Apple A14 - 5 nm, 11.8 billion transistors

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

NostaSeronx

Diamond Member
Sep 18, 2011
3,712
1,241
136
Maybe I missed it, but AFAIK just about nobody was claiming that TSMC was in high volume mass N5 production in Q1 2020, not even TSMC themselves.
"Total operating expenses decreased by TWD2.6 billion, mainly as 5-nanometer technology moved from R&D stage to mass production during the first quarter."
- Wendell Huang -- Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer/Spokesperson

Volume production at TSMC = Mass production at TSMC
 

piokos

Senior member
Nov 2, 2018
554
206
86
People are underestimating how much success Apple will have with ARM Macs.
While most of your post absolutely makes sense (Apple controlling OS and main system APIs leading to highly optimized hardware), this last sentence is a little disappointing.

ARM Macs will be great as another Apple-ecosystem device. Which means they will cannibalize iPads.
For example: ARM-powered Macbook Air will essentially be an iPad Pro with a fixed keyboard.

At the same time, ARM Macs will be much less useful for people who aren't in Apple-ecosystem. Today MacBook Pro is one of top choices for programmers and scientists - pretty much anyone who would really want a Linux, but they can't accept how awful everyday experience that brings (especially on a notebook).
And these people will probably jump to x86 devices. MS pushes Linux integration so hard - with Windows slowly becoming a dual-kernel OS - that soon it will be hard to recognize which kernel you're actually using.

So in the end Apple will probably sell significantly less devices - but with much higher margins, because they won't have to share profits with Intel and AMD.
 

mikegg

Golden Member
Jan 30, 2010
1,847
471
136
While most of your post absolutely makes sense (Apple controlling OS and main system APIs leading to highly optimized hardware), this last sentence is a little disappointing.

ARM Macs will be great as another Apple-ecosystem device. Which means they will cannibalize iPads.
For example: ARM-powered Macbook Air will essentially be an iPad Pro with a fixed keyboard.

At the same time, ARM Macs will be much less useful for people who aren't in Apple-ecosystem. Today MacBook Pro is one of top choices for programmers and scientists - pretty much anyone who would really want a Linux, but they can't accept how awful everyday experience that brings (especially on a notebook).
And these people will probably jump to x86 devices. MS pushes Linux integration so hard - with Windows slowly becoming a dual-kernel OS - that soon it will be hard to recognize which kernel you're actually using.

So in the end Apple will probably sell significantly less devices - but with much higher margins, because they won't have to share profits with Intel and AMD.
I completely disagree with you.

There's nothing stopping people from buying an Intel Mac over an iPad today if they wish. ARM Mac isn't going to change this behavior unless Apple decides to one day turn Macbooks into 2-in-1 devices, which they have said they won't do many times already.

However, I believe ARM Macs will greatly increase Apple's PC market share. Why? Two reasons:

1. Differentiated performance on Macs instead of relying on widely available 3rd party Intel chips. I expect Macs to greatly outperform AMD and Intel computers, especially on laptops with battery life, accelerators, and general computing performance.

2. Apple can finally release a low-cost Macbook that won't suck. Expensive Intel chips prevented them from doing that. Don't be surprised if we see entry-level $700 - $800 Macbook in the future that far outperforms anything in the same class, ala iPhone SE strategy.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: teejee

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
5,094
8,098
136
Is it even meaningful to compare performance for traditional apps anymore when so much of the transistor budget is dedicated to accelerating non-CPU and non-GPU applications?
As you mentioned yourself this depends on the software support. Hardware acceleration is meaningless if no or little software can make use of it. Apple is indeed in an excellent position there since not only do the control all the stacks, they also keep their API rather up to date to make good use of the hardware acceleration available. This is hard to compare with non-Apple systems since there the hardware, OS and software can change a lot, making similar hardware acceleration on non-closed systems like Android or PC not impossible but still very hard to achieve (especially as soon as closed software is involved that doesn't access APIs that can be extended for hardware acceleration). So non-accelerated benchmarks are still a valid base for performance comparison. As soon as hardware acceleration is used the software used need to be specified as well due to the dependency on software support.

I guess a way to cover both extremes is to always include best and worst case performance. Any improvement in worst case performance can lift all apps, whereas the best case performance shows what's currently possible in the most ideal case.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,870
1,438
126
"Total operating expenses decreased by TWD2.6 billion, mainly as 5-nanometer technology moved from R&D stage to mass production during the first quarter."
- Wendell Huang -- Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer/Spokesperson

Volume production at TSMC = Mass production at TSMC
Thanks for posting that, but I will point out that the above and one of your previous quotes represent very selective quoting. From the same earnings call:

---

N5 is already in volume production with good yield. Our N5 technology is a full node stride from our N7 with 80% logic density gain and about 20% speed gain compared with N7. N5 will adopt EUV extensively. We expect a very fast and smooth ramp of N5 in the second half of this year driven by both mobile and HPC applications. We'll reiterate 5-nanometer will contribute about 10% of our wafer revenue in 2020. N5 is the foundry industry's most advanced solution with best PPA. We observed a higher number of tapeouts as compared with N7 at the same period of time. We will offer continuous enhancements to further improve the performance, power, and density of our 5-nanometer technology solution into the future as well. Thus, we are confident that 5-nanometer will be another large and long-lasting node for TSMC.

---


Sebastian Hou -- CLSA -- Analyst

Thank you. [Indecipherable] So I have two follow-up. First one, I just want to double check that if I hear you correctly, I think C.C. already mentioned that you have reserved the high numbers of tapeout on N5 versus N7 at the same stage. Is that right?

C.C. Wei -- Chief Executive Officer

That's right.

Sebastian Hou -- CLSA -- Analyst

Okay. So if my note is correct, then in the year one manufacturing, the year one mass production for 7, you have 30-plus tapeout on 7 and recent entry you have 50-plus and then you're going to like 100-something. So I think this year is year one for 5-. So we can say that you have 30-plus 5-nanometer tapeout at this point.

C.C. Wei -- Chief Executive Officer

Well, I'm not willing to release the actual number. But all I can say is now in N5, we have a customer from -- smartphone customer from HPC-related area, OK? And the activity, actually we saw more tapeouts as compared with the same period of N7 because the N5 actually is complicated, and I would believe that customer will take more time to work with TSMC as early as possible. That's what we are thinking.

Sebastian Hou -- CLSA -- Analyst

Okay. Okay. Do you expect N5 to be potentially bigger than N7 in terms of the capacity?

C.C. Wei -- Chief Executive Officer

Yes. Certainly, we expect that.

Sebastian Hou -- CLSA -- Analyst

Okay. On the capacity-wise, not revenue, capacity.

C.C. Wei -- Chief Executive Officer

Oh, on the capacity-wise, we'll say no comment right now.


---

So from their earnings call, they said they are technically in mass production, but the ramp up for N5 isn't happening until Q3 2020, and their initial N5 production is to support a "smartphone customer from HPC-related area".

That certainly isn't Apple. I'd guess that is Huawei, and nowhere near production levels of the iPhone chips of course. IOW, this means the Apple N5 A14 ramp up wasn't until Q3 2020.
 

piokos

Senior member
Nov 2, 2018
554
206
86
There's nothing stopping people from buying an Intel Mac over an iPad today if they wish. ARM Mac isn't going to change this behavior unless Apple decides to one day turn Macbooks into 2-in-1 devices, which they have said they won't do many times already.
I meant: when ARM Macs fully replace the x86 lineup.

You'll have 3 groups:
1) I used a Mac and I don't care / I'm OK with ARM
2) I used a Mac but I have to stay on x86
3) I haven't used a Mac, but ARM convinced me to buy one

So yeah... I have no trouble finding arguments for (2), but I struggle to point a sensible one for (3). Hence the suspicion that market share will go down. And since Apple's margin will increase, they can totally afford it.
Sure, if Apple decides to sell Macs for less, this could bring new clients. But I look at latest iPads and I just can't find any premise of this happening.
You have to remember that Apple products are considered a luxury good in a way. So they may not want to lower the price too much.

Your arguments about efficiency and performance are true. But are they significant?
x86 laptops offer plenty of battery life today, especially current Macbooks. You're essentially moving from "more than I need between charges" to "more than I need between charges + 4 hours".
Performance (especially: performance/$) was never a decisive factor for Apple consumers.

Apple may be playing a long game - hoping that x86 tasks will migrate to cloud. But that's even more against the argument of superior chip performance (battery life as well).
 
Reactions: Mk pt and Tlh97

piokos

Senior member
Nov 2, 2018
554
206
86
At a more basic level, why would Apple keep a bunch of expensive inventory sitting around for months?
That's how Apple launches work. Products are available almost instantly after launch. People are camping for 2 days in front of a store to get an iPhone/a Macbook before their neighbour.
Samsung does the same with their smartphones.

It's very different from what you may be used to in the PC world, when we have to wait months before some products become available.
 
Reactions: lightmanek

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,870
1,438
126
That's how Apple launches work. Products are available almost instantly after launch. People are camping for 2 days in front of a store to get an iPhone/a Macbook before their neighbour.
Samsung does the same with their smartphones.

It's very different from what you may be used to in the PC world, when we have to wait months before some products become available.
iPhone 12 isn't launching until October, and the pundits are saying that for several models, it won't even be available until November.

In that context, having most of their A14 chips ready and sitting around in February/March, 7-9 months in advance, just doesn't make much sense. Yes I understand it's not as if they just drop in SoCs at the last minute in otherwise pre-made near-complete iPhones, but nonetheless you get the picture.

Furthermore, as I quoted above, TSMC itself already said back in Q2 that their N5 ramp was planned for Q3. Yes they did say "mass production" and "volume production" in Q1 but they never said high-volume mass production and they were quite cagey about production capacity, refusing to provide any numbers about that. Furthermore, they specifically said it was for a smartphone customer doing HPC. Apple itself has never done HPC. The closest Apple has ever come to HPC was some dude at Virginia Tech creating a supercomputer out of off-the-shelf G5 Power Macs and then off-the-shelf G5 Xserves.

Come to think of it though, it would be cool to have a crapload of Apple Arm cores built into a supercomputer.
 
Last edited:

piokos

Senior member
Nov 2, 2018
554
206
86
In that context, having most of their A14 chips ready and sitting around in February/March, 7-9 months in advance, just doesn't make much sense. Yes I understand it's not as if they just drop in SoCs at the last minute in otherwise pre-made near-complete iPhones, but nonetheless you get the picture.
Apple has absolutely no business in using the latest and greatest SoC they can make. No company does.
A14 has a large enough performance advantage over A13 just based on the better node. Which means iPhone 12 buyers will be satisfied.
iPhone 13 will very likely use the same node, probably a SoC design similar to (based on) A14. Same can be said about the next iPad (maybe even Macs).
So it absolutely didn't make sense to "waste" all the known improvements for something that's already fine. They're saving what they can for future products.

Also, keep in mind just how many chips Apple wants to make on 5N. iPhones, iPads and potentially a big chunk of iMacs and Macbooks. So even if they wanted to delay A14 and make it slightly faster, they probably needed that node capacity for something else.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,870
1,438
126
Apple has absolutely no business in using the latest and greatest SoC they can make. No company does.
A14 has a large enough performance advantage over A13 just based on the better node. Which means iPhone 12 buyers will be satisfied.
iPhone 13 will very likely use the same node, probably a SoC design similar to (based on) A14. Same can be said about the next iPad (maybe even Macs).
So it absolutely didn't make sense to "waste" all the known improvements for something that's already fine. They're saving what they can for future products.

Also, keep in mind just how many chips Apple wants to make on 5N. iPhones, iPads and potentially a big chunk of iMacs and Macbooks. So even if they wanted to delay A14 and make it slightly faster, they probably needed that node capacity for something else.
I don't understand your post.

I made no comment in that post about their performance. My point was it doesn't make sense to make these chips 8 months in advance just to sit in a warehouse.

But it's a moot argument anyway, since TSMC has already said their N5 ramp up was Q3, not Q1.
 

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,327
11,121
136
I don't understand your post.

I made no comment in that post about their performance. My point was it doesn't make sense to make these chips 8 months in advance just to sit in a warehouse.

But it's a moot argument anyway, since TSMC has already said their N5 ramp up was Q3, not Q1.

Their Q1 remark was in regards to TSMC's R&D spending, that doesn't mean customers were actually ordering high volume wafers at that point, they were just saying their R&D spending for 5 nm was reduced because it reached the point of viability for high volume production. Just because you reach that point doesn't mean you instantly have high volume orders and their subsequent comments about actual production ramp show that their high volume orders weren't coming in until the second half of the year.
 
Reactions: Eug

oak8292

Member
Sep 14, 2016
102
96
101
High volume manufacturing is a very loose term, at least according to Intel. When they were ramping the 14nm node they had a footnote on the bottom of a slide that their definition of high volume manufacturing was 1 million die in a quarter. The die that they were using to say that 14nm was in 'high' volume production was a U/Y, meaning around 100 mm2. You can do the math on how many wafers per month is required.

TSMC continues to 'ramp' a node depending on demand/contracts. With the current capital spend rate and rumors it sounds like they are still 'ramping' the 7nm node. The 5nm ramp rate is going to be limited by EUV equipment availability. Todays news from Digitimes is that Apple is going to consume all of the 5nm capacity until the end of the year.


Besides building inventory for a 'mass release' Apple also uses TSMC for InFO packaging.

P.S. Anandtech has an article on Broadcom using 5nm for HPC on a double size reticle CoWoS chip. I believe that EUV cuts the maximum die size in half due to limits in lithography. This could be a problem for graphics cards from both AMD and Nvidia. I think that both are using die sizes over the EUV limit.
 
Reactions: Eug

name99

Senior member
Sep 11, 2010
511
395
136
I meant: when ARM Macs fully replace the x86 lineup.

You'll have 3 groups:
1) I used a Mac and I don't care / I'm OK with ARM
2) I used a Mac but I have to stay on x86
3) I haven't used a Mac, but ARM convinced me to buy one

So yeah... I have no trouble finding arguments for (2), but I struggle to point a sensible one for (3). Hence the suspicion that market share will go down. And since Apple's margin will increase, they can totally afford it.
Sure, if Apple decides to sell Macs for less, this could bring new clients. But I look at latest iPads and I just can't find any premise of this happening.
You have to remember that Apple products are considered a luxury good in a way. So they may not want to lower the price too much.

Your arguments about efficiency and performance are true. But are they significant?
x86 laptops offer plenty of battery life today, especially current Macbooks. You're essentially moving from "more than I need between charges" to "more than I need between charges + 4 hours".
Performance (especially: performance/$) was never a decisive factor for Apple consumers.

Apple may be playing a long game - hoping that x86 tasks will migrate to cloud. But that's even more against the argument of superior chip performance (battery life as well).

The arguments for (3) include:
- the device is faster/more fluid than the Intel equivalent
- it's more secure
- it's more desirable because it can (one way or another) run a lot of iPhone/iPad software
- it's more tightly tied into the rest of my Apple compute ecosystem

Each of these is legit for a different group of users, but I think the 3rd and 4th will be most important. There are now many small apps that exist only in mobile form, but it can be irritating to use them on a phone -- maybe you want to cut and paste data between multiple apps, maybe you want a larger window, maybe you want a decent keyboard, maybe you're just already sitting down at your Mac -- and the ability to just use them will be, IMHO, a substantial win for the ARM Mac.

Already I am constantly irritated by the frictions where Apple doesn't do proper sharing from iPhone to iPad or Mac, most obviously with health data, and I expect this mindset to continue and become more common.
For example I've noticed my non-techie friends who use WeChat or Viber a lot for work communication with Asia now take it for granted that they can engage in these interactions on their phone or their Mac, whichever is most convenient, to the extent that they are likewise becoming irritated by other app situations that don't provide this fluidity. Of course any individual app can code a separate Mac and iOS version (think Skype), but Apple's very deliberately making this cheaper every year. (Which is a VERY different claim from the idiotic "Macs will become big iPads"...)
 

name99

Senior member
Sep 11, 2010
511
395
136
High volume manufacturing is a very loose term, at least according to Intel. When they were ramping the 14nm node they had a footnote on the bottom of a slide that their definition of high volume manufacturing was 1 million die in a quarter. The die that they were using to say that 14nm was in 'high' volume production was a U/Y, meaning around 100 mm2. You can do the math on how many wafers per month is required.

TSMC continues to 'ramp' a node depending on demand/contracts. With the current capital spend rate and rumors it sounds like they are still 'ramping' the 7nm node. The 5nm ramp rate is going to be limited by EUV equipment availability. Todays news from Digitimes is that Apple is going to consume all of the 5nm capacity until the end of the year.


Besides building inventory for a 'mass release' Apple also uses TSMC for InFO packaging.

P.S. Anandtech has an article on Broadcom using 5nm for HPC on a double size reticle CoWoS chip. I believe that EUV cuts the maximum die size in half due to limits in lithography. This could be a problem for graphics cards from both AMD and Nvidia. I think that both are using die sizes over the EUV limit.

High NA EUV lithography cuts the maximum die size in half. We aren't there yet with 5nm.
It remains unclear in High NA EUV (ASML's EXE:5000 machine) will be adopted in 3nm (increasingly unlikely) or 2nm (probable).
 

piokos

Senior member
Nov 2, 2018
554
206
86
Each of these is legit for a different group of users, but I think the 3rd and 4th will be most important.
If someone buys a Macbook because it works well in Apple ecosystem or because it runs iPad apps (or something very similar) - he probably already own a Macbook.

I can't imagine anyone buy a Macbook over a Windows laptop or vice versa with security being a key factor. These systems are too different.

That was the point of my argument. We know for sure that some people will pass the next Macbook because their life on x86 will be much easier.

But it's really hard to point a scenario where someone would buy his first Macbook BECAUSE it moved to ARM.
So the outflow will dominate. That's it.
There are now many small apps that exist only in mobile form, but it can be irritating to use them on a phone -- maybe you want to cut and paste data between multiple apps, maybe you want a larger window, maybe you want a decent keyboard, maybe you're just already sitting down at your Mac -- and the ability to just use them will be, IMHO, a substantial win for the ARM Mac.
Again: that was not the argument.
You're talking about potential advantages of ARM over x86 (or Apple over Windows+Intel/AMD).

But most of the people you describe probably already have a Macbook.
For example I've noticed my non-techie friends who use WeChat or Viber a lot for work communication with Asia now take it for granted that they can engage in these interactions on their phone or their Mac (...)
Exactly.
 
Reactions: Tlh97

oak8292

Member
Sep 14, 2016
102
96
101
High NA EUV lithography cuts the maximum die size in half. We aren't there yet with 5nm.
It remains unclear in High NA EUV (ASML's EXE:5000 machine) will be adopted in 3nm (increasingly unlikely) or 2nm (probable).

Thanks name99 I got ahead of my skis. A little dementia setting in on when some of these transitions are occurring.
 

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,833
4,819
136
Yes, and I think they chose their wording carefully, as "volume production" is not necessarily the same thing as "mass production" at iPhone SoC levels. Furthermore, even disregarding that caveat, that is in Q2 already, not the Q1 you were claiming.

Maybe I missed it, but AFAIK just about nobody was claiming that TSMC was in high volume mass N5 production in Q1 2020, not even TSMC themselves.


What I think some people are missing here is that it takes about three months for a wafer to go from the start of the process to being finished, so if you "start mass/volume production" on April 1st, the first finished wafer will come out the other end around July 1st.
 

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,833
4,819
136
Takes that long to be able to assemble enough iPhones for a launch.

Given that Apple sells over 200 million iPhones a year, the production process has to be capable of making 4 million a week when averaged out over the entire year. We know that Foxconn brings on extra people to increase production rates pre-launch, so it requires less than two months pre-production to satisfy all the prelaunch sales and stocking all the stores/carriers at launch.

If they can get more than they need for that initial launch/stocking great, but no matter what they will always end up with some model/color/config combos getting a few weeks out shortly after launch. That's more because they can only guess how popular the various combinations will be, and have to wait until the things start selling and see which combos are running out and which are moving more slowly than expected to make adjustments in what configs are being assembled.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,870
1,438
126
Given that Apple sells over 200 million iPhones a year, the production process has to be capable of making 4 million a week when averaged out over the entire year. We know that Foxconn brings on extra people to increase production rates pre-launch, so it requires less than two months pre-production to satisfy all the prelaunch sales and stocking all the stores/carriers at launch.

If they can get more than they need for that initial launch/stocking great, but no matter what they will always end up with some model/color/config combos getting a few weeks out shortly after launch. That's more because they can only guess how popular the various combinations will be, and have to wait until the things start selling and see which combos are running out and which are moving more slowly than expected to make adjustments in what configs are being assembled.
Sounds about right. BTW, this was from August:

Foxconn starts major hiring drive for 'iPhone 12' assembly lines

The recruitment drive is an annual fixture of the Apple production schedule, with Foxconn typically hiring more staff in the months before the September launch of a new iPhone model. This year's call is later than 2019, when the recruitment drive commenced in July.

However, the chips would have to come out a bit before that of course.

What I think some people are missing here is that it takes about three months for a wafer to go from the start of the process to being finished, so if you "start mass/volume production" on April 1st, the first finished wafer will come out the other end around July 1st.
Really? I had thought it was considerably less than 3 months.

EDIT:

I just looked it up. 6-8 weeks for simpler processes, but 3 months is about right for 7 nm.
 
Last edited:

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,327
11,121
136
When do the new iPhones come out? I don't follow this stuff.

For fab turn around, I'm pretty sure Apple orders, at least early on, will be expedited. Fabs can typically expedite at least a good portion of your order by several weeks if you are a premier customer or are willing to pay for it.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,870
1,438
126
When do the new iPhones come out? I don't follow this stuff.

For fab turn around, I'm pretty sure Apple orders, at least early on, will be expedited. Fabs can typically expedite at least a good portion of your order by several weeks if you are a premier customer or are willing to pay for it.
October is the likely iPhone announcement date, but the leakers are saying that some models will not arrive until November (which is quite late).

However, besides COVID-19, the delay may be mostly related to the integration of the modem and its availability, and not due to shortages the 5 nm SoC. Apple decided Intel's 5G is non-viable for 2020, and had to crawl back on its hands and knees to Qualcomm to get their X55 5G chipset.


It is estimated that this has cost Apple $4.5 billion, and Apple has since bought up Intel's modem IP, so I suspect Apple's next chip design target may be a modem.

EDIT:

Weird. The link works in this post, but not if you click on it. So here is the link again:

https://www.apple.com/uk/newsroom/2019/04/qualcomm-and-apple-agree-to-drop-all-litigation/
 
Last edited:
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |