태터데스크 관리자

도움말
닫기
적용하기   첫페이지 만들기

태터데스크 메시지

저장하였습니다.
 

 


Author : Daeguen Lee

English Translation : Wendy Kim

Contact : leedaeguen [at] kaist.ac.kr

(Any action violating either CCL policy or copyright laws is strictly prohibited)

 

 

 

 

 

Introduction


It has been exactly four weeks since I have written an article on comparing game performances on plenty of different CPUs. If I remember correctly, I started the last one with similar words as this one("It has been..."), so I say I might, or should rename my blog as "Monthly" IYD or something. Well, let me get to the business and dare name this article as the trinity of unprecedentedness, as I am writing on an unprecedented subject with an unprecedented scenario by using an unprecedented amount of benchmark data, compared with my previous articles. Then, what makes this article so unprecedented? 

 

The title of this article, that I am sure that has either consciously or subconsciously caught your attention at the moment that you clicked to read this, is "The Resolutionary War". For some of you who picks up things fast, the title would be vaguely familiar – as it would remind you of a frequent topic of modern history, a revolutionary war. The subtitle of this article, "with Gamer’s Liberation Army", is also a wordplay derived from Communists' "People’s Liberation Army". With these two combined, the article would shout out something radical, revolutionary and "unprecedented", isn’t it?  Let’s delve into the details of this unprecedented matter, "The Resolutionary War".

 

 

Chatper 1 <What's 5K & Why?>


The first two of the trinity, "Unprecedented Subject" and "Unprecedented Scenario" are derived from this unprecedented resolution, 5K. Then, why 5K all the sudden? Or, rather, where in the world the 5K resolution came from? It all started at GTC (GPU Technology Conference) 2014 on March 26, two months ago.

 

At the conference, Jen-Hsun Huang, CEO of NVIDIA, has unveiled their new graphics card that will be released - GeForce GTX TITAN Z. This product is the very first one to employ two GK110s, which is the best GPU of NVIDIA that is out there in the market. According to Huang, the graphics card supports 8TFLOPS single-precision compute performance, as well as an enormous graphic memory of 12GB, 6GB for each GPU. In addition to that, what captured my attention the most was this one phrase, “5K-ready,” an unprecedented resolution throughout the history of graphics card, Though not even a half of a year has passed since GTX TITAN and AMD’s “Hawaii” series opened the new era of 4K-resolution, this random, yet monstrous “5K-ready” graphics card is about to be introduced to the arena. In reality, it will be a while before the 4K resolution will be widely used among the users, as 4K does not even have a standard (※ Though UHD = 3840 x 2160 using 16:9 display aspect ratio is widely accepted and commercially sold as 4K-supporting monitor, several monitor and optical equipment manufacturers regard 4096 x 2160 as the true 4K resolution, which is 256 pixels wider horizontally than the one aforementioned). Because of these issues, 5K resolution seemed and sounded like a very premature thing to expect at the time. 

 

Well, I ranted enough about how it does not seem like the right time to have the 5K resolution available. But as long as I know that it actually exists, I could not let go of the thought, wondering “What exactly is a 5K resolution?” I have fervently googled for a few days and found the answer that the 5K resolution that NVIDIA assumed was 5120 x 2700, but having found the “answer”, it amplified my curiosity even more.

 

5120 x 2700.

 

5120 x 2700???????

 

I thought to myself, ‘The aspect ratio is not 16:9, nor 21:9. Then where did the resolution come from? How is this even possible?’ When I was bogged down by the curiosity, I received a report that the actual resolution is 4096 x 2160, in other words, it is an altered form of 4K resolution, which is 256 pixels wider than UHD. Then, the appearance of this rather strange ratio as if it would be the new standard for the 5K resolution, especially through a mainstream event as NVIDIA’s new product announcement, should be very significant. It is significant because a major GPU manufacturer is looking beyond to the era of 5K resolution when UHD monitors are not even popularly used in the general public, as well as their attempt of setting a totally new standard than UHD.

 

Anyhow, products that support the resolution of 5120 x 2700 (From now on, 5K refers to this resolution) will be released pretty soon, and I am obliged to test this new stuff out. Therefore, I planned an unprecedented thing throughout the world, a “gaming benchmark at 5K resolution.” But, no matter how good the idea would be, keeping the really good idea inside the head and actually doing it to get a visible result are two totally different things. But one thing promoted me for the actual realization of the “really good idea”. In order to explain the reason behind it, I would have to start with the fact that I had GTX 780 Ti for my computer’s main graphics card. Though for some reason, I felt sudden spasm on my fingers as I decided to talk about what has happened; but despite my unwillingness to unravel the story, I must go on:

 

1. (At first) I was examining the possibility of doing experiments on the resolution. 

2. I accidentally opened the NVIDIA Control Panel, and then...

3. I made 4096 x 2160 using custom resolution option.

4. So the resolution option can be applied??????

5. I made 5120 x 2700 using custom resolution option.

6. So the resolution option can be applied, again??????

 

...for the reason, I ended up starting this project thinking that the 5K benchmark would be an easy task to complete. But, the project ended up being a huge catastrophe. “Though the beginning was small, the latter hours of the project were great difficulties.” The followings are the difficulties that I have encountered since I have started the test.

 

1. (After finishing NVIDIA's single GPU test,) the 4K /5K configuration won’t work after configuring SLI…?

-> The refresh rate was set to 29Hz, and it worked after changing it to 30Hz.

2. (After finishing the business with NVIDIA,) How come there is no such thing as “custom resolution” in AMD Catalyst Control Center?

-> I would have to configure Eyefinity in order to have a resolution that is higher than the monitor specification!

3. Even two monitors cannot handle 5120 x 2700?

-> I will make it three monitors..

4. Won’t work even with three monitors?!.

-> I will make it four. (Should contact CrossOver -a monitor manufacturer- and beg for their help...) 

5. (After all the work to obtain the 4th monitor,) Why the 4th display isn’t recognized?

-> It has to be connected via Native DisplayPort.

6. Why it won’t work after all?!

-> The initial resolution of DP-display should be set at 1920 x 1080.

 

How horrible...


Just because I wrote down the solutions for each problem, they might seem no hard, however, I had no idea and rather felt devastated thinking how in the world I would resolve the problem when I first encountered each of them. I mean, seriously... think about how you would feel when you have completed the single GeForce Test and configured SLI, and all the sudden the resolution won’t work, and you have no idea what the reason is. Then, you have connected four monitors (yes, FOUR.) and the computer treats the fourth one as some sort of inexistent one, and you have no idea what the reason is... But in a retrospect, it was a fun progress to do this series of problem solving, and if I would make it sound more dramatic, I probably was “destined” to do this benchmark. Yes, the Lord probably allowed me to overcome these trials... You know, feelings like that.

 

Well, let me wrap up the first chapter with this. For the next two chapters, let me introduce my turmoil and trial to actually have the 5K resolution work. Note that I would have to "fold" all the detailed procedures over next two chapters due to the length of the whole article. Please "click" each folding (which is indicated as "Click to see more") and see the whole procedures, if you don't mind.

 

 

Chapter 2 <5K for AMD>


There is a legitimate reason for me to split the “5K resolution adventure” into two different chapters. As all of you would know, there is no sense of combining them into one since the ways to make it work for AMD graphics card and NVIDIA graphics card are, even if they both are aiming for the same resolution, are totally different from each other. Especially, for AMD graphics card, it is impossible to set a custom resolution and force “upscale” the resolution like NVIDIA. Therefore, in order to have a resolution that is above the standard resolution (I used 30" monitor, and the standard resolution for the monitor was 2560 x 1600), I had to use a multi-monitor configuration, which added more complexity to the experiment. Then, from now on, I will talk about how I have set the individual resolution in the ascending order of pixels.

 

더보기

 

 

Chapter 3 <5K for NVIDIA>


For I have passionately expressed my ANGER in the previous chapter, this chapter is somewhat more succinct than the last chapter. Earlier I have described my journey of setting the resolution for AMD graphics card in the ascending order, but this time, I will start with 2560 x 1600, and continue on in the order of 4K -> 5K -> 5760 x 1080 -> and 7680 x 1600. The reason that I have decided on this order is that the first three resolution can be instantaneously made in a single monitor using up-scaling option in NVIDIA control panel.

 

더보기

 

 

Chapter 4 <Photo Gallery>


Finally, the prologue is over. In this chapter, I will show you the pictures of actual display that I had to configure in order to actualize the resolution by using the methods described in the previous chapters.

 

 

First of all, this is the configuration using a single monitor. The resolution of 2560 x 1600 (for both AMD and NVIDIA) and 4K / 5K (NVIDIA only) are displayed in this format.

 

 

The next one is the configuration using two monitors (2-monitor configuration). To display 4K resolution in AMD, each monitor's resolution was set to 2048 x 2160, and the two monitors were merged via Eyefinity. After all as I am uploading the picture, I started to wonder why I did not configure the monitors in portrait, because the vertical side is longer than the horizontal side (2160 > 2048). Yes, I already know I'm smart. Anyway, I have configured the 2-monitors setting by adding two landscape-positioned monitors (2 x landscape monitors)

 

 

Both AMD / NVIDIA require three-monitor configuration in order to realize 5760 x 1080 and 7680 x 1600 resolution. The picture shown is three landscape-positioned monitors (3 x landscape monitors).

 

For your information, I thought of pivoting three monitors and have those three grouped together in portrait position instead of what you see here if the 5K is not realizable by all means. In this case, since I have rotated the 2560 x 1600 by 90 degrees, the individual resolution will be 1600 x 2560, and 4800 x 2560 combining all three. This resolution, while getting a similar number of pixels of 4800 x 2700 (which is another 5K standard for 16:9 aspect ratio), will have a similar aspect ratio as the resolution of our favorite 5120 x 2700. In this case, I have even thought of overriding the problem of this (4800 x 2560) having the same number of pixels, 12 millions,  as 7680 x 1600 by using three QHD (resolution of 2560 x 1440) monitors with surrounded configuration, thus making a 7680 x 1440 with 10.8 million pixels, and this was to differentiate the pixel number for each scenario (it is because the gaming performance is inversely proportionate to the pixel numbers). But, since the up-scaling was successful, this plan was not actually used.

 

 

This is what I was supposed to set as "Plan B", just as described above.

 

 

And this is... the long-awaited...

4-monitor Eyefinity!

 

 

In order to level the height, I used eight graphics card box, 4 stacked boxes for one monitor.

 

 

At that point, the whole workplace scene was not captured by the camera lens. Maybe I should blame the fact that the space is quite small...

I say this again to make sure that this configuration was only for AMD. NVIDIA does not even have an option of having an even-numbered surround configuration. (I heard that NVIDIA Quadro supports the output of 4 and more monitors -don't tell me that's the reason why this graphics card was named Quadro-, but I am not sure if it is conceptually the same as Eyefinity or the SurroundVision.) 

 

 

Chapter 5 <Test Setup & Methodology>


Let’s talk about the benchmark from now on. First of all, let me explain the test setup and methodology. The system setup that I used for the test are shown in the picture below.

 

 

In every game that I used, the output option was set to the maximum (highest possible) in each game, excluding anti-aliasing (AA). However, for the games that support PhysX, PhysX was deactivated for the fair comparison between AMD and NVIDIA products, and each resolution was compared with an option of applying AA and 4x AA to see the effect of having anti-aliasing on the graphics card performance.


If the game does not support the option of altering levels on anti-aliasing (i.e., Metro : Last Light), SSAA (which is the only option available in the game) was applied, and if there is no such quantitative leveling option but has qualitative options for the degree of anti-aliasing (i.e., Sniper Elite V2), the second-highest option was chosen and applied (For example: As for Sniper Elite V2, "Extreme" was the highest option, and the second highest option was "High" so that "High" was the option applied for the game). On the other hand, as for Sleeping Dogs, it is not a problem that the highest option available for anti-aliasing named "Extreme" is the 4x anti-aliasing, but it was impossible to "disable" anti-aliasing. Therefore, the lowest option (Normal; FXAA) was applied, regarded as no anti-aliasing, and recorded. Lastly, as for Bioshock : Infinite, the anti-aliasing setting could not be altered using the benchmark tool, and as a result, the anti-aliasing test was replaced with options of enabling and disabling DDOF. These conditions mentioned above are also recorded in the result section for each game.

 

The methodology is same as always. For each comparison group, a test was done for three times for each game / scenario / and anti-aliasing, then the median value of the three tests was taken. If there is any unusual circumstance that cannot be generalized, then the circumstance was dealt accordingly using previous experiments and experiences. If you have any specific question, please let me know, and I will be more than glad to answer those questions for you.

 

 

Chapter 6 <Result>


Here are the results. Have fun with them all :)

 

(1) 3DMark 11

더보기

 

(2) 3DMark 2013

더보기

 

(3) Aliens vs Predator

더보기

 

(4) Batman : Arkham City

더보기

 

(5) Battlefield 4

더보기

 

(6) Bioshock : Infinite

더보기

 

(7) Crysis : Warhead

더보기

 

(8) Crysis 3

더보기

 

(9) DiRT : Showdown

더보기

 

(10) Hitman : Absolution

더보기

 

(11) Just Cause 2

더보기

 

(12) Metro 2033

더보기

 

(13) Metro : Last Light

더보기

 

(14) Sleeping Dogs

더보기

 

(15) Sniper Elite V2

더보기

 

(16) Splinter Cell : Black List

더보기

 

(17) Tomb Raider

더보기

 

 

Chapter 7 <Performance Summary; Raw Data>


So, here we are at the Performance Summary after getting done with the *boring* Result chapter.


Up until now, I have tried to use two different methods for analysis of the result (in a single chapter). However, for this article, I have separated the summary chapter into two. The first one would be dealing with the "Raw Data", which includes the sum of the framerate for each game. The second section, named as "Normalized", is the average value of relative framerate (= normalized) for all games, obtained by the framerate of each graphics card for each game divided by the framerate of GTX TITAN Z for each game. The more reliable method would be the latter (as the raw data only provides what is obtained in the experiment, it cannot be called as an "analysis" per se), the Raw Data graphs were made to show that there are more ways to reach a conclusion by using a set of given data.

 

 

 

 

 

 

In summary, we could conclude the below after analyzing the result obtained at 5 different resolutions:

 

- As the resolution gets higher, the relative ranks of AMD graphics cards improve

- As anti-aliasing gets enabled, the relative ranks of AMD graphics cards improve

 

But when focusing on the details, the generalization above does not always work. For an example, when going from 5760 x 1080 to 4K or from 7680 x 1600 to 5K, though both of the cases went from lower to higher resolution (=more pixels), the relative rank of AMD family would remain the same, or lower. Of course, still, the result of AMD seems better when compared with 2560 x 1600.

 

Let's find out if the in-depth analysis would prove the same in the next chapter.

 

 

Chapter 8 <Performance Summary; Normalized>


Since I have already explained what "Normalized" means in the previous chapter, I will jump straight to the graphs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

In this chapter as well, the big picture seems identical as the previous chapter.

 

- As the resolution gets higher, the relative ranks of AMD graphics cards improve

- As anti-aliasing gets enabled, the relative ranks of AMD graphics cards improve

 

Also, you probably have noticed that AMD's relative rank has gone up in this chapter compared to the previous chapter throughout all scenarios - this is the third statement. This is caused by the games in favor of NVIDIA, such as Batman: Arkham City. As a result, the Raw Data, which are just a mere added value of frame rate of each game, could show that AMD's performance is not as good as NVIDIA. However, in "Normalized" analysis, AMD "performs" better as Normalized data signifies the average value of relative performance of the graphics card for each game. To summarize, the improvement of AMD graphics card is a result of losing a big time for a little number of games, and winning by a little in other majority of games.

 

Also, when results for each resolution were analyzed in-depth, it can be seen that the trend observed in the earlier chapters is repeated.

 

- The relative rank of AMD drops in 4K than 5760 x 1080 and in 5K than 7680 x 1600

 

There is no obvious explainable reason for this, but one thing that is suspicious for the result is Eyefinity itself. As I have explained through the lengthy prologue, while NVIDIA was able to realize the specific resolution with a single monitor, AMD had to configure Eyefinity using either 2 or 4 monitors to realize 4K and 5K, respectively. The fact that the Eyefinity had to be utilized for achieving such resolution probably had given AMD a penalty. When you think intuitively, it would be strange to have same amount of computational burden between having a single monitor as the output device and dividing the output among several monitors. Well, this is just an assumption of the cause, and the "facts" revealed from the results are indicated in the statements above. The result showed that higher the resolution, higher the relative rank of AMD, and in 7680 x 1600 resolution, two 290X graphics card showed 26% higher performance rate when compared with GTX TITAN Z. However, in 5K, the performance went down a little bit, and showed only 17% higher performance rate. The answer to the question shall be revealed not until when 4K/5K resolution can be realized in AMD products using a single monitor (Therefore, I should purchase Samsung Curved Television when I get my next paycheck...)

 

 

Conclusion


With a lengthy prologue and numerous graphs, I have dealt with the subject of "Gaming at 5K resolution". The meaning of this research can be summarized as the following:

 

- Gaming at 5K resolution was extremely slow, regardless of using AMD or NVIDIA. Simply, it sucks.

- (Though I have stated the above) when performance is the only factor, a pair of R9 290X was the best by far. In other words, R9 295X2 would be the best single graphics card out there.

- (Though I have stated above two) the only single graphics card that can run every single game at 5K is GTX TITAN Z.


As a result, AMD and NVIDIA got the same score. As NVIDIA stated when GTX TITAN Z was released, indeed it was the first graphics card in history that is actually a "5K-ready".  Also, though AMD could not run some of the games under certain settings, it gets the title of "the fastest graphics card for any resolution" among the ones in the market for the games that it supports (Though I did not include R9 295X2 due to the circumstance, it is assumed to be similar to 290X CrossFire when performance is considered).  Especially, the Hawaii family had difficulty in showing its strength in a low-resolution setting due to its characteristics (512bit memory bus and 64 ROP), but the true power of Hawaii products were shown in an extreme-high resolution setting. Brethren, this is the very first scenario and the result from it on the face of the planet, since no hardware website has dealt with this topic -5K- before.

 

When we step back for just a little bit from the cutting-edge graphics cards such as GTX TITAN Z and R9 295X2, the limitation of existing products, especially the GTX 700 series, are exposed through this article. The article gives out an obvious answer to the question of "Where should we use the 6GB version of GTX 780 / 780 Ti?". The answer is, that you should use it under the resolution of 7680 x 1600 or above.


Thinking realistically, while 4K and 5K resolutions need more time (maybe a couple of years) for any actual use, the resolution of 7680 x 1600 can be simply made with three 30" monitors, or even, three 27" QHD monitors. In other words, 7680 x 1600 is "today's" resolution that we might utilize right now. Also, it is evident that the 3GB of memory is starting to show its limitation, though the limitation has not been addressed since no hardware website dealt with such surrounded configuration. Looking at this, for those of you, the owners of GTX TITAN (Non-Black) who had been bitter up until now, should be proud of what you got.

 

...Finally, this long article is about to end.

Thank you for reading this lengthy article, and I hope you have a great day!


*Editor's note : I really appreciate your efforts on this work and yourself, dear Wendy :)*


저작자 표시 비영리 동일 조건 변경 허락

'Graphics > Graphics Round-Up' 카테고리의 다른 글

Catalyst War 2014 S/S  (2) 2014/08/11
Watch Dogs : Benchmark & Analysis  (2) 2014/07/01
The Resolutionary War : GTX TITAN Z @ 5K  (17) 2014/05/20
MANTLE : A half-year achievement  (10) 2014/03/30
Entry-level Gang Fight  (6) 2014/02/11
Crossfire vs SLI 3 - (2) Mainstream Gang Fight  (0) 2014/01/09

댓글을 달아 주세요

  1. 송영하 2014/05/20 10:06  댓글주소  수정/삭제  댓글쓰기

    믿고보는 대근이형

  2. sunup 2014/05/20 13:58  댓글주소  수정/삭제  댓글쓰기

    세계 최고 PC하드웨어 리뷰어
    DG Lee. 역시나 재미있게 잘봤다.

  3. DGLee 2014/05/21 01:27  댓글주소  수정/삭제  댓글쓰기

    For foreigners : Translating this article is now in progress. Due to my poor English ability, average speed is about a couple of paragraphs per a day. I promise that I'll finish this as soon as possible as well as lessen the language barrier as I can.

  4. ㅇㅇ 2014/05/22 23:41  댓글주소  수정/삭제  댓글쓰기

    삐까뻔쩍한 그래픽카드들이 줄줄이 나올때는 우와..하고 봤지만 이번에는 너무 나랑은 동떨어진?상관없는?? 느낌(별나라이야기같은..ㅜㅜ)이와서 헐..하고봤네요 ㅋㅋㅋ
    그래프들이 줄줄줄줄줄줄줄.......@.@
    타이탄Z가 제목에 있는만큼 주인공일텐데 보면서 안티하니깐 순위가 슬쩍 올라가는거만 떠오르네요 ㅋㅋ
    고생하셨습니다 ㅋ.ㅋ
    +이모티콘에 맛들이셨나봐요.ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ

    • DGLee 2014/05/23 00:26  댓글주소  수정/삭제

      감사합니다! 타이탄Z가 등장한 첫 리뷰이긴 하지만 주인공은 절대 아닙니다. 오히려 주인공이라면 5K라는 기상천외한 해상도 그 자체, 그리고 이를 구현하기 위한 저의 고군분투기(記)가 더 어울리지 않을런지...ㅠㅠㅋ (타이탄Z 출시를 엔비디아 미루다 보니, 본의 아니게 타이탄Z의 첫번째 리뷰로 소개되어 해외에서도 이 리뷰 안에서 타이탄Z만 주목을 받고 있는데 살짝 안타까운 생각도 듭니다...ㅋㅋㅋㅋ) 여튼 좀처럼 대중적으로 관심끌기 어려운 설정 하에서 진행한 벤치마크라 한분 한분이라도 관심가져주는 분이 계시단 사실에 위안을 받고 있습니다 ㅠㅠㅋ

      이모티콘은... 모바일버전에서 되는 건 새로 배웠지만, 어차피 폰으로도 늘 데탑 버전으로만 확인하기 때문에 자주 쓰지는 않을 것 같습니다...ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ

      그나저나 자주 들러주시는 ㅇㅇ님... 이제 슬슬 신상을 밝혀 주셔도 괜찮으리라 생각합니다만 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ (운영하는 블로그나 SNS, 하다못해 메일 주소라도 링크 좀!! ㅋㅋㅋ)

    • ㅇㅇ 2014/05/26 09:31  댓글주소  수정/삭제

      블로그도 SNS도 하나도 안하는데 밝힐거라니요ㅜㅋㅋ..
      자주오는건 그냥 저번에 구글검색으로 들어온후로 즐겨찾기해놓고 오는것뿐인걸요..ㅋㅋㅋ

  5. DGLee 2014/05/25 18:40  댓글주소  수정/삭제  댓글쓰기

    To overseas visitors : Translation is just complete. Please read & have fun with it. :)

  6. OCer 2014/05/28 21:29  댓글주소  수정/삭제  댓글쓰기

    본문 영어로 할 필요 없이 그냥.. 구글 번역 달아 놓으면 되는데.........

    • DGLee 2014/05/28 22:01  댓글주소  수정/삭제

      그래프나 숫자만 있으면 모르겠는데, 뉘앙스를 전달하고픈 '글'이 포함된 이상 번역기에 의존할 수 없는 부분이 있어서요...ㅋㅋ 뉘앙스 이전에 뜻이 완전히 통하지 않게 되는 경우도 많고. 다만 같은 페이지에서 한/영을 오갈 수 있단 점에선 구글 번역기도 유용하겠는데...

  7. 주니군 2014/05/29 11:17  댓글주소  수정/삭제  댓글쓰기

    안녕하세요 블로그 잘 보고 있습니다. ^^
    제가 295x2를 구매하려고 하는데요.. 혹시 이 카드가 듀얼 UHD 모니터 2대를 60Hz로 지원 가능한지 아시나요?
    1대는 무조건 지원하는것 아는데.. 스펙상으로 두대는 될것 같은데 판매사도 모르겠다고 하고 AMD 그래픽카드 포럼에 글을 올려봐도 댓글이 안달려서.. 혹시 테스트 해보셨으면 아시지 않을까 해서 질문 남겨봅니다.

    미리 감사드립니다. &&

    • DGLee 2014/05/29 13:47  댓글주소  수정/삭제

      안녕하세요. 들러 주셔서 감사합니다^^
      본문에 나와 있지만, 4K 이상 해상도는 모두 30Hz로 테스트해 질문하신 부분에 대해선 저도 가능한지 여부를 모르겠습니다. ㅜㅜ
      혹시라도 알게 되면 다시 댓글 달아드리도록 하겠습니다.ㅎㅎ

    • 주니군 2014/05/29 14:14  댓글주소  수정/삭제

      아.. 30Hz로 하셨군요 아무튼 감사합니다 ^^

  8. 2014/06/07 08:54  댓글주소  수정/삭제  댓글쓰기

    비밀댓글입니다