Placement of CD-ROM, CD-RW, DVD Drives

Sorry, but this post was also placed in the CD-Writers section. It does kinda fit in both forums.

Here's a question(s) I need the pros here to help me out with:

It deals with placement of numerous optical drives; the CD-ROM, CD-RW, and DVD drive. The hard drives, two WD1000BB's, setup in a RAID 0 config (using a Promise FastTrak 100 Tx2 card) are on their own separate channels and are not at issue here.

The three optical drives listed above will be setup on the MB's primary and secondary channels and that is where my question lies.

Intended Usage:
I plan to copy some CD's from the CD-ROM drive as well as data off the HD's to the CD-RW. At this point, both of these tasks will be shared equally. And yes, I'll be watching a few DVDs.

So, in terms of performance, how would "you" configure this setup?
-Where does that CD-ROM go?
-Where do you put that CD-RW?
-Do you share a channel between these two drives and if so, does it matter which one is the master/slave?
-Or do you kick that CD-RW off on its' own channel, and if so, do you place it on the Primary or Secondary channel?

So many options, so many choices. Please keep performance in mind.

I think the answer to this drive placement question will hinge between these two drives and the DVD drive will simply follow. What are you guys thinkin?

I would appreciate all comments on this setup. There are many combinations here and your sound reasoning and logic would be much appreciated!!!!

Thanks in advance to all!

Joe
18 answers Last reply
More about placement drives
  1. I was facing something similar (but hdd going on Pri Master and was a RW/DVD combo)... i take it youve got 2 IDE ports (some mobos apparently have 4!!), HDD's going seperately thru RAID card.

    i'd go for:
    PM: CDROM
    PS: DVD
    SM: CDRW
    SS: -

    My reasoning is CDROM will get most use as thats what youll be using most, so primary master, and cdrw goes on the other cable as then it can write on the fly at full speed. DVD drive goes pri slave as its possible youll copy a file from a data-dvd, not really going to be using DVD at same time as CDROM :) It gets a lot more complicated when theres a HDD also on these cables.

    "i dont know what you're listening to me for, havent you figured out i dont actually know anything?"
  2. Thanks for answering on this Thanksgiving Holiday. Lots of people have viewed my question but few have answered. Maybe they are all still digesting their birds. Again, thanks for your reply.

    You are correct. My motherboard has the mostly standard configuration; two IDE ports; a Primary/Secondary setup. And I'm thinking along the same lines as you have outlined. I'm wondering though. Is it possible that the CDROM and CDRW could write on the fly, at full speed while sharing the same port? I don't think I will set it up that way, but technically speaking, I was wondering if that was possible. And you're correct. I really don't see when I would run the DVD drive and the CDRW at the same time.

    Based on the config you suggested:

    PM: CDROM
    PS: DVD
    SM: CDRW
    SS: -

    Would I hurt the performance of that CDRW if I were to install a removable drive (like a Zip or Syquest drive) on that remaining Secondary/Slave? In other words, would my disk burning sessions slow down at all if I simply plugged in one of these removable type drives into that remaining slot, even if no activity was going on with that removable drive? I'd like to use one of these Zip or Syquest drives as a data backup medium for my hard disks on a daily basis, but I don't want to hurt the performance of my CDRW when I need to burn a few disks.

    Thanks again for your input. I think we are on the same page.

    By the way, I have posted this same exact question over on the StorageReview wedsite and I'm getting some really lame responses. I appreciate all responses, but some people are clueless. Thank you again for your thoughtful response!!
  3. It wont hurt at all if you put something on the slave to the CDRW, as long as nothing is happening on the other device. only if theres activity on the zip drive, then the two drives would have to take turns using the cable. For this same reason you will not get maximum performance burning on the fly when the CDROM and CDRW are on the same cable, since theyll have to take turns. The data has to fly from CDROM down the cable to the mobo and then back up the same cable to the CDRW. However both CDRW and CDROM are trying to use the cable continuously, which obviously they cant do, and hence they have to take turns. When theyre on seperate cables, they both have a cable to themselves so this problem doesnt occur.

    Hopefully sometime someone clever will make it so the data can go straight from one device to the other without having to go via the mobo, but this doesnt happen yet :(

    ive got a combo CDRW/DVD drive, CDROM and two HDD, all which have to use IE cable, so ive had to make concessions :(

    "i dont know what you're listening to me for, havent you figured out i dont actually know anything?"
  4. one thing you should keep in mind all the time is that the slowest drive interface on an IDE port is setting the maximum available speed for both drives.
    means: when you put a drive that only has a PIO4 I/O interface and a drive with ATA66 interface on the same IDE port that port can only run in PIO4 mode!

    the config as you have it so far looks to be the best for what you intend to do.
    check on the interface of the Zip/Syquest drive.
    if your CD-RW is 20x or so and the ZIP/Syquest is only PIO mode it might compromise the CD-RW speed!

    another problem IDE has, is that on an IDE port (channel) only one drive at a time can use it and the other has to wait. when you use the writer any other drive on the port should not be used at all, espacilly removable disk drives!
    my DVD-drive and CD-RW are on the same IDE port. I lost one disk once because while writing I put a DVD in and the DVD drive was blocking the port while validating the DVD so the CD-RW run out of data and failed the writing.
    should not be an issue for a CD-RW with burn-proof though.

    respect!
  5. DaveGOD and NermalX…

    Thanks for those comments!

    But I guess I’m just “slightly miffed.”

    I hear what DaveGod has said:

    “It wont hurt at all if you put something on the slave to the CDRW, as long as nothing is happening on the other device. only if theres activity on the zip drive, then the two drives would have to take turns using the cable.”

    But I also hear what NermalX has said:

    “One thing you should keep in mind all the time is that the slowest drive interface on an IDE port is setting the maximum available speed for both drives.
    means: when you put a drive that only has a PIO4 I/O interface and a drive with ATA66 interface on the same IDE port that port can only run in PIO4 mode!

    OK, so here is where I need a bit more bangin on the brain.

    IF the Zip (or Syquest) drive is NOT in operation, according to DaveGOD, there is no penalty. But from what I hear NermalX say is that regardless if this drive is operating or not, if it’s specs are somewhat inferior to the other drive, in this case the CD-RW, then the CD-RW will take a hit in performance.

    So basically, that is where we stand and this is the issue I had when I first started this thread. Thanks to everyone with the placement of these drives with respect to what channels and master/slave config, but now I really need a hard, factual, technical, pin-point, no BS answer as to whether or not the CD-RW will suffer if the zip/Syquest drive’s specs (ie: PIO4) will kick the CD-RW in the ass?

    Lookin at the Specs:
    Syquest Drive: EIDE Burst Rate: PIO Mode 4 = 16.6MB/s
    Plextor 24/10/40A: Burst Read, Ultra DMA mode 2 = 33.3MB/s

    If these two devices share the same IDE channel, will the CD-RW suffer, even if the Syquest Drive isn’t spinning?

    NermalX says yes?
    DaveGOD says no?

    This is the question I guess.

    One other thing. Where can I find the specs on performance with respect to all these modes (ie: PIO Mode 4, Ultra DMA mode 2.) How the hell is anyone able to keep a handle on all these modes? I’m sure there are “new” modes being developed as technology moves on; is there a website that someone like me can bookmark to help me understand this stuff?

    Thanks again guys! Learning a lot here!

    Joe
  6. <font color=green>"one thing you should keep in mind all the time is that the slowest drive interface on an IDE port is setting the maximum available speed for both drives.
    means: when you put a drive that only has a PIO4 I/O interface and a drive with ATA66 interface on the same IDE port that port can only run in PIO4 mode!"</font color=green>

    No, sir ... that is not necessarily correct ... not anymore. Your information is a little out of date, although that <i>was</i> the situation a few years ago.

    Modern chipsets (Intel 5th geveration or better) support Independent Device Timing, so the old rule of thumb about the slowest device on an IDE cable limiting the over-all negotiation speed of any devices on that cable is no longer applicable.

    I thought you might appreciate being brought up to speed on the subject.

    <A HREF="http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/if/ide/confTiming-c.html" target="_new">http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/if/ide/confTiming-c.html</A>

    Toejam31

    <font color=red>My Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847</A>
    ____________________________________________________

    <font color=purple>"Procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part."</font color=purple>
  7. There is a tremendous amount of information available at this site. <A HREF="http://www.pcguide.com/index-c.html" target="_new">http://www.pcguide.com/index-c.html</A>

    <font color=green>"If these two devices share the same IDE channel, will the CD-RW suffer, even if the Syquest Drive isn’t spinning?"</font color=green>

    No. The devices will both run at full speed on the same cable, due to the chipset support of Independent Device Timing, as mentioned above.

    Because your CD-RW has BURN-Proof, you also should be able to use both both devices at the same time, without incurring buffer-underruns with the Plextor. The drive will adjust the data in the cache before it is burned to disk so that the process proceeds smoothly, despite the inherent IDE Read/Write thread limitation.

    The CD-RW's performance might be hampered <i>slightly</i> when copying on the fly from the CD-ROM, but only if they share a cable. That won't be the case if you create an image of the data to be copied on the hard drive, first ... and then burn the CD. A burning program like Nero can do this easily, and all in one process.

    The Plextor 24/10/40A has the most advanced version of BURN-Proof on the market. I expect that you would have to make an real effort to cause a buffer-underrun with this drive, regardless of any other shared device on the cable.

    Happy reading!

    Toejam31

    <font color=red>My Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847</A>
    ____________________________________________________

    <font color=purple>"Procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part."</font color=purple>
  8. hi toejam31,

    thanks for the information about the independend device timing. true, I wasn't up to date there. good link to the pc-guide.

    but you missed one thing on that site:
    "Note: It is not possible to use PIO modes to control one device on a channel and DMA (or Ultra DMA) modes to control the other one. Do not mix devices that don't support DMA with ones that do on the same channel, if you want to use DMA."

    Kujo's drive specs are PIO4 for the syquest and UDMA for the Plextor so the Plextor will still be run at PIO4 if he puts both on the same port.
    question is if this makes a significant difference. I don't think so cause the PIO4 tranfer rate should be fast enough to get the Plextor writing at 24x. but only a test can tell.

    @Kujo:
    I think this link on the pc-guide site is what you've been looking for in the first place:
    <A HREF="http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/if/ide/conf_Performance.htm" target="_new">http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/if/ide/conf_Performance.htm</A>
    check it out if you haven't done yet.

    respect!
  9. You are quite right. Good call.

    There are two obvious solutions. One would be to place the SyQuest drive on one cable, and the optical drives on the other. Of course, that leaves one extra optical device that still must be connected to the cable with the SyQuest.

    That device could be the least frequently used, or the slowest of the three.

    Or ... one or more devices could be eliminated from the configuration altogether. That would be my preference.

    My personal opinion is that there are just too many redundant-feature devices being installed in this system. I don't really see the point of a DVD-ROM <i>and</i> a CD-ROM. That's just a drain on the PSU that serves no purpose ... not to mention increased system heat from all the components.

    I also don't see the point of the SyQuest drive, not with the new Plextor in the system. It's slow, uses magnetic media, and a 1GB cartridge runs about $60.00, compared to two CD-R disks that cost about 60 cents each. Not to mention the issues of data integrity and storage longevity when comparing magnetic media vs digital. And ... transporting data from computer to computer.

    This Plextor drive runs at PIO Mode 4 from the BIOS, but DMA Multi-Word 2 when the chipset drivers are loaded in Windows. Whether the current ATA standards backwards-compatibility would allow the newer device to burn and run at full speed with the SyQuest on the same cable ... I honestly don't know. I've never tested this particular scenario. It might be an interesting experiment, but if it were my system, I think that I'd avoid running this particular configuration, just to avoid possible conflicts. I also think the Plextor <i>should</i> be able to run at 24x in PIO 4 Mode, but for best performance, I'd prefer to install the drive according to the manufacturer's recommended settings.

    Comments?

    Toejam31

    <font color=red>My Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847</A>
    ____________________________________________________

    <font color=purple>"Procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part."</font color=purple>
  10. so you cannot put a PIO4 device as the slave to a device using DMA? This is the stupidest thing i have ever heard, it means that you cannot put it as a slave to a hard disk. You can, at worst you just lose DMA. Intuitively (i.e. see what other people say on this) would the simplest solution not be to simply open the bios and turn off DMA for the CDRW, which would just mean the CPU has some work to do when burning. I think this is what nermalx says in his last post. i think DMA makes transfer only a little faster when the CPU is not under load, only significant when CPU is very busy. I also think it will be able to cope with 24x without DMA. The main problem is the CPU will have more work to do.

    I agree with eliminating a device i suggest if not CDROM then the zip, what is the point of having a zip drive when you can copy 800mb onto a rewritable CD that costs 10% the price of a zip, probably faster. unless of course, you need to copy files from work/uni/wherever that only has a zip drive...


    The more I know the more I know I don't know
  11. Actually, I think the simplest solution, if Kujo insists on using the SyQuest drive, would be to keep it off the cable with the CD-RW! Then there wouldn't be any need to disable DMA in the BIOS, or the Device Manager, depending on the OS. Kujo never mentioned his operating system version.

    It just wouldn't make sense to put the fastest optical device on the cable with the slowest, unless you had absolutely no other options. Just from a practical standpoint.

    Some BIOS versions "need" a Zip drive like this to be a Master, and so I'd put it on a cable with the CD-ROM. Then the CD-RW as the Secondary Master and the DVD-ROM as the Slave on the other cable.

    I agree ... the Plextor should work okay without DMA, but what's the point of buying a drive like this and even vaguely considering negating the performance in any way? (No answer required ... mild sarcasm intended.) <GRIN>

    That Zip drive is just antiquated, and oughta be discarded. Perhaps placed in an older system that doesn't have a CD-RW. Of course, if you need to copy files from work, a CD would work just as well as the cartridge, and much faster, too. It would be an unusual situation for a workstation to have a Zip drive, but no CD-ROM ... unless the IT budget has hit dead rock-bottom, and you've gotta jump through hoops to buy <i>any</i> components.

    Toejam31

    <font color=red>My Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847</A>
    ____________________________________________________

    <font color=purple>"Procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part."</font color=purple>
  12. umm, so wouldnt the cdrom performance then be hit? and er, that means bad for a) general useage, and b) on the fly burning! hehe. Unless i am mistaken - not uncommon - in my belief that CDROM's also use DMA. If he's just using DVD-Rom for movies, would movie performance be affected much? my guess is it depends on how much of the cpu time his dvd software needs. But ooops, then CDROM and RW on same cable and back to orginal post :)

    "It would be an unusual situation for a workstation to have a Zip drive, but no CD-ROM "
    - er, the point was the workstation wont have a burner! i.e. IF he needs to copy files from work and bring it home (proly doesnt need to anyway, just saying as this is common) :)


    The more I know the more I know I don't know
  13. LOL!

    I think that we could debate the finer points of DMA and device placement for this poor fellow until the cows come home, as long as we don't know exactly what the devices are, the speeds, etc. ;-)

    Without more detailed system specs, this is just wheel spinning.

    I can add this, for what it's worth.

    Unless he really needs that Zip drive (for some obscure, and hereby unknown, unfathomable reason that currently requires high-level ESP) ... I'd replace it with a third hard drive, used for nothing but storage ... say, something cooler, like a 5,400 RPM drive.

    He wants to do daily backups, due to running a RAID 0 configuration, with two WD Caviar 100 GB hard drives.

    It would be a heck of a lot cheaper (and faster) in my opinion, to burn an image to disk, and then perhaps copy the image to CD's, perhaps on a weekly basis, unless a great deal of changes were made to the system on that daily basis.

    This is assuming, of course, that we're just talking about a home desktop system, and someone's personal backup. And a fellow who is religious about keeping that backup up-to-date, which I would find to be a little unusual in a home environment, anyway. For most people, keeping a daily backup is like a New Year's Eve resolution ... a good idea, but it probably won't last long.

    A third hard drive for storage would make more sense, to my way of thinking. Greater capacity, less chance of data corruption, could be used to save multiple images on different partitions, etc.

    I can burn an image of the partition that contains the operating system files (and a few programs) with my Plextor 16/10/40A in around eight minutes, and it takes about the same amount of time to copy the compressed image to a couple of CD's.

    Unless Kujo is working with some hellaciously big files, it shouldn't take long to back up any new personal data each day with this method, and that brand-new Plextor is pretty fast ... definitely much faster than any Zip drive.

    I would also think that it would be easier to rebuild the array if something went wrong if there was a current image already on the system, instead of trusting to one of those expensive cartridges, which are subject to corruption due to shock, heat, light ... the normal problems encountered when using magnetic media. This would also allow him some redundancy ... by having two ways to store an image, instead of relying on just the one.

    I'm not a big fan of Zip drives. And I still think there are too many devices being stuffed into this can, for no particularly good reason. Who installs a DVD-ROM, just for watching DVD's? That's silly. He'd better have a big tower, a good cooling solution, a decent PSU, and money to burn.

    Toejam31

    <font color=red>My Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847</A>
    ____________________________________________________

    <font color=purple>"Procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part."</font color=purple>
  14. much as i dont want to drag this further off topic, but my backup way is (okok WILL be) to have 3 partitions and add my current 2.5gb disk. C: is for windows and programs that refuse to go anywhere but C:, D: is for all programs, and E: is for files. Basically i can more or less have a clean reinstallation of windows without having to touch anything else. ditto for all programs, and to backup files i just copy and paste E: drive onto the old 2.5gb disk, zipping if necessary. maybe make a cd too... but them im just using ot for games and uni work, which i ALWAYS backup by once on HDD, once to floppy, and occasionally email my uni account with it too :)


    The more I know the more I know I don't know
  15. <b>WOW!</b>

    Killer Help Guys,
    Thanks for all the comments on this thread. I knew I could get some good answers and insight into this topic on this forum.

    I’m sorry I’ve been off line for a few days. Been working my ass off and now I have a few days off.

    OS:
    The OS for this system is going to be stuck at WIN98SE for a while. I’ve got a very expensive, older HP plotter (used for large blueprints for ACAD apps) that does not have drivers for anything other than Win9x. Until drivers are developed for this plotter, or they buy another, newer plotter, I’m stuck with this present OS.

    Specs on this rig:
    <b>CPU:</b> PENTIUM 4 2.0GHZ P4 256K 400FSB S478
    <b>Motherboard:</b> ASUS P4T-E
    <b>Power Supply:</b> PC Power and Cooling’s Ultra-Quiet ATX 400 ATX/ATX12V
    <b>Memory:</b> 1 Gig: All 800MHz ECC RDRAM RIMMs + 2 CRIMM
    <b>Case:</b> Lite-On Enclosures Workstation FS020
    <b>Fans:</b> 3 Panasonic PanaFlo FBA12G12U1A (120mm)
    <b>CD-ROM:</b> Kenwood 72X TrueX CD-ROM
    <b>CD-RW:</b> PlexWriter 24/10/40A
    <b>DVD:</b> Lite On LTD-163
    <b>Hard Drives:</b> 2 WD’s 100.0GB EIDE ULTRA/ATA 100 7200RPM
    <b>RAID Controller:</b> Promise Fasttrack100 TX2 UltraATA/100 RAID Card
    <b>Video Card:</b> Radeon 8500 AGP 64MB DDR All-In-Wonder (when released)
    <b>Sound Card:</b> CL's Audigy Platinum Sound Blaster SB0090P

    This rig has plenty of power, plenty of cooling, and plenty of internal case space to pretty much handle anything that can be packed in her. It is a personal home desktop for my brother who will be using it for double duty between his architectural engineering projects (ACAD) and personal use. He’s not big on backing up his system and I’ll need to automate his back-up tasks.

    A special thanks to Toejam31 for that pcguide.com link!

    As per Toejam31: <font color=green>“My personal opinion is that there are just too many redundant-feature devices being installed in this system. I don't really see the point of a DVD-ROM and a CD-ROM. That's just a drain on the PSU that serves no purpose ... not to mention increased system heat from all the components. I also don't see the point of the SyQuest drive, not with the new Plextor in the system. It's slow, uses magnetic media, and a 1GB cartridge runs about $60.00, compared to two CD-R disks that cost about 60 cents each. Not to mention the issues of data integrity and storage longevity when comparing magnetic media vs digital. And ... transporting data from computer to computer.”</font color=green>

    All great points! I think what I’m going to do is forget about installing that Syquest drive and/or a Zip drive. Much of what I have been reading on the pcguide website, and as recommended by the Toejam31 master, appears to strongly indicate that I will suffer some type of performance penalty with respect to having this older drive on ANY channel in this computer. Since performance is my primary concern, I’ll blow off this type of drive for backup purposes and just do periodic backups to a CD or possibly throw in another HD, also recommended by Toejam31. I do have plenty of Syquest cartridges though and they can be found in quantity for as little as $4.00 per cartridge thru eBay. Of course they still won’t approach the cheap cost of a CD however. My brother’s office rig does have Syquest drives and therefore the desire to try to stick with this type of medium.

    As per NermalX: <font color=green>“Kujo's drive specs are PIO4 for the syquest and UDMA for the Plextor so the Plextor will still be run at PIO4 if he puts both on the same port.question is if this makes a significant difference. I don't think so cause the PIO4 tranfer rate should be fast enough to get the Plextor writing at 24x. but only a test can tell."</font color=green>

    If I would have had the time, it would have been a neat project to do some benchmarks with/without this drive installed on the Secondary Slave channel. But again, from what I have read here and elsewhere, I suspect these benchmarks would have just verified what was already known. By the way, what type of benchmarking programs would you use for such a test?

    I’d like to again thank all of you for your input. Thanks DaveGOD, NermalX, Toejam31. A great thread and hopefully some great insight not only for me, but for everyone here.

    Thanks again!!!

    Joe
  16. You are very welcome. It was an enjoyable thread, and hopefully, informative.

    Here's a link to a page that has a "couple" of decent benchmarking programs.

    <A HREF="http://www.acnc.com/benchmarks.html" target="_new">http://www.acnc.com/benchmarks.html</A>

    More:

    <A HREF="http://www.benchtest.com/win98.html" target="_new">http://www.benchtest.com/win98.html</A>

    <A HREF="http://www.etestinglabs.com/benchmarks/3dwinbench/3dwinbench.asp" target="_new">http://www.etestinglabs.com/benchmarks/3dwinbench/3dwinbench.asp</A>

    <A HREF="http://www.benchmarkhq.ru/b_e.html" target="_new">http://www.benchmarkhq.ru/b_e.html</A>

    That oughta keep you busy for a while. :wink:

    Have fun!

    See ya ...

    Toejam31

    P.S. <b>WHOOHOO!</b> Killer rig!

    <font color=red>My Rig:</font color=red> <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=6847</A>
    ____________________________________________________

    <font color=purple>"Procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part."</font color=purple>
  17. ToeJammer!

    Thanks for all those links! I just wish I had the time to try all of those benchmarks out. Which one do you go with?

    In terms of the specs on my brother's rig; he gave me an unlimited budget on this thing, but when I presented my final proposal, he started pullin in the money and what I posted on this forum is the final specs. This beast is sittin next to me now, but will soon be shipped off to NYC. I sure wish I had the ability to tweak this thing out even more, but he's itching to get his fingers on it. I guess I can understand.

    Again, thanks for all your help. Ya came thru for me big-time.

    And to everyone else, a big thanks as well!

    The Kuj
  18. i have also a cdr,cdrw & dvd drives

    cdr master 1
    dvd slave 1

    cdrw master 2

    the most important thing is to put cdr & cdrw on diff channel for cdr/cdrw copies


    EasyInfo :cool:
    I would like to Invest for my PC !!
    ok, buy nothing.
Ask a new question

Read More

DVD Drives CD-Rom Storage