Which processor is better i3 or pentium. Intel Pentium or Intel Celeron: comparison and which is better. Where did the Intel Pentium and Celeron processors go?

The year 2013 is the year of the great 22nm breakthrough

Autumn is inevitably followed by winter, winter is followed by spring, and with the same inevitability we need to return to budget families of Intel processors for the LGA1155 platform. The inevitability is dictated by the fact that since late autumn (when we last dealt with this issue), although not revolutionary, but very serious changes have occurred in this market segment. Nothing unpredictable - if then we met the first Pentium on Ivy Bridge, then now the new microarchitecture is “registered” tightly not only in the Pentium line, but also in Celeron. Moreover, the company’s pricing policy, traditionally, leads to the fact that the purchase of previous models by trade organizations loses all meaning: new ones are shipped at the same prices. Moreover, the process turned out to be so rapid that one model managed to disappear from the horizon altogether, almost never reaching Moscow retail.

To make it clearer, we decided to present such a unique table, which only needs a brief explanation: the first column is the “standard” price levels of processors in the budget segment, the second is the best that “lived” on them at the time of the material mentioned above, and the third is what “lives” there now. As you can see, models with four-digit numbers occupied all the “standard” niches, and similar processes were taking place in the area of ​​the “energy efficient” T-family. In fact, the last bastion of Sandy Bridge remained the single-core processors of the Celeron G400 line, but they were not of particular interest to the retail buyer before.

As for the usual models of the G500, G600 and G800 families, they remain in the wholesale price list, but cost like new. However, they can still be considered as candidates for purchase (as well as the quickly flying by Pentium G2010), but only due to the peculiarities of the retail market, which is updated with a noticeable delay. Accordingly, the inventory of the “old guys” must be sold off somehow, and the only way to attract attention to them is through price. Previously (when new models differed from old ones only in clock speed), this sometimes allowed for serious savings - as we already wrote, the opportunity to find an “old” Pentium G630 in stores at the price of a “new”, but slower Celeron G555 was quite real, and not hypothetical . But now it’s worth thinking carefully before taking such a step, taking into account in advance what you will have to lose. Those planning to use integrated graphics are generally better off not thinking about Sandy Bridge without a serious discount from the seller: we also compared HD Graphics of the second and third generations in the fall - with a devastating result for the first. And what has changed in terms of processor performance, which is more interesting to many (after all, despite all the progress, Intel’s integrated graphics can still be called a gaming solution only out of politeness)? We already know that Ivy is faster than Sandy “all other things being equal”, as well as the magnitude of this increase, but the massive arrival of the new microarchitecture in Celeron has led to the appearance of “not equal” ones. And what will be the final result? Today we will study this issue.

Test bench configuration

This is what almost the entire line of junior representatives of the Ivy Bridge microarchitecture looks like today - only the Pentium G2010 is missing, the reasons for its absence were given above. What you should pay attention to? Firstly, as it was easy to guess, the increase in clock frequencies continues - there is much more time left before the transition of Celeron and Pentium to LGA1150 than before the appearance of the new platform, so this extensive version of a creeping increase in performance “for the same money” was and remains main Secondly, as before, there are three lines of processors under two names, differing in the capacity of the third level cache and supported RAM frequencies. But if the L3 capacity has not changed, then the RAM has grown by one step: the G2100 family officially supports DDR3-1600, and the younger ones got DDR3-1333, which was previously the prerogative of only the Pentium G800. This is official, but in practice the situation is more interesting. Firstly, many motherboards based on “overclocker” chipsets allow you to set memory frequencies higher than the official ones. Secondly, even on non-overclocking models, the restrictions are more or less strictly observed for the G2000, but not the G1600: our “old lady” on the H67, for example, offered DDR3-1600 among the acceptable options for the latest line. Apparently, the origins of this confusion must be sought somewhere in the depths of Intel, where they decided to make an easing for Celeron - they are already “offended” by L3 capacity and frequencies, so additional restrictions may be less stringent. However, we have already studied the issue of performance gains when increasing the memory frequency from 1066 to 1333 MHz, which resulted in an estimate of 2%, and between 1333 and 1600 MHz the difference is even smaller, so this issue is only relevant when using an integrated video core. For now (in tests using the current version of the methodology) we use frequencies no higher than 1333 MHz for all LGA1155 processors.

Who should we compare the new processors with? Since no global changes in technical characteristics have occurred, we decided to limit ourselves to “intraspecific” competition, once again taking the “tops” of the three families of dual-core Sandy Bridge. It seems to us that this will be enough - AMD in this price class offers processors that are slightly different in organization, which, naturally, both overtook and will overtake the “classic” dual-core Intel processors where they could. And they will continue to lag behind them where they lagged behind :) In general, we will not give unnecessary reasons for continuing holy wars between fans of both companies, but will simply see what the new microarchitecture gives in this particular class of processors.

Testing

Traditionally, we divide all tests into a number of groups and show on diagrams the average result for a group of tests/applications (you can find out more about the testing methodology in a separate article). The results in the diagrams are given in points; the performance of the reference test system from the 2011 sample site is taken as 100 points. It is based on the processor AMD Athlon II X4 620, but the amount of memory (8 GB) and video card () are standard for all tests of the “main line” and can only be changed within the framework of special studies. For those who are interested in more detailed information, again, it is traditionally proposed to download a table in Microsoft Excel format, in which all the results are presented both converted into points and in “natural” form.

Interactive work in 3D packages

Note that the processors are lined up in the form of a neat ladder, despite the similarity in performance characteristics (and the G1610 has a slightly lower frequency than the G555) - there is a certain increase from the change in microarchitecture. But there is nothing new in this - this was clear from the previous article. We remind you that the prices remain the same. Or even formally decreased.

Final rendering of 3D scenes

Another illustration of creeping progress while maintaining positions. The only interesting thing is that the Pentium G2130 has already almost achieved a result of 100 points. Let us remember that the “scale unit” is the Athlon II X4 620, equipped with four computing cores. However, this processor is very old, and at one time it was far from the fastest quad, but the result is still interesting. If only because the dual-core, but four-threaded (also old, by the way) Core i3-530 from 2010 was slower.

Packing and Unpacking

The greater growth in the younger families and the almost complete lack of progress in the older ones is largely due to the fact that we limited ourselves to DDR3-1333 memory for all processors.

Audio encoding

Pure mathematics, and even algorithms that have not been updated for a long time - it is clear that “classic” dual-core processors have nothing special to catch here. On the other hand, at the same frequency, Ivy is about 5% faster than Sandy, which, given the similarity of the test subjects, allowed the Celeron G1620 to almost catch up with the Pentium G645 - which has a higher clock frequency and in general... Pentium at least, and not some Celeron.

Compilation

And again, no changes. However, those who are counting on them, we think, have already quickly moved to conclusions :) From a more or less curious point, the G2020 is almost catching up with the G870, despite the 200 MHz difference in clock frequency.

Mathematical and engineering calculations

And here not only the G2020 is capable of such “feats,” but also the G1620, which is as close as possible to the G645. In general, despite the fact that the main changes during the transition from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge are not concentrated in the processor cores, sometimes they lead to a quite visible effect. Relatively visible, of course.

Raster graphics

Repetition of what has been covered. Actually, it couldn’t be otherwise - the processors are very similar. Despite the difference in microarchitecture, names and positioning. Once again, the most interesting thing is that, in general, the practical difference between the Celeron G555 and Pentium G2130 is about 25% - in this situation, looking for differences between models that are closer to each other is, naturally, a thankless task.

Vector graphics

Video encoding

We didn’t comment on the previous diagram because we were tired of it, but this one is perhaps the most interesting of all. In any case, it differs from the rest: the advantages of Ivy Bridge over previous models are almost visible to the naked eye. In fact, the Celeron G1620 managed to not only catch up, but also overtake the Pentium G645, and the Pentium G2020 exactly repeated the results of the G870, i.e., the new microarchitecture made it possible to compete on an equal footing with higher-frequency processors from families positioned higher. And, by the way, a result of 100 points (i.e., the level of the Athlon II X4 620) has already been achieved by two dual-core Intel processors, and two more completely exceed this level.

Office software

It was faster than necessary, but it became even faster - what can I add? :)

Java

Another case when the “younger new” catches up with the “older old”, but otherwise there is traditionally nothing interesting: after all, all the tested processors are very similar to each other, differing only in small things.

Games

The superiority of the new microarchitecture over the old one is relatively great - even the lack of cache memory (which is very important here) did not interfere. However, the superiority is due, in fact, to one single game: F1 2010. Which “slows down” on all low-threaded processors, but slows down on Ivy Bridge to a lesser extent than on Sandy Bridge. As we have already written, all other things being equal, this “handbrake release” increases the frame rate by as much as 30% or more, which significantly exceeds the average increase in Ivy over Sandy. But where there are enough computing threads (Core i3 and higher), the absolute level of performance itself is much higher, but such breakthroughs are not observed. In general, as we can see, architectural improvements can work differently in different programs and on processors of different classes, so they need to be assessed as a whole, and not based on one example (whatever it may be).

Multitasking environment

Dual-core - it is dual-core. Any progress is observed only in younger families, i.e. where productivity was lacking to the maximum extent. Why is this interesting? And the fact that the frequencies of younger Celeron/Pentiums are comparable to the frequencies of mobile and (to an even greater extent) ultramobile processors. And it is precisely in such conditions that microarchitecture optimizations have the greatest impact. That is, the thesis is once again confirmed that Ivy Bridge is primarily for mobile market. That’s why the older models looked so pale a year ago compared to their predecessors - the latter were already doing well. But lower power consumption and higher operating efficiency at low clock speeds in low-end processors are what laptops need. And, of course, the dramatic improvement in the built-in video core is from the same area: a desktop user is free to choose a video card, but in a more compact systems using anything powerful is already problematic.

Total

Of course, the final summary chart looks exactly like most of the ones in this article, but... Doesn't quite paint the picture. Simply because in all “three-digit” lines we took the older models, i.e., the latest ones at the time of the official transition of these lines to Ivy Bridge. However, they appeared as a result of more than a year of development of the corresponding families, and not all at once, so in retail you can also stumble upon older representatives - up to the Celeron G530 and Pentium G620. Therefore, let's try to take a look at the general state of affairs in the camp of old and new budget processors.

In general, it’s indicative: at equal frequencies, Pentium is always better than Celeron of its generation, but the new one Celeron is better old Pentium. And among the various sub-lines of the latest family, the transition to a new architecture also provides more than extensive little things, such as a slight increase in memory speed. And at the very top of the segment, everything is also clear: the transition to a new microarchitecture provided a greater increase than a simple increase in clock frequency, but Intel did not abandon the latter either. Moreover, Ivy Bridge is more economical than Sandy Bridge, so the only thing that can restrain creeping progress is the reluctance to arrange intra-company competition with more expensive families. But as clock speeds increase in expensive models, it is possible to move forward in the budget segment.

Actually, this is what modern price reductions look like “Intel’s way.” In the summer of 2011, 110 final points (Pentium G840) of our method were estimated at $75 wholesale, but now the Celeron G1620 gives almost the same amount with a wholesale price of $52 (well, we can already conclude that after the release of the G1630, inevitable as the collapse of capitalism, this processor will displace the G1610 from the $42 price bracket). Moreover, if we talk about the cheapest computers, then they involve the use of an integrated video core, and in this area the advantage of the third generation HDG over the second is generally noticeable to the naked eye. It is clear that this still does not make integrated Intel graphics a gaming solution, but the user will experience less inconvenience. In general, in a nutshell, the situation can be characterized as follows: it has become a little better and a little cheaper. There are no hints of revolution, but no one promised it.

Hello everyone. In fact, the difference between Celeron and Pentium is minimal. But many users may disagree with me, saying that Celeron is much weaker and, in principle, there is some truth here... And all because it was like that before. When there was a 775 socket or an even more ancient 478 socket, then in those days there were basically two families, these were Pentium and Celeron. I don't mean quad-core processors on socket 775, they appeared later.

So. That's when Celeron was much weaker. But starting with socket 1156, everything began to change, now Celeron is close to Pentium in performance and some users on the forum even advise buying it, since the power is almost the same. But I don’t think so, after all, Penek will be faster... it has 3 MB of cache, and Celeron has 2 MB..

And the whole point is that powerful processors ABOVE Penk appeared in socket 775 (but not immediately, but with the release of new chipsets), even then there were so-called quads, but there was still a difference between Penk and Celeron. But now it is already minimal. Technical process, modern technologies, in general, today's Celeron (1150 socket) is a couple of times more powerful than the old top-end Pentium 4 EE (775 socket), who would have thought...

Therefore, the difference between Penk and Celeron fluctuates around 10-15%, that’s approximately, but not more than 20%, that’s for sure. Basically the same as the price

But it’s true that Celeron has one big plus - it’s actually even cooler, that is, it heats up even less than Penek, and in principle it can be used with passive cooling. But at the same time, you need to think about ventilation in the case, because after all, the Celeron kit comes with a radiator with a fan for a reason.. *cute*

Everything I write here is about the fact that the difference is small, that’s all I mean modern processors starting from socket 1156. I’ll tell you a secret, Celeron G3900, which is 1151 socket, frequency 2.8, 2 MB cache, sixth generation Skylake, well, it will be more powerful than even the quad-core Q9650 on socket 775, although it is the latest Yorkfield core...!

In general, I don’t know what to say. Because my opinion is that the difference in price between a modern Penk and a modern Celeron is exactly equal to their difference in performance. But there are Penka models that can be overclocked, for example the Pentium G3258 model. An overclocked Penek will already be head and shoulders above Celeron, keep this in mind. The price of a model that supports overclocking (that is, having an unlocked multiplier) is 10-15 bucks higher. But it's worth it, believe me...

For example, in this test, Celeron falls just short of Penk’s level:

And believe me, you may not even notice this difference, especially if the computer is intended for the office..

Here is another test and here the same situation will be repeated, the difference is very small:

Another test:

The tests themselves are not particularly important here, the main thing is that the processors here are modern, that is, this is real information in order to understand the difference.

And look here, Celeron 1037U, Celeron J1900, these are processors that are already included in motherboards, that is, soldered, they are not for ordinary computers at all, but for media centers. This is actually why they lose to desktop Celerons:

Here's another WinRAR test (the archiver has a built-in performance test):

Well, I hope that now you already understand that the difference in price is almost the same as the difference in performance. For an office PC or just a home PC, I would take Celeron. If you need a gaming PC, but don’t have a lot of money, then take only a Pentium that can be overclocked, for example, these are the G3260, G3258, G3420 models, these are all 1150 socket. Here's what CPU-Z shows about the G3420:

As you can see here, it’s 4.5 GHz and believe me, this is no longer a joke. And for this you can do without water cooling, it is enough to have a decent radiator with a decent cooler

Intel has earned fundamental trust from active users desktop gaming PCs, work And computers for home. Reliable and high-performance - this, of course, is about its modern multi-core central processing units . But choosing between AMD And Intel, many of us are faced with very confusing series and names of crystals from the “blue” chipmaker.

This is an instruction on how to understand processors Intel V 2017 what is better in the series Core what characteristics mean model series i3, i5 And i7, and where did they go? Intel Pentium And Celeron?

What kind of processors does Intel have in 2017?

Modern Intel processors are divided into three types of the Core family.

Intel "Core i" processors differ from each other:

Level cache(own super memory is a very important characteristic that helps the CPU perform tasks more efficiently);

The presence and absence of certain technologies;

architectural decisions;

Goals and your marketing purpose.

Intel Core i3

These are dual-core processors equipped with technology Hyper-Threading. It helps improve performance under high load. It is enough for simple games and most applications under Windows.

Family Intel Core i3 does not have a large cache, does not support the technology Turbo Boost and is most suitable for work and home computers, where the main tasks are related to the Internet, web browsing, light games and office programs.

Intel Core i5

Quad-core processors without Hyper-Threading, but with faster processing of workload-intensive tasks physical level. Optimal choice for lovers of games and resource-intensive applications. In terms of performance, they often exceed the capabilities Core i3.

Intel Core i7

Quad-core processors with Hyper-Threading for computer enthusiasts, gamers (for gaming PCs) and professionals. High level cache memory, advanced integrated graphics technologies and the company's latest achievements at the core architecture level.

Where did the Intel Pentium and Celeron processors go?

There are practically no old processors left on sale Intel. Series Pentium(for home computers and gaming) and Celeron(working systems) by 2017 were officially transferred from the architectural range to the brand category.

Intel Pentium processors not issued since 2009. Since then, the name has been used as a brand for some entry-level products based on the Intel Core architecture.

Intel Celeron processors finally phased out of commercial production in 2011, giving way to the Atom, Core and in some cases Pentium series.

Everyone thinks that Core i3 is simply cheaper, and Core i7 is more expensive - that’s not true

The well-established opinion that Intel thus segmented its desktop processors into inexpensive ones Core i3, mass medium-budget Core i5 and high performance Core i7 for enthusiasts - not entirely true. The model numbers in each family will completely confuse you.

Can you tell what the difference is between the Intel Core i5-6400 and the Core i5-7600K?

Central processors within the same series may differ in performance levels, different modifications, and even generations. Now we will figure out in a few steps what all these numbers and letters mean. You can immediately determine which processor, for example, Intel Core i5, is better.

What does the number mean in Intel Core processors after i3/i5/i7?

Number 6 in Intel Core i5- 6 400 means generation number (“sixth Intel generation Core"), as 7 in Core i5- 7 600K means 7 generation of Intel processors for Windows 10. This way you can determine which of them is newer and arrange the models in order.

The last three digits determine SKU. They actually show how powerful the processor is within the product line. Core i5-7 600 K will be faster compared to Core i5-7 500 K.

Letters in the name indicate various additional qualities of the Intel Core processor. Here are the differences:

H- high-performance graphics.

K- ability to unlock overclocking of Intel processor.

Q- four physical cores.

QM- the same, but for mobile PCs.

T- Optimized for efficient desktop PCs.

U- optimized with low power consumption for mobile computing.

How to compare Intel, AMD, laptop, PC processors?

There is a universal online service where you can enter the processor model identifier and get a table with a complete comparison of characteristics and features: cpuboss.com.

For office, home or gaming computer It's not that difficult to choose the right processor. You just need to decide on your needs, orient yourself a little in the characteristics and price ranges. There is no point in thoroughly studying the smallest nuances if you are not a “geek,” but you need to understand what to pay attention to.

For example, you can look for a processor with a higher frequency and cache memory, but without paying attention to the core of the chip, you can get into trouble. The core, in fact, is the main performance factor, and the rest of the characteristics are plus or minus. In general terms, I can say that the more expensive the product in the line of one manufacturer, the better, more powerful, and faster it is. But AMD processors are cheaper than those from Intel.

• The processor should be chosen depending on the tasks at hand. If in normal mode If you have about two resource-intensive programs running, then it is better to buy a dual-core “stone” with high frequency. If more threads are used, it is better to opt for a multi-core processor of the same architecture, even with a lower frequency.
• Hybrid processors (with a built-in video card) will allow you to save on the purchase of a video card, provided that you do not need to play fancy games. These are almost all modern Intel and AMD processors of the A4-A12 series, but AMD has a stronger graphics core.
• All processors marked “BOX” must be supplied with a cooler (of course, a simple model, which will not be enough for high loads, but is just what is needed for operation in nominal mode). If you need a cool cooler, then .
• Processors marked “OEM” are covered by a one-year warranty, while processors marked “OEM” are covered by a three-year warranty. If the warranty period provided by the store is shorter, it is better to think about looking for another distributor.
• In some cases, it makes sense to buy a percentage from hand, this way you can save about 30% of the amount. True, this method of purchase is associated with a certain risk, so you need to pay attention to the availability of a guarantee and the reputation of the seller.

Main technical characteristics of processors

Now about some characteristics that are still worth mentioning. It is not necessary to go into it, but it will be useful to understand my recommendations for specific models.

Each processor has its own socket (platform), i.e. name of the connector on motherboard for which it is intended. Whatever processor you choose, be sure to look at socket matching. On this moment There are several platforms.

• LGA1150 – not for top processors, is used for office computers, gaming and home media center. Entry-level integrated graphics, except Intel Iris/Iris Pro. Already going out of circulation.
• LGA1151 is a modern platform, recommended for future upgrade to newer hardware. The processors themselves are not much faster than the previous platform, i.e., there is little point in upgrading to it. But there is a more powerful built-in graphics core of the series Intel Graphics, DDR4 memory is supported, but it does not provide a significant performance gain.
• LGA2011-v3 is a top-end platform designed for building high-performance desktop systems based on the system Intel logic X299, expensive, outdated.
• LGA 2066 (Socket R4) - socket for HEDT (Hi-End) Intel processors of Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X architecture, replaced 2011-3.

• AM1 for weak, energy-efficient processors
• AM3+ is a common socket, suitable for most AMD processors, incl. for high-performance processors without an integrated video core
• AM4 is designed for microprocessors with Zen microarchitecture (Ryzen brand) with and without integrated graphics, and all subsequent ones. Added support for DDR4 memory.
• FM2/FM2+ for budget versions of Athlon X2/X4 without integrated graphics.
• sTR4 is a connector type for the HEDT family of Ryzen Threadripper microprocessors. Similar to server sockets, the most massive for desktop computers.

There are outdated platforms that you can buy in order to save money, but you need to take into account that new processors will no longer be made for them: LGA1155, AM3, LGA2011, AM2/+, LGA775 and others that are not on the lists.

Kernel name. Each line of processors has its own kernel name. For example, Intel currently has Sky Lake, Kaby Lake and the newest eighth generation Coffee Lake. AMD has Richland, Bulldozer, Zen. The higher the generation, the more high-performance the chip, with lower energy consumption, and the more technologies are introduced.

Number of Cores: from 2 to 18 pieces. The bigger, the better. But there is such a point: programs that do not know how to distribute the load across the cores will work faster on a dual-core with a higher clock frequency than on a 4-core, but with a lower frequency. In short, if there is no clear technical specification, then the rule works: more is better, and the further, the more correct it will be.

Technical process, measured in nanometers, for example – 14nm. Does not affect performance, but does affect processor heating. Each new generation of processors is manufactured using a new technical process with a smaller nm. This means that if you take a previous generation processor and a new one that is approximately the same, the latter will heat up less. But, since new products are made faster, they heat up about the same. That is, improving the technical process allows manufacturers to make faster processors.

Clock frequency, measured in gigahertz, for example - 3.5 GHz. Always the more the better, but only within one series. If you take an old Pentium with a frequency of 3.5 GHz and some new one, then the old one will be many times slower. This is explained by the fact that they have completely different kernels.

Almost all “stones” are capable of accelerating, i.e. operate at a higher frequency than that specified in the specifications. But this is a topic for those knowledgeable, because... You can burn the processor or get a non-working system!

Level 1, 2 and 3 cache size, one of the key characteristics, the more, the faster. The first level is the most important, the third is less significant. Directly depends on the kernel and series.

TDP– dissipated thermal power, or how much at maximum load. A lower number means less heat. Without clear personal preferences, this can be ignored. Powerful processors consume 110-220 watts of electricity under load. You can see a diagram of the approximate energy consumption of Intel and AMD processors under normal load, the less the better:

Model, series: does not relate to the characteristics, but nevertheless I want to tell you how to understand which processor is better within the same series, without delving too much into the characteristics. The name of the processor, for example "Intel i3-8100", consists of the "Core i3" series and the model number "8100". The first number means the line of processors on a certain core, and the next ones are its “performance index,” roughly speaking. So, we can estimate that:

• Core i3-8300 is faster than i3-8100
• i3-8100 is faster than i3-7100
• But the i3-7300 will be faster than the i3-8100, despite the lower series, because the 300 strongly more than 100. I think you get the idea.

The same goes for AMD.

Will you play on the computer?

The next point that you need to decide in advance is the gaming future of the computer. For “Farm Frenzy” and other simple online games, any built-in graphics will do. If buying an expensive video card is not part of your plans, but you want to play, then you need to buy a processor with a normal graphics core Intel Graphics 530/630/Iris Pro, AMD Radeon RX Vega Series. Even modern games will run in Full HD 1080p resolution at minimum and medium graphics quality settings. You can play World of Tanks, GTA, Dota and others.

• Comments (233)

• In contact with

Minsk Repairman


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  • Answer

    Answer

BRedScorpius


Answer

aleksandrzdor


Answer

• Elena Malysheva
  

  Answer

  • Alexey Vinogradov
    

    Answer

Dmitriy


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  Basil
  Feb 25, 2020

  Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  • iUnhead
    Feb 10, 2020

    Answer

Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Leonid


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Leonid


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Sergey


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  • Sergey
    

    Answer

    • Alexey Vinogradov
      

      Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Stanislav


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Vladislav


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Alexander


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Alexander


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Igor Novozhilov


Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  • Answer

    • Alexey Vinogradov
      

      Answer

Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Alexander S.


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  Alexander S.
  

  Answer

  • Answer

Alexey Vinogradov


Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Answer

Alexander S.


Answer

Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Alexander S.


Answer

Answer

Vyacheslav


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Dmitriy


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Konstantin


Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Vitaly


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  Alexander S.
  

  Answer

  Gregory
  

  Answer

Dmitriy


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

  • Answer

Alexander S.


Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Leonid


Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

  • Leonid
    

    Answer

Answer

Vladimir


Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Answer

Seryoga


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

  • Answer

Leonid


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Natalia


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Andrey


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Andrey


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  • Alexey Vinogradov
    

    Answer

Andrey


Answer

Andrey


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Andrey


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Andrey


Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Andrey


Answer

Andrey


Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Alexander S.


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Andrey


Answer

Alexander S.


Answer

Andrey


Answer

Alexander S.


Answer

Andrey


Answer

Alexander S.


Answer

Andrey


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Andrey


Answer

Alexander


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  Alexander S.
  

  Answer

  • Alexander
    

    Answer

    • Alexander S.
      

      Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Maksim


Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Andrey


Answer

Andrey


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Andrey


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Answer

• Answer

  • Andrey
    

    Answer

    Alexander S.
    

    Answer

Alexey Vinogradov


Answer

Dmitriy


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  Alexander S.
  

  Answer

  Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Maksim


Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Alexander


Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

  • Alexander
    

    Answer

Alexander S.


Answer

• Answer

Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Dmitriy


Answer

Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Alexander S.


Answer

Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  • Answer

    • Alexey Vinogradov
      

      Answer

    • Alexander S.
      

      Answer

little ducalis


Answer

Newbie


Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

  • Newbie
    

    Answer

Answer

• Newbie
  

  Answer

  • Answer

    • Newbie
      

      Answer

Konstantin


Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Answer

• Answer

  • Alexander S.
    

    Answer

    • Answer

      • Alexander S.
        

    Answer

Iskandar


Answer

Answer

Answer

Vladimir


Answer

• Alexander S.
  

  Answer

Answer

Andrey


Answer

Answer

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

Sergey


Answer

Leonid


Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  

  Answer

  • Leonid
    

    Answer

    • Alexey Vinogradov
      

      Answer

Victor


Answer

• Victor
  

  Answer

  • Alexander S.
    

    Answer

Tatiana
Jan 04, 2019

Answer

Victor
Apr 19, 2019

Answer

• Alexey Vinogradov
  Apr 19, 2019

  Answer

A
Jul 12, 2019