EVGA Gives Nvidia GTX 980, 980 Ti, Titan X Hybrid Graphics Cards Free Facelift

[mapesdhs]

They may make a 980 Ti dual card, that has "12" GB of GDDR5, and by that I mean each GPU has access to 6, but SLI doesn't "stack" VRAM between GPUs (even on dual GPU cards), so you have two GPUs on one circuit board with access to only 6 GB of VRAM each for a total of 12. GPU 1 can't access the 6 GB belonging to GPU 2, though. (This is how it currently works even on the "12GB" Titan Z)

Indeed. Something that reeeeally annoyed me about the whole FUD relating to the 970's split RAM setup was the way so many were moaning so loudly about that, and yet nobody seems to care that both GPU makers get away with describing dual-GPU cards as having double the RAM (far worse practice IMO). It should not be allowed as it's completely misleading; such box packaging & PR directly implies the user's programs can access that much RAM, but they can't. As you say, the data is simply replicated to each card. A dual 980 Ti should still be described as being a 6GB card, or at the most, "2x6GB (6GB visible)". The fact that there's two lots of 6GB on the card is irrelevant, the card cannot behave as anything other than a config with just 6GB. AMD and NVIDIA have been doing this for years; I really don't get why site reviews don't call them out on it because it stinks. It's even worse when there's a complete contradiction between official specs for dual-GPU cards and at the same time one can get up-spec'd single-GPU cards, eg. the GTX 590 was marketed as a 3GB card (2x 1.5GB), but there was also the single 580 in numerous variants with a genuiner 3GB (I have loads of them), in which case SLI 580 3GB is obviously a lot more potent than a 590 where VRAM matters (certainly does for Crysis at crazy detail).


Also, QSV, I don't get the ACX hate. I have three 980 ACX 2.0 cards, I'm very happy with them, easily some of the quietest cards I own, and they oc very nicely (I have some pretty high spots atm on the Techpowerup Unigine Heaven top-10 list, and a few 3DMark records).

Ian.

 

[pimpanther]

They may make a 980 Ti dual card, that has "12" GB of GDDR5, and by that I mean each GPU has access to 6, but SLI doesn't "stack" VRAM between GPUs (even on dual GPU cards), so you have two GPUs on one circuit board with access to only 6 GB of VRAM each for a total of 12. GPU 1 can't access the 6 GB belonging to GPU 2, though. (This is how it currently works even on the "12GB" Titan Z)

Indeed. Something that reeeeally annoyed me about the whole FUD relating to the 970's split RAM setup was the way so many were moaning so loudly about that, and yet nobody seems to care that both GPU makers get away with describing dual-GPU cards as having double the RAM (far worse practice IMO). It should not be allowed as it's completely misleading; such box packaging & PR directly implies the user's programs can access that much RAM, but they can't. As you say, the data is simply replicated to each card. A dual 980 Ti should still be described as being a 6GB card, or at the most, "2x6GB (6GB visible)". The fact that there's two lots of 6GB on the card is irrelevant, the card cannot behave as anything other than a config with just 6GB. AMD and NVIDIA have been doing this for years; I really don't get why site reviews don't call them out on it because it stinks. It's even worse when there's a complete contradiction between official specs for dual-GPU cards and at the same time one can get up-spec'd single-GPU cards, eg. the GTX 590 was marketed as a 3GB card (2x 1.5GB), but there was also the single 580 in numerous variants with a genuiner 3GB (I have loads of them), in which case SLI 580 3GB is obviously a lot more potent than a 590 where VRAM matters (certainly does for Crysis at crazy detail).


Also, QSV, I don't get the ACX hate. I have three 980 ACX 2.0 cards, I'm very happy with them, easily some of the quietest cards I own, and they oc very nicely (I have some pretty high spots atm on the Techpowerup Unigine Heaven top-10 list, and a few 3DMark records).

Ian.

i have a nice rig,the card i have lets it down.[r9 280x XFX dd BE].i am afetr a EVGA GTX 980 3.0 hdmi SUPERCLOCKED to finish my project.[then a 2 GB HYBRID STORAGE hdd and a gold or platinum superflower 750 watt or XFX or EVGA P! and im done,until i get bored and want a ddr4 set up lol]
i hope the EVGA SC GTX (*) has a backplate lol

 

[CraigN]

Indeed. Something that reeeeally annoyed me about the whole FUD relating to the 970's split RAM setup was the way so many were moaning so loudly about that, and yet nobody seems to care that both GPU makers get away with describing dual-GPU cards as having double the RAM (far worse practice IMO). It should not be allowed as it's completely misleading; such box packaging & PR directly implies the user's programs can access that much RAM, but they can't. As you say, the data is simply replicated to each card. A dual 980 Ti should still be described as being a 6GB card, or at the most, "2x6GB (6GB visible)". The fact that there's two lots of 6GB on the card is irrelevant, the card cannot behave as anything other than a config with just 6GB. AMD and NVIDIA have been doing this for years; I really don't get why site reviews don't call them out on it because it stinks. It's even worse when there's a complete contradiction between official specs for dual-GPU cards and at the same time one can get up-spec'd single-GPU cards, eg. the GTX 590 was marketed as a 3GB card (2x 1.5GB), but there was also the single 580 in numerous variants with a genuiner 3GB (I have loads of them), in which case SLI 580 3GB is obviously a lot more potent than a 590 where VRAM matters (certainly does for Crysis at crazy detail).


Also, QSV, I don't get the ACX hate. I have three 980 ACX 2.0 cards, I'm very happy with them, easily some of the quietest cards I own, and they oc very nicely (I have some pretty high spots atm on the Techpowerup Unigine Heaven top-10 list, and a few 3DMark records).

Ian.

I'm with you 100% on this. I find it really dumb that for the last few years, dual GPU cards have gotten away with actually misrepresenting how much VRAM the cards actually have, while the 970 got a beating for being a "3.5 GB card" when it *actually* has 4 GB available, whereas the SLI cards never have the advertised amount available.

And no one can argue "Well DX12 will have combined VRAM" because we haven't even seen it implemented yet, and its been misadvertised for long before DX12 was announced, on cards that are definitely not DX12 compatible.

 

[QSV]

Thats probably because not many people buy dual GPU cards. And those who do, arent really known for being critics.

The main reason why the 970 got so much flak was not that it didnt have real 4 GB, it was because the driver keeps the usage below 3.5 GB, so that the rest of the 4 GB is not used. So it really is not real 4 GB, because in most games that 4 GB will never be used, even if they would need 4 GB. It was pretty much a scam. They advertised it as an 4 GB card, but they knew about the 3.5 GB + 512 MB issue and thus limited VRAM usage to 3.5 GB via the driver.

EVGA is a joke. When I bought my GTX 260 and it crashed all the time and the support didnt recognize that, I swore to myself to not buy another EVGA product ever. Then I got a good deal for an EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0.
I decided to go against my oath and buy it. Yeah. I got what I deserved:
That card is absolute garbage. Its locked at a very low voltage and cant be overclocked at all. And even the stock speed/voltage is so close to instability that it sometimes does single black frames from time to time. Yet the EVGA support again didnt acknowledge that problem.
And then the cooler... its loud, because its running hot. Much hotter than MSI or Gigabyte or Asus. And its hot because its so horribly designed that one of the heatpipes isnt touching the GPU.

 

[CraigN]

To say that the driver "keeps usage below 3.5 GB" is not actually correct. To say it will never be used if it needs that much, also incorrect. It was proven in a lot of benchmarks it was *very* easy to get the card to use all 4GB (Shadow of Mordor being the most notorious) and when it did, that's where it could cause problems, but not necessarily. It's still a very solid performer at 1080p.

The drivers prioritize when to use that last 512 MB of cache, but they definitely don't avoid it entirely. You could argue that it's 3.5 GB with a 512MB cache or buffer, but it's definitely still 4GB, and it definitely WILL use all 4 if it has to, so to say it's "not used," or they actively force the card not to use it, is false. It is not a scam, it was at best a misadvertisement and a miscommunication that they definitely should have gotten out in front of before reviews, or at least right after when their Engineering realized what was being reported.

It's possible you got two lemons in a row, and that sucks, and even worse so that EVGA didn't help you. I've had my fair share of CS horror stories from MSI myself, even though others swear up and down by them too. My roommate's EVGA 980 Superclocked runs like a dream. I've learned with hardware, loyalty to a manufacturer is a mistake, because any of them can and inevitably will burn you (hot GPU pun intended) at any time eventually.

 

[QSV]

It was proven in a lot of benchmarks that exactly that happens and only few games actually use the full 4 GB. Side by side a 980 used the full 4 GB while a 970 kept below 3.5 GB.
Read what I wrote: "because in most games that 4 GB will never be used".
You can talk around it as much as you like, it doesnt change the facts. There are actually law suits going over this.

You excuse such things a lot. I bet you were also one of those who defended the Xbox 360 during the RRoD disaster. You were one of the 40% that didnt have a problem, so everyone else was just "unlucky"... lol
Might wanna Google a bit about EVGA and their "superior" support and their "awesome" products.

 

[pimpanther]

oh hummm strix here we come [980 ] lol

 

[CraigN]

It was proven in a lot of benchmarks that exactly that happens and only few games actually use the full 4 GB. Side by side a 980 used the full 4 GB while a 970 kept below 3.5 GB.
Read what I wrote: "because in most games that 4 GB will never be used".
You can talk around it as much as you like, it doesnt change the facts. There are actually law suits going over this.

You excuse such things a lot. I bet you were also one of those who defended the Xbox 360 during the RRoD disaster. You were one of the 40% that didnt have a problem, so everyone else was just "unlucky"... lol
Might wanna Google a bit about EVGA and their "superior" support and their "awesome" products.

You're right, there are a lot of benchmarks that show the 970 tries to avoid using the 512MB buffer.

There's also just as many that show that it still runs fine even when it does, at least at 1080p. 1440p that gets murky. That still doesn't indicate it can't, or won't, which makes this statement:

so that the rest of the 4 GB is not used...

and this one:

So it really is not real 4 GB...

Factually untrue. It is real 4GB, and it is used. Is it used like it's used on the 980? No. It's managed differently, and that's okay, what's not okay is letting it go for so long as being incorrect.

As for your other points:
That would be impossible as I've never owned a Xbox 360, so now you're just making baseless assumptions about me to be rude. I'm not invalidating your issue. I'm saying that you could be spectacularly unlucky with eVGA, while others could be spectacularly lucky.

I even supported your argument (which amounts to: "EVGA sucks because I have issues, and the internet says they do too, even if popular opinion is their CS is great") by mentioning that I had issues with MSI (and the internet said they did too), another company others claim to be decent when it comes to customer support. I sent back the same 890FX motherboard 3 times for a very widely reported issue that they failed to acknowledge, and had to pay shipping each time, one of those times the board was damaged because of the packaging they asked me to use, and tried to make me pay for the whole motherboard (a motherboard i already bought), before FINALLY conceding and sending me a 990FX board to replace it the 4th time.

Certainly not excusing anything. I just recognize the reality of what I live in. Companies aren't perfect, it's possible to be spectacularly unlucky with hardware regardless of vendor, and a bad experience for one person doesn't indicate a bad experience for everyone.

 

[mapesdhs]

Wow, this all just goes to prove exactly my point! All this hate for the 970 which is NOT an issue; as benchmarks show, the card runs great no matter how it functions internally, yet dual-GPU cards are misadvertised again and again, yet nobody seems to care.

QSV, I don't care if lots of people don't use dual-GPU cards (even though I think you're wrong, I see lots of people with them, especially on pro forums where they can be used for app acceleration); how many of those yelling about the 970 owned a 970? Do you? Yet plenty felt they were entitled to pile the hate & FUD on NV for a non-issue. I don't mind if people complain, with a proper rationale (which there isn't for the 970 btw), I just rather they were consistent about it. If you're going to rant about the 970 then for grud's sake rant more about the dual-GPU VRAM nonsense because it's a zillion times worse! People are arguing irrelevant edge-case performance semantics over the 970, while dual-GPU cards are marketed with the implication they can handle VRAM loads that they factually can't. It's a lie, it's wrong, review sites should call out both vendors on it and put a stop to it. I just wish those spouting venom about the 970 would focus their wrath where it's blatantly more deserved.

Pick any site review of a dual-GPU, very rarely does the author explain that the card will not and cannot behave as the advertised doubled-RAM implies.


However, back to the pointless and irrelevant 970-bashing we go I expect...

Ian.

 

[QSV]

Yeah yeah, baseless bashing, flaming, etc. Thats always the words of fanboys.
May I remind you that I actually bought a GTX 970 months AFTER I knew about this issue? I knew I wouldnt be able to use the 4 GB to the full extend. And I acknowledge that many games still run good with it. It is still a very good 1080p graphics card. Else I wouldnt have bought it so later after release.

Yet you cant deny the facts. It is a problem in a lot of games and even in the games were it seems it isnt a problem, load stuttering will be more than with a 980. Anyone will notice those compared to a 980. I actually noticed them instantly when I got my GTX 970 even in games like Skyrim with mods, because on my friends 980 they were not there.

Anyway, I realized that you guys dont care about the facts, so I am done here.

 

[CraigN]

People are arguing irrelevant edge-case performance semantics over the 970, while dual-GPU cards are marketed with the implication they can handle VRAM loads that they factually can't. It's a lie, it's wrong, review sites should call out both vendors on it and put a stop to it. I just wish those spouting venom about the 970 would focus their wrath where it's blatantly more deserved.

Couldn't have summarized it better myself (bolded for emphasis). I agree. The Dual GPU reporting is far worse.

At best, most reviews will mention in a one-line that "Each GPU has access to <x> RAM, for a total of <y> RAM on the board" and rarely call out that each GPU is actually limited to the access of that amount, and is merely mirrored on the other half.

 

[CraigN]

Yeah yeah, baseless bashing, flaming, etc. Thats always the words of fanboys.

Except, you did exactly that, explicitly when you tried to say I must have been a Xbox 360 sympathizer? Completely baseless, as it had naught to do with the conversation at hand.

load stuttering will be more than with a 980. Anyone will notice those compared to a 980. I actually noticed them instantly when I got my GTX 970 even in games like Skyrim with mods, because on my friends 980 they were not there.

Anyway, I realized that you guys dont care about the facts, so I am done here.

Maybe because, gasp, the 980 is a faster card, with actually faster memory bandwidth? (224 vs 196)
We aren't ignoring facts. You're the one stating "it can't" when really the answer is "it tries not to."

 

[mapesdhs]

Sorry QSV but there just aren't any so called "facts" that make the 970 nonsense remotely interesting. No site was able to show any serious performance issue as a result of how the card works. Infact, I clearly recall reading it was very hard to make the card end up in a state where it was possible to tell the difference.

And then there are those yabbering about performance for SLI for 4K, yet it's a card which doesn't have enough oomph for 4K anyway, so again a non-issue.

"It is a problem in a lot of games..." No it isn't, site articles showed this clearly. It just isn't.

And btw, are you saying I'm a fanboy? That's a laugh. Check my posts, I slag off any vendor as I see fit, and my own rather large collection of GPUs spans right across the range (more than sixty cards).

Meanwhile, as I predicted, the 970 ranting continues. Care to join me in a rant about the dual-GPU VRAM thing, QSV? You didn't even mention it in your reply, just straight back to the pointless 970 topic.

To me it's like someone complaining about a leaky kitchen tap when there's a burst water main outside flooding their lounge...

Why aren't you complaining about dual-GPU VRAM lies in the same way? Or actually more since it's clearly worse?

Or I could pick other more relevant PR issues which bug me, like the contstant rebranding of existing old tech which both sides keep doing again and again. The 300 series isn't new, but nobody seems to care. NV did it with the 260, and the 560.

The whole 970 business feels more like a vine meme, something that people feel they have to join in with, even though it just doesn't matter a hoot in reality.

Ian.

 

[CraigN]

Sorry QSV but there just aren't any so called "facts" that make the 970 nonsense remotely interesting. No site was able to show any serious performance issue as a result of how the card works. Infact, I clearly recall reading it was very hard to make the card end up in a state where it was possible to tell the difference.

And then there are those yabbering about performance for SLI for 4K, yet it's a card which doesn't have enough oomph for 4K anyway, so again a non-issue.

"It is a problem in a lot of games..." No it isn't, site articles showed this clearly. It just isn't.

And btw, are you saying I'm a fanboy? That's a laugh. Check my posts, I slag off any vendor as I see fit, and my own rather large collection of GPUs spans right across the range (more than sixty cards).

Meanwhile, as I predicted, the 970 ranting continues. Care to join me in a rant about the dual-GPU VRAM thing, QSV? You didn't even mention it in your reply, just straight back to the pointless 970 topic.

To me it's like someone complaining about a leaky kitchen tap when there's a burst water main outside flooding their lounge...

Why aren't you complaining about dual-GPU VRAM lies in the same way? Or actually more since it's clearly worse?

Or I could pick other more relevant PR issues which bug me, like the contstant rebranding of existing old tech which both sides keep doing again and again. The 300 series isn't new, but nobody seems to care. NV did it with the 260, and the 560.

The whole 970 business feels more like a vine meme, something that people feel they have to join in with, even though it just doesn't matter a hoot in reality.

Ian.

In all fairness, the latest "rebrands" from Nvidia (i.e. 600-to-700 series) have been actual performance improvements on Kepler, rather than just card relabels on the NV side, and there was no Maxwell 1 versions of the 900 series cards except the 750. Not that they haven't been guilty of it before, but they have been less guilty of it later, at least on their mid range to enthusiast cards. I'm sure the budget-range gets recycled every year still :\

Some of the Rx 200 and Rx 300 cards have been straight up copies of their earlier counterparts with only slightly higher stock clocks or added VRAM on Team Red side though.

 

[pimpanther]

It was proven in a lot of benchmarks that exactly that happens and only few games actually use the full 4 GB. Side by side a 980 used the full 4 GB while a 970 kept below 3.5 GB.
Read what I wrote: "because in most games that 4 GB will never be used".
You can talk around it as much as you like, it doesnt change the facts. There are actually law suits going over this.

You excuse such things a lot. I bet you were also one of those who defended the Xbox 360 during the RRoD disaster. You were one of the 40% that didnt have a problem, so everyone else was just "unlucky"... lol
Might wanna Google a bit about EVGA and their "superior" support and their "awesome" products.

You're right, there are a lot of benchmarks that show the 970 tries to avoid using the 512MB buffer.

There's also just as many that show that it still runs fine even when it does, at least at 1080p. 1440p that gets murky. That still doesn't indicate it can't, or won't, which makes this statement:

so that the rest of the 4 GB is not used...

and this one:

So it really is not real 4 GB...

Factually untrue. It is real 4GB, and it is used. Is it used like it's used on the 980? No. It's managed differently, and that's okay, what's not okay is letting it go for so long as being incorrect.

As for your other points:
That would be impossible as I've never owned a Xbox 360, so now you're just making baseless assumptions about me to be rude. I'm not invalidating your issue. I'm saying that you could be spectacularly unlucky with eVGA, while others could be spectacularly lucky.

I even supported your argument (which amounts to: "EVGA sucks because I have issues, and the internet says they do too, even if popular opinion is their CS is great") by mentioning that I had issues with MSI (and the internet said they did too), another company others claim to be decent when it comes to customer support. I sent back the same 890FX motherboard 3 times for a very widely reported issue that they failed to acknowledge, and had to pay shipping each time, one of those times the board was damaged because of the packaging they asked me to use, and tried to make me pay for the whole motherboard (a motherboard i already bought), before FINALLY conceding and sending me a 990FX board to replace it the 4th time.

Certainly not excusing anything. I just recognize the reality of what I live in. Companies aren't perfect, it's possible to be spectacularly unlucky with hardware regardless of vendor, and a bad experience for one person doesn't indicate a bad experience for everyone.

I had 2 gigabyte m2 sniper atx mobo fritz on me inside 6 months,great when the worked but i got a full refund after the 2nd mobo and bought the Asus hero 7.i told Toms Hardware and im still smarting from the slating i got saying the mobo was crap [even though i gave it a good reveiw when i received it] learnt my lesson there.EVGA has got tons of excellent reviews on amazon and most other sites.sometimes you just get bad luck.

 

[pimpanther]

the 3.5 issue is what stopped me buying the 970 and [hopefully] going for the 980,also i was told the 970 wouldn't be much of a step up from the r9 280x from XFX BE DD i already am using .

 

[Reaper_7799]

CraigN said: "Certainly not excusing anything. I just recognize the reality of what I live in. Companies aren't perfect, it's possible to be spectacularly unlucky with hardware regardless of vendor, and a bad experience for one person doesn't indicate a bad experience for everyone."

This ^^...It really can just be bad luck, it happens with cpu chips (silicon lottery) and gpu chips from all manufacturers. Was helpin a guy pick out a card the other day and he ended up getting an evga hybrid like mine, except his wont overclock hardly at all and had a pretty low asic score too. Is it the norm? No, not at all but it happens, even on upper end. He ended up RMA'ing it so hopefully his next one will be better, I felt bad though.

Seen people go through rma process 2 or 3 times to get a properly working gigabyte or msi with no coil whine and in that timeframe 50 people bought one and had no issues at all.


I agree that the 970 should have been addressed and handled properly, instead of seeming like they were just lying about it, however as has been stated above and tested over and over again, it doesn't really affect anything in 1080P, where the card is designed to play hard.

 

[CraigN]

QSV said: "Certainly not excusing anything. I just recognize the reality of what I live in. Companies aren't perfect, it's possible to be spectacularly unlucky with hardware regardless of vendor, and a bad experience for one person doesn't indicate a bad experience for everyone."

This ^^...It really can just be bad luck, it happens with cpu chips (silicon lottery) and gpu chips from all manufacturers. Was helpin a guy pick out a card the other day and he ended up getting an evga hybrid like mine, except his wont overclock hardly at all and had a pretty low asic score too. Is it the norm? No, not at all but it happens, even on upper end. He ended up RMA'ing it so hopefully his next one will be better, I felt bad though.

Seen people go through rma process 2 or 3 times to get a properly working gigabyte or msi with no coil whine and in that timeframe 50 people bought one and had no issues at all.


I agree that the 970 should have been addressed and handled properly, instead of seeming like they were just lying about it, however as has been stated above and tested over and over again, it doesn't really affect anything in 1080P, where the card is designed to play hard.

Not to nitpick, but I said that, definitely not QSV.

But yeah, I agree, there is a ridiculous lottery with hardware luck sometimes, and it's not just computers. My audio receiver I bought for $1200 went out in the first 3 months, thankfully it was swapped without any issue, and that one has been going for two years now without any problems.

 

[Reaper_7799]

QSV said: "Certainly not excusing anything. I just recognize the reality of what I live in. Companies aren't perfect, it's possible to be spectacularly unlucky with hardware regardless of vendor, and a bad experience for one person doesn't indicate a bad experience for everyone."

This ^^...It really can just be bad luck, it happens with cpu chips (silicon lottery) and gpu chips from all manufacturers. Was helpin a guy pick out a card the other day and he ended up getting an evga hybrid like mine, except his wont overclock hardly at all and had a pretty low asic score too. Is it the norm? No, not at all but it happens, even on upper end. He ended up RMA'ing it so hopefully his next one will be better, I felt bad though.

Seen people go through rma process 2 or 3 times to get a properly working gigabyte or msi with no coil whine and in that timeframe 50 people bought one and had no issues at all.


I agree that the 970 should have been addressed and handled properly, instead of seeming like they were just lying about it, however as has been stated above and tested over and over again, it doesn't really affect anything in 1080P, where the card is designed to play hard.

Not to nitpick, but I said that, definitely not QSV.

But yeah, I agree, there is a ridiculous lottery with hardware luck sometimes, and it's not just computers. My audio receiver I bought for $1200 went out in the first 3 months, thankfully it was swapped without any issue, and that one has been going for two years now without any problems.

Ahhh yeah I see now...my bad...edited. lol the one on the other side of the argument.

 

[EVGA_ChrisB]

EVGA is here to help if anyone is having trouble with their product. Please feel free to contact me directly if you are in need of support? ChrisB@EVGA.com

Please also keep in mind that we do offer 24 hour phone support at 1-888-881-3842 Option 1 or by email at Support@evga.com.

 

[pimpanther]

EVGA is here to help if anyone is having trouble with their product. Please feel free to contact me directly if you are in need of support? ChrisB@EVGA.com

Please also keep in mind that we do offer 24 hour phone support at 1-888-881-3842 Option 1 or by email at Support@evga.com.

just bought the 8 pack 980gtx and the games that came [game] says it isn't out yet.when? rainbow siege

 

[CraigN]

EVGA is here to help if anyone is having trouble with their product. Please feel free to contact me directly if you are in need of support? ChrisB@EVGA.com

Please also keep in mind that we do offer 24 hour phone support at 1-888-881-3842 Option 1 or by email at Support@evga.com.

just bought the 8 pack 980gtx and the games that came [game] says it isn't out yet.when? rainbow siege

C'mon Man. You have the internet at your fingertips.

Click here for release date

 

[pimpanther]

cheers bud, guess its true ask a silly question you get a silly answer.

 

[CraigN]

cheers bud, guess its true ask a silly question you get a silly answer.

It's all good man. Sorry if that came off as rude, wasn't my intent, just going for a little tongue in cheek

 

[pimpanther]

cheers bud, guess its true ask a silly question you get a silly answer.

It's all good man. Sorry if that came off as rude, wasn't my intent, just going for a little tongue in cheek

your ok man.you are right i was lazy.always usedmy mouth than my brain