͇̯̻̞̱̭̗͉̰̮̞͍̫̺͙͎̙̞̯̟͓͉̹̲͖͎̼̫̩̱͇̲͓̪͉̺̞̻͎̤̥̭̺̘̻̥͇̤̖̰̘̭̳̫̙̤̻͇̪̦̭̱͎̥̟͖͕̣̤̩̟̲̭̹̦̹̣͖̖͒̈́̈́̓͗̈̄͂̈́̅̐̐̿̎̂͗̎̿̕͘͜͜͜͜͝͝ͅͅt̸̡̡̧̧̨̡̢̛̥̥̭͍̗͈̩͕͔͔̞̟͍̭͇̙̺̤͚͎͈͎͕̱͈̦͍͔͓̬͚̗̰̦͓̭̰̭̎̀̂̈́̓̒̈́̈́̂̄̋́̇̂͐͒̋̋̉͐̉̏̇͋̓̈́͐̾͋̒͒͐̊̊̀̄͆̄͆̑͆̇̊̓̚̚̕̚̕͜͠͝͝ͅͅơ̵̡̨̡̡̡̨̛̺͕̼͔̼̪̳͖͓̠̘̘̳̼͚͙͙͚̰͚͚͖̥̦̥̘̖̜̰͔̠͕̦͎̞̮͚͕͍̤̠̦͍̥̝̰̖̳̫̮̪͇̤̱̜͙͔̯͙̙̼͇̹̥̜͈̲̺̝̻̮̬̼̫̞̗̣̪̱͓̺̜̠͇͚͓̳̹̥̳̠͍̫͈̟͈̘̯̬̞͔̝͍͍̥̒̐͗͒͂͆̑̀̿̏́̀͑͗̐́̀̾̓́̌̇̒̈́̌̓͐̃̈́̒̂̀̾͂̊̀̂͐̃̄̓̔̽̒̈́̇̓͌̇̂̆̒̏̊̋͊͛͌̊̇̒̅͌̄̎̔̈́͊́̽̋̈̇̈́́͊̅͂̎̃͌͊͛͂̄̽̈́̿͐̉̽̿́́̉͆̈́̒́̂̾̄̇̌̒̈̅̍̿̐͑̓͊̈́̈̋̈́̉̍̋̊̈̀̈́̾̿̌̀̈́͌̑̍́̋̒̀̂̈́́̾̏̐̅̈̑͗͐̈͂̄̾̄̈́̍̉͑͛͗͋̈́̃̄̊́́͐̀̀̽̇̓̄̓̃͋͋̂̽̔̀̎͌̈́̈́̑̓̔̀̓͐͛͆̿̋͑͛̈́͂̅̋̅͆͗̇́̀̒́̏͒̐̍͂̓͐͐̇̂̉̑̊͑̉̋̍͊̄̀͂̎͒̔͊̃̏̕̚̕̕͘͘͘̚͘̚͘̕͘̚͘̚̚̚̕͘͜͜͜͝͝͠͠͝͝͠͠͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅc̴̨̡̢̢̢̡̡̢̛̛̛̻͇̝̣͉͚͎͕̻̦͖̤̖͇̪̩̤̻̭̮̙̰̖̰̳̪̱̹̳̬͖̣͙̼̙̰̻̘͇͚̺̗̩̫̞̳̼̤͔͍͉̟͕̯̺͈̤̰̹̍̋́͆̾̆̊͆͋̀͑͒̄̿̄̀̂͋̊͆́͑̑̽͊̓́̔̽̌͊̄͑͒͐̑͗̿̃̀̓̅́̿͗̈́͌̋̀̏̂͌̓́̇̀͒͋̌̌̅͋͌̆͐̀̔̒͐̊̇̿̽̀̈́̃̒̋̀̈́̃̏̂̊͗̑̊̈̇̀̌͐̈́̉̂̏͊̄͐̈̽͒̏̒̓́̌̓̅́̓̃͐͊͒̄͑̒͌̍̈́̕͘̚͘̕͘̚̕͜͝͠͝͝͝ͅǩ̴̢̢̢̧̨̢̢̢̨̨̨̢̢̢̨̧̨̡̡̢̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̜̥̩̙͕̮̪̻͈̘̯̼̰̜͚̰͖̬̳͖̣̭̼͔̲͉̭̺͚̺̟͉̝̱̲͎͉̙̥̤͚͙̬̪̜̺͙͍̱̞̭̬̩̖̤̹̤̺̦͈̰̗̰͍͇̱̤̬̬͙̙̲̙̜͖͓̙̟̙̯̪͍̺̥͔͕̝̳̹̻͇̠̣͈̰̦͓͕̩͇͈͇̖͙͍̰̲̤̞͎̟̝̝͈͖͔͖̦̮̗̬̞̞̜̬̠̹̣̣̲̮̞̤̜̤̲̙͔͕̯͔͍̤͕̣͔͙̪̫̝̣̰̬̬̭̞͔̦̟̥̣̻͉͈̮̥̦̮̦͕̤͇̺͆͆̈͗̄̀̌̔̈́̈̉̾̊̐̆̂͛̀̋́̏̀̿͒̓̈́̈́͂̽̾͗͊̋̐̓̓̀̃̊̊͑̓̈̎̇͑̆̂̉̾̾̑͊̉̃́̑͌̀̌̐̅̃̿̆̎̈́̀̒́͛̓̀̊́̋͛͒͊̆̀̃̊͋̋̾̇̒̋͂̏͗͆̂̔́̐̀́͗̅̈̋̂̎̒͊̌̉̈̈́͌̈́̔̾̊̎́͐͒̋̽̽́̾̿̚̕͘͘̚̕̕̕̚̚̕̚̕͘͜͜͜͝͠͝͝͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅͅB̸̢̧̨̡̢̧̨̡̡̨̡̨̡̡̡̢̨̢̨̛̛̛̛̛̛͉̞͚̰̭̲͈͎͕͈̦͍͈̮̪̤̻̻͉̫̱͔̞̫̦̰͈̗̯̜̩̪̲̻̖̳͖̦͎͔̮̺̬̬̼̦̠̪̤͙͍͓̜̥̙̖̫̻̜͍̻̙̖̜̹͔̗̪̜̖̼̞̣̠̫͉̯̮̤͈͎̝̪͎͇͙̦̥͙̳̫̰̪̣̱̘̤̭̱͍̦͔̖͎̺̝̰̦̱̣͙̙̤͚̲͔̘̱̜̻͔̥̻͖̭͔̜͉̺͕͙͖̜͉͕̤͚̠̩̮̟͚̗͈͙̟̞̮̬̺̻̞͔̥͉͍̦̤͓̦̻̦̯̟̰̭̝̘̩̖̝͔̳͉̗̖̱̩̩̟͙͙͛̀͐̈́̂̇͛̅̒̉̏̈́̿͐́̏̃̏̓̌̽͐̈́͛̍͗͆͛̋̔̉͂̔̂̓̌͌͋̂͆̉͑̊̎́̈́̈̂͆͑́̃̍̇̿̅̾́́̿̅̾̆̅̈́̈̓͒͌͛̃͆̋͂̏̓̅̀͂̽̂̈̈́̎̾̐͋͑̅̍̈́̑̅̄͆̓̾̈́͐̎̊͐̌̌̓͊̊̔̈́̃͗̓͊͐̌͆̓͗̓̓̾̂̽͊͗́́́̽͊͆͋͊̀̑̿̔͒̏̈́́̏͆̈́͋̒͗͂̄̇̒͐̃͑̅̍͒̎̈́̌̋́̓͂̀̇͛̋͊͆̈́̋́̍̃͒̆̕̚̚̕̕̕͘̕̚̚͘̕͜͜͜͜͝͠͠͝͠͝͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅͅͅI̵̡̢̧̨̡̢̨̡̡̢̡̧̡̢̢̢̡̢̛̛͕͎͕̩̠̹̩̺̣̳̱͈̻̮̺̟̘̩̻̫͖̟͓̩̜̙͓͇̙̱̭̰̻̫̥̗̠͍͍͚̞̘̫͉̬̫̖̖̦͖͉̖̩̩̖̤̺̥̻̝͈͎̻͓̟̹͍̲͚͙̹̟̟̯͚̳̟͕̮̻̟͈͇̩̝̼̭̯͚͕̬͇̲̲̯̰̖̙̣̝͇̠̞̙͖͎̮̬̳̥̣̺̰͔̳̳̝̩̤̦̳̞̰̩̫̟͚̱̪̘͕̫̼͉̹̹̟̮̱̤̜͚̝̠̤̖̮̯̳͖̗̹̞̜̹̭̿̏͋̒͆̔̄̃̾̓͛̾̌́̅̂͆̔͌͆͋̔̾́̈̇̐̄̑̓̂̾́̄̿̓̅̆͌̉̎̏̄͛̉͆̓̎͒͘̕̕͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͝͠ͅͅƠ̷̢̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̟̰͔͔͇̲̰̮̘̭̭̖̥̟̘̠̬̺̪͇̲͋͂̅̈́̍͂̽͗̾͒̇̇̒͐̍̽͊́̑̇̑̾̉̓̈̾͒̍̌̅̒̾̈́̆͌̌̾̎̽̐̅̏́̈̔͛̀̋̃͊̒̓͗͒̑͒̃͂̌̄̇̑̇͛̆̾͛̒̇̍̒̓̀̈́̄̐͂̍͊͗̎̔͌͛̂̏̉̊̎͗͊͒̂̈̽̊́̔̊̃͑̈́̑̌̋̓̅̔́́͒̄̈́̈̂͐̈̅̈̓͌̓͊́̆͌̉͐̊̉͛̓̏̓̅̈́͂̉̒̇̉̆̀̍̄̇͆͛̏̉̑̃̓͂́͋̃̆̒͋̓͊̄́̓̕̕̕̚͘͘͘̚̕̚͘̕̕͜͜͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͝͠ͅS̷̢̨̧̢̡̨̢̨̢̨̧̧̨̧͚̱̪͇̱̮̪̮̦̝͖̜͙̘̪̘̟̱͇͎̻̪͚̩͍̠̹̮͚̦̝̤͖̙͔͚̙̺̩̥̻͈̺̦͕͈̹̳̖͓̜͚̜̭͉͇͖̟͔͕̹̯̬͍̱̫̮͓̙͇̗̙̼͚̪͇̦̗̜̼̠͈̩̠͉͉̘̱̯̪̟͕̘͖̝͇̼͕̳̻̜͖̜͇̣̠̹̬̗̝͓̖͚̺̫͛̉̅̐̕͘͜͜͜͜ͅͅͅ.̶̨̢̢̨̢̨̢̛̻͙̜̼̮̝̙̣̘̗̪̜̬̳̫̙̮̣̹̥̲̥͇͈̮̟͉̰̮̪̲̗̳̰̫̙͍̦̘̠̗̥̮̹̤̼̼̩͕͉͕͇͙̯̫̩̦̟̦̹͈͔̱̝͈̤͓̻̟̮̱͖̟̹̝͉̰͊̓̏̇͂̅̀̌͑̿͆̿̿͗̽̌̈́̉̂̀̒̊̿͆̃̄͑͆̃̇͒̀͐̍̅̃̍̈́̃̕͘͜͜͝͠͠z̴̢̢̡̧̢̢̧̢̨̡̨̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̛̲͚̠̜̮̠̜̞̤̺͈̘͍̻̫͖̣̥̗̙̳͓͙̫̫͖͍͇̬̲̳̭̘̮̤̬̖̼͎̬̯̼̮͔̭̠͎͓̼̖̟͈͓̦̩̦̳̙̮̗̮̩͙͓̮̰̜͎̺̞̝̪͎̯̜͈͇̪̙͎̩͖̭̟͎̲̩͔͓͈͌́̿͐̍̓͗͑̒̈́̎͂̋͂̀͂̑͂͊͆̍͛̄̃͌͗̌́̈̊́́̅͗̉͛͌͋̂̋̇̅̔̇͊͑͆̐̇͊͋̄̈́͆̍̋̏͑̓̈́̏̀͒̂̔̄̅̇̌̀̈́̿̽̋͐̾̆͆͆̈̌̿̈́̎͌̊̓̒͐̾̇̈́̍͛̅͌̽́̏͆̉́̉̓̅́͂͛̄̆͌̈́̇͐̒̿̾͌͊͗̀͑̃̊̓̈̈́̊͒̒̏̿́͑̄̑͋̀̽̀̔̀̎̄͑̌̔́̉̐͛̓̐̅́̒̎̈͆̀̍̾̀͂̄̈́̈́̈́̑̏̈́̐̽̐́̏̂̐̔̓̉̈́͂̕̚̕͘͘̚͘̚̕̚̚̚͘̕̕̕͜͜͝͠͠͝͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͠͝͝͝͝͝͝ͅͅͅī̸̧̧̧̡̨̨̢̨̛̛̘͓̼̰̰̮̗̰͚̙̥̣͍̦̺͈̣̻͇̱͔̰͈͓͖͈̻̲̫̪̲͈̜̲̬̖̻̰̦̰͙̤̘̝̦̟͈̭̱̮̠͍̖̲͉̫͔͖͔͈̻̖̝͎̖͕͔̣͈̤̗̱̀̅̃̈́͌̿̏͋̊̇̂̀̀̒̉̄̈́͋͌̽́̈́̓̑̈̀̍͗͜͜͠͠ͅp̴̢̢̧̨̡̡̨̢̨̢̢̢̨̡̛̛͕̩͕̟̫̝͈̖̟̣̲̖̭̙͇̟̗͖͎̹͇̘̰̗̝̹̤̺͉͎̙̝̟͙͚̦͚͖̜̫̰͖̼̤̥̤̹̖͉͚̺̥̮̮̫͖͍̼̰̭̤̲͔̩̯̣͖̻͇̞̳̬͉̣̖̥̣͓̤͔̪̙͎̰̬͚̣̭̞̬͎̼͉͓̮͙͕̗̦̞̥̮̘̻͎̭̼͚͎͈͇̥̗͖̫̮̤̦͙̭͎̝͖̣̰̱̩͎̩͎̘͇̟̠̱̬͈̗͍̦̘̱̰̤̱̘̫̫̮̥͕͉̥̜̯͖̖͍̮̼̲͓̤̮͈̤͓̭̝̟̲̲̳̟̠͉̙̻͕͙̞͔̖͈̱̞͓͔̬̮͎̙̭͎̩̟̖͚̆͐̅͆̿͐̄̓̀̇̂̊̃̂̄̊̀͐̍̌̅͌̆͊̆̓́̄́̃̆͗͊́̓̀͑͐̐̇͐̍́̓̈́̓̑̈̈́̽͂́̑͒͐͋̊͊̇̇̆̑̃̈́̎͛̎̓͊͛̐̾́̀͌̐̈́͛̃̂̈̿̽̇̋̍͒̍͗̈͘̚̚͘̚͘͘͜͜͜͜͜͜͠͠͝͝ͅͅͅ☻♥■∞{╚mYÄÜXτ╕○\╚Θº£¥ΘBM@Q05♠{{↨↨▬§¶‼↕◄►☼1♦  wumbo╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ╚̯̪̣͕̙̩̦͓͚̙̱̘̝̏̆ͤ̊̅ͩ̓̏̿͆̌Θ̼̯͉ͭͦ̃͊͑̉ͯͤ̈́ͬ͐̈́͊ͤͅº͍̪͇͖̝̣̪̙̫̞̦̥ͨ̂ͧ̄̿£̺̻̹̠̯͙͇̳ͬ̃̿͑͊ͨͣ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

This Universal Processor comes across as a way to scam Investors. Now if this only targets Vulture Capitalist then that is fine with me...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulture_capitalist

 

I am referring to those who seek promising new start-ups only to strip them later. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×