Nixeus NX-EDG27X

Interlace pattern artifacts

On some monitors, particularly but not exclusively those with high refresh rates, interlace patterns can be seen during certain transitions. We refer to these as ‘interlace pattern artifacts’ but some users refer to them as ‘inversion artifacts’ and others as ‘scan lines’. They may appear as an interference pattern, mesh or interlaced lines which break up a given shade into a darker and lighter version of what is intended. They often catch the eye due to their dynamic nature, on models where they manifest themselves in this way. Alternatively, static interlace patterns may be seen with some shades appearing as faint horizontal or vertical bands of a slightly lighter and slightly darker version of the intended shade.

We did not observe any static interlace patterns on this model. Under certain conditions we observed some faint dynamic ‘interlace pattern artifacts’, fine interlaced vertical lines during movement or when scanning our eyes across the screen in a certain way. These were not readily observed at higher refresh rates, but more noticeable at relatively low refresh rates of ~60Hz or below. Even then, they remained relatively faint and most people won’t notice these or find them bothersome if they do.

Responsiveness

Input lag

A small utility called SMTT 2.0 was used alongside a sensitive camera to analyse the latency of the NX-EDG27X, with over 30 repeat readings taken to help maximise accuracy. Using this method, we calculated 2.56ms (under ½ a frame at 165Hz) of input lag. At 60Hz we calculated a very slightly higher but still respectable value of 3.61ms. These figures are influenced by both the element you ‘see’ (pixel responsiveness) and the main element you ‘feel’ (signal delay). It indicates a very low signal delay which even sensitive users should be happy with. Note that we don’t have the means to accurately measure input lag with Adaptive-Sync active in a VRR environment.

Perceived blur (pursuit photography)

Our article on responsiveness explores some of the key concepts surrounding monitor responsiveness. Chief amongst these concepts is perceived blur, contributed to by both the pixel responses of the monitor and movement of your eyes as you track motion on the screen. The perceived blur due to eye movement is the dominant cause of perceived blur on modern monitors, but pixel responsiveness is also important. A photography technique called pursuit photography is also explored, using a static rather than stationary camera to capture motion on a monitor. Pursuit photos reflect both elements of perceived blur, unlike static photos or videos which only reflect weaknesses in pixel response behaviour.

The images below are pursuit photographs taken using the UFO Motion Test for ghosting, with the UFO moving across the screen from left to right at a frame rate matching the refresh rate of the display. The test is set to run at its default speed of 960 pixels per second, which is a practical speed for such photographs and sufficient to highlight any weaknesses. The monitor was tested at 60Hz (directly below), 120Hz and 165Hz using various ‘OD Gain’ settings. Although 144Hz was not documented here, it was tested and performed some way between 120Hz and 165Hz as you might expect. The ‘OD Gain’ controls how aggressive the pixel overdrive is and can be set between ‘0’ and ‘100’ in single unit increments, with a default value of ‘24’. The slider is greyed out if ‘Over Drive’ is set to ‘Off’ (which is equivalent to setting ‘OD Gain’ to ‘0’). We tested the full range but will document our findings here using ‘0’, ‘12’, ‘24’, ‘50’ and ‘100’. We’re focusing in more on the values below ‘50’ because by that point overshoot becomes too strong not just in this test but more broadly. And many will find that visually distracting and unappealing. All rows of the UFO Motion Test were used, highlighting a range of pixel transitions between various shades. The final column shows a reference screen for comparison running what we deem to be its optimal pixel response time setting. This reference is the Gigabyte M27Q, a 27” model with IPS-type panel that offers a level of responsiveness many are comfortable with.

Note that any wavy patterns surrounding some UFOs in the background are slight image retention. We observed a fair amount of image retention during this test, especially at 60Hz and this is something we’ve seen on various monitors before. It soon disappeared when using monitor normally and wasn’t something we observed forming outside of tests like this..



At 60Hz, shown above, the UFO appears relatively broad without clear internal detailing. This reflects a significant degree of perceived blur due to eye movement and is tied to the 60Hz refresh rate. There are also varying degrees of trailing behind the UFOs due to weaknesses in pixel responsiveness. There’s very little to complain about in terms of conventional trailing here. Even with ‘OD Gain = 0’ the monitor performs these transitions well within the constraints of the 60Hz refresh rate. There’s a very small reduction in ‘powdery trailing’ using ‘OD Gain = 12’ for the medium background (middle row) and a small amount of overshoot (inverse ghosting) introduced. It takes the form of ‘halo’ trailing that’s somewhat brighter than the background shade and therefore stands out a bit. This is also visible for the light background (bottom row), but this isn’t strong overshoot using a setting of ‘12’. The ‘OD Gain = 24’ setting removes the already very small amount of ‘powdery’ trailing for the dark background (top row) and replaces this with overshoot. Whilst introducing more eye-catching and colourful overshoot elsewhere. A higher ‘OD Gain’ setting simply intensifies this overshoot. We consider a setting of ‘0’ or ‘12’ optimal (or thereabouts – remember this is adjustable in single-unit increments). It’s quite comparable to the reference here, which performs very well at 60Hz overall. The pursuit photographs below show how things look with refresh rate doubled, to 120Hz.



At 120Hz, shown above, the UFO now appears significantly narrower with some slightly clearer internal details. This indicates a significant reduction in perceived blur due to eye movement. There are again varying degrees of trailing behind the UFOs due to weaknesses in pixel responsiveness. Even with the ‘OD Gain = 0’ setting the weaknesses in pixel response time are only minor – a touch of faint ‘powdery’ trailing. Less than the reference screen, particularly for the dark background. Using ‘OD Gain = 12’ decreases this further, introducing just a touch of overshoot for the light backgrounds. The default setting of ‘OD Gain = 24’ further cuts down this already very small amount of ‘powdery trailing’ but introduces slightly more noticeable overshoot for the light background and some overshoot behind the UFO cockpit for the medium background. All you really get from setting this any higher at 120Hz is strengthened overshoot. We consider the ‘OD Gain = 12’ setting optimal. The pursuit photographs below show how things look with refresh rate increased somewhat, to 165Hz. The reference screen runs at 170Hz but this makes a negligible difference and therefore the comparison is still valid.



At 165Hz, shown above, the UFO appears a bit narrower again with clearer internal detailing. The pixel response requirements for optimal performance are increased, so some of the weaknesses in pixel response time become more pronounced. We’d again classify the trailing behaviour as ‘powdery’ trailing, which remains relatively faint and sticks close to the object. Even in the worst case (dark background, ‘OD Gain = 0’) this is far from extreme and the monitor outperforms the reference screen. The ‘OD Gain = 12’ setting slightly reduces this without introducing any real overshoot to speak of. The ‘OD Gain = 24’ setting pushes things very slightly further without introducing clear overshoot. Considering these transitions and a broader range, the differences between a setting of ‘12’ and ‘24’ are really very subtle. Pushing the setting higher than this provides a slight improvement to the transition speeds for the dark background and therefore slightly reduces ‘powdery trailing’ – but this specific change is subtle. What’s less subtle is the introduction of stronger overshoot elsewhere. This also applies when considering a very broad range of transitions and testing settings between ‘24’ and ‘50’ which aren’t specifically documented here.

Ultimately everyone will have their own preferences, but we feel things are well-balanced here using ‘OD Gain = 12’. This is therefore a setting which performs well at all refresh rates tested (and all refresh rates supported under VRR, as covered later). The manufacturer advertises ‘variable overdrive’ for this model, implying things are carefully re-tuned over a range of refresh rates. From our testing we’d argue this is just a natively fast panel that performs well using a relatively low level of acceleration (e.g. ‘OD Gain = 12’ or thereabouts), which won’t introduce strong overshoot even at lower refresh rates. Semantics aside, it’s still nice to have a single overdrive mode experience from the monitor without you having to worry about different settings for different refresh rates, which is particularly relevant in a VRR environment. If we’re to nitpick, we’d say it would’ve been better if the overdrive would’ve focused more on speeding up some of the somewhat slower transitions involving dark or very bright shades (including for the dark background shown in this test) without overaccelerating transitions which are already performed quickly. This would’ve further cut back on the slight ‘powdery trailing’ in places without introducing strong overshoot elsewhere. But really the performance here is already very good and beyond a level most people are perfectly comfortable with (Gigabyte M27Q).

Responsiveness in games and movies

The monitor provided a fluid experience on various Battlefield titles, with the frame rate keeping pace with the 165Hz refresh rate of the monitor. Compared to a solid 60Hz experience, the monitor is outputting 2.75 times as much visual information every second. Coupled with the impressively low signal delay on this model, the ‘connected feel’ provided was excellent. This describes the precision and fluidity you feel when interacting with the game. Additionally, there’s a significant decrease in perceived blur due to eye movement, as illustrated using Test UFO earlier. This combination provided a nice competitive edge to game titles like this, making enemies easier to track and engage with superior detail visible during motion of various speeds. Outside of gaming and simply on the desktop these benefits can also be appreciated. Coming from 144Hz to 165Hz is only a slight difference that’s far more subtle than the initial boost up from say 60Hz to 120Hz with suitable frame rate. And even then it’s all very subjective, so not everyone will appreciate the extra potential offered by the refresh rate so much.

Strong pixel responsiveness is also important to help round off the experience. Reflecting what we explored earlier with the pursuit photographs, the monitor provided a pretty solid 165Hz experience with relatively minor weaknesses. These weaknesses were mainly focused around very bright or darker shades, providing a bit of ‘powdery’ trailing. This is far removed from the ‘smeary’ trailing typically provided by VA models and also significantly lower (less detrimental to perceived blur) than slower IPS performers. There was no real overshoot to speak of using an appropriate ‘OD Gain’ setting including ‘12’, which we settled on, or even a bit higher. Whichever way you cut it, performance was superior to the M27Q in terms of pixel responsiveness and as explored earlier that’s already at a level that most will find perfectly fine in terms of pixel responsiveness.

We made similar observations on Shadow of the Tomb Raider. A pleasing performance overall with only minor weaknesses. This title has a lot of ‘high contrast’ scenes which tend to capture some of the somewhat slower transitions, but even then the weaknesses are too minor for most to notice or find at all bothersome. There was again no overshoot to speak of that would sour the experience, either. We made additional observations using movie content at a range of frame rates, including ~24 – 30fps and 60fps content on platforms such as Netflix and YouTube. No real weaknesses presented themselves, with the visual fluidity limited by the frame rate itself rather than the monitor.

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases made using the below link. Where possible, you’ll be redirected to your nearest store. Further information on supporting our work.

VRR (Variable Refresh Rate) technology

FreeSync – the technology and activating it

AMD FreeSync is a variable refresh rate technology, an AMD-specific alternative to Nvidia G-SYNC. Where possible, the monitor dynamically adjusts its refresh rate so that it matches the frame rate being outputted by the GPU. Both our responsiveness article and the G-SYNC article linked to explore the importance of these two elements being synchronised. At a basic level, a mismatch between the frame rate and refresh rate can cause stuttering (VSync on) or tearing and juddering (VSync off). FreeSync also boasts reduced latency compared to running with VSync enabled, in the variable frame rate environment in which it operates.

FreeSync requires a compatible AMD GPU such as the Radeon RX 580 used in our test system. The monitor itself must support ‘VESA Adaptive-Sync’ for at least one of its display connectors, as this is the protocol that FreeSync uses. The NX-EDG27X supports FreeSync Premium via DP and HDMI on compatible GPUs and systems. You need to make sure ‘FreeSync Premium’ is enabled in the ‘Advance’ section of the OSD. On the GPU driver side recent AMD drivers make activation of the technology very simple. You should ensure the GPU driver is setup correctly to use FreeSync, so open ‘AMD Radeon Software’, click ‘Settings’ (cog icon towards top right) and click on ‘Display’. You should then ensure that the first slider is set to ‘Enabled’ as shown below. The top image shows the monitor connected by DP and the bottom image by HDMI. The setting is referred to as ‘AMD FreeSync Premium’ in both cases, although the exact wording may depend on the driver version you’re using.

The Nixeus supports a variable refresh rate range of 30 – 165Hz (144Hz max via HDMI). That means that if the game is running between 30fps and 165fps, the monitor will adjust its refresh rate to match. When the frame rate rises above 165fps, the monitor will stay at 165Hz and the GPU will respect your selection of ‘VSync on’ or ‘VSync off’ in the graphics driver. With ‘VSync on’ the frame rate will not be allowed to rise above 165fps, at which point VSync activates and imposes the usual associated latency penalty. With ‘VSync off’ the frame rate is free to climb as high as the GPU will output (potentially >165fps). AMD LFC (Low Framerate Compensation) is also supported by this model, which means that the refresh rate will stick to multiples of the frame rate where it falls below the 30Hz (30fps) floor of operation for FreeSync. This feature sometimes kicked in just slightly above this (~32Hz or 30fps) but that makes very little difference in practice. If a game ran at 29fps, for example, the refresh rate would be 58Hz to help keep tearing and stuttering at bay. This feature is used regardless of VSync setting, so it’s only above the ceiling of operation where the VSync setting makes a difference.

To configure VSync, open ‘AMD Radeon Software’. Click ‘Settings’ (cog icon towards top right) and click ‘Graphics’. The setting is listed as ‘Wait for Vertical Refresh’. This configures it globally, but if you wish to configure it for individual games click ‘Game Graphics’ towards the top right. The default is ‘Off, unless application specifies’ which means that VSync will only be active if you enable it within the game itself, if there is such an option. Such an option does usually exist – it may be called ‘sync every frame’ or something along those lines rather than simply ‘VSync’. Most users will probably wish to enable VSync when using FreeSync to ensure that they don’t get any tearing. You’d therefore select either the third or fourth option in the list, shown in the image below. Above this dropdown list there’s a toggle for ‘Radeon Enhanced Sync’. This is an alternative to VSync which allows the frame rate to rise above the refresh rate (no VSync latency penalty) whilst potentially keeping the experience free from tearing or juddering. This requires that the frame rate comfortably exceeds the refresh rate, not just peaks slightly above it. We won’t be going into this in detail as it’s a GPU feature rather than a monitor feature.



Some users prefer to leave VSync enabled but use a frame rate limiter set a few frames below the maximum supported (e.g. 162fps) instead, avoiding any VSync latency penalty at frame rates near the ceiling of operation or tearing from frame rates rising above the refresh rate. The refresh rate at the bottom right of the OSD adjusts to coincide with frame rate in a VRR environment, if it’s within the main VRR window. This indicates that ‘FreeSync’ is active and doing its thing. The final point to note is that FreeSync only removes stuttering or juddering related to mismatches between frame rate and refresh rate. It can’t compensate for other interruptions to smooth game play, for example network latency or insufficient system memory. Some game engines will also show stuttering (or ‘hitching’) for various other reasons which won’t be eliminated by the technology.

FreeSync – the experience

As usual we tested various game titles using AMD FreeSync and found the experience similar throughout. Any issues affecting one title but not another suggests a game or GPU driver issue rather than a monitor issue. For simplicity we’ll just focus on our experience on Battlefield titles for this section, which offer sufficient flexibility in the graphics settings to allow the entire VRR range to be assessed on our Radeon RX 580. It’s not unusual to see some dips in frame rate below 165fps – even these slight dips without a VRR technology results in tearing (VSync off) or stuttering (VSync on). FreeSync removed such issues and if you’re sensitive to these issues as we are, it’s a very welcome technology to have.

Where frame rate fell off significantly there was an increase in perceived blur due to eye movement, whilst ‘connected feel’ worsens. This is purely linked to the frame rate and isn’t something a VRR technology can address. The technology worked all the way down to the advertised 30Hz (30fps), at which point LFC (Low Framerate Compensation) activated to keep tearing and stuttering at bay. There’s always a subtle momentary stuttering when LFC activates or deactivates, but this is much less noticeable than traditional stuttering from frame and refresh rate mismatches. Furthermore, because it occurs at such a low frame rate in this case there’s significant juddering to mask it. So it’s very difficult to detect even if you’re sensitive to it. The monitor provided good pixel overdrive tuning across the entire VRR range without introducing significant overshoot. There was a small amount of overshoot by ~60Hz and it became slightly stronger (but still fairly weak) at 30 – 40Hz. This was certainly not the strong overshoot you’d usually see on Adaptive-Sync models at low refresh rates when sticking with the same setting that works well at the maximum refresh rate. This was the case using our preferred setting of ‘12’ – a bit either side of this can also work well. In other words, a good single overdrive mode experience was offered here.

Nvidia Adaptive-Sync (‘G-SYNC Compatible’)

As noted earlier, AMD FreeSync makes use of Adaptive-Sync technology on a compatible monitor. As of driver version 417.71, users with Nvidia GPUs (GTX 10 series and newer) and Windows 10 or 11 can also make use of this Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) technology. When a monitor is used in this way, it is something which Nvidia refers to as ‘G-SYNC Compatible’. Some models are validated as G-SYNC compatible, which means they have been specifically tested by Nvidia and pass certain quality checks. With the NX-EDG27X, you need to connect the monitor up via DisplayPort and enable ‘FreeSync Premium’ in the ‘Advance’ section of the OSD. This enables Adaptive-Sync on the monitor and will unlock the appropriate settings in Nvidia Control Panel. When you open up Nvidia Control Panel, you should then see ‘Set up G-SYNC’ listed in the ‘Display’ section. Ensure the ‘Enable G-SYNC, G-SYNC Compatible’ checkbox and ‘Enable settings for the selected display model’ is checked as shown below and press ‘OK’. If you’ve enabled ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ and it was previously disabled, the monitor should re-establish its connection with the system and the technology should now be active.



You will also see in the image above that it states: “Selected Display is not validated as G-SYNC Compatible.” This means Nvidia hasn’t specifically tested and validated the display, not that it won’t work. On our RTX 3090 the experience was very similar to that using FreeSync, as we described earlier. A slightly higher floor of operation was observed, with a 38 – 165Hz VRR range. An LFC-like frame to refresh multiplication technology was employed below that to keep tearing and stuttering from frame and refresh rate mismatches at bay. There was again a subtle momentary stuttering when the boundary was crossed, but this was particularly difficult to detect given the relatively low frame rate of this boundary. Our suggestions regarding use of VSync also apply, but you’re using Nvidia Control Panel rather than AMD Radeon Software to control this. The setting is found in ‘Manage 3D settings’ under ‘Vertical sync’, where the final option (‘Fast’) is equivalent to AMD’s ‘Enhanced Sync’ setting. You’ll also notice ‘G-SYNC Compatible’ listed under ‘Monitor Technology’ in this section, as shown below. Make sure this is selected (it should be if you’ve set everything up correctly in ‘Set up G-SYNC’).



Note again that you can observe the refresh rate displayed towards the bottom right of the OSD. This displays the refresh rate of the display and therefore indicates the frame rate if that is within the VRR window (38 – 165Hz). This is a useful indication that the technology is active and doing its thing.

Interpolation and upscaling

It may be desirable or perhaps necessary to run the monitor below its native 2560 x 1440 (WQHD or 1440p) resolution. For performance reasons, or because you’re using a system (such as a games console) that doesn’t support a WQHD signal. The monitor provides scaling functionality via both DP and HDMI. It can be run at resolutions such as 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) and can use an interpolation (scaling) process to map the image onto all pixels of the screen. This is supported at up to 165Hz (144Hz via HDMI) as well as 120Hz and 60Hz. To ensure the monitor rather than GPU is handling the scaling process, as a PC user, you need to ensure the GPU driver is correctly configured so that the GPU doesn’t take over the scaling process. For AMD GPU users, the driver is set up correctly by default to allow the monitor to interpolate where possible. Nvidia users should open Nvidia Control Panel and navigate to ‘Display – Adjust desktop size and position’. Ensure that ‘No Scaling’ is selected and ‘Perform scaling on:’ is set to ‘Display’ as shown in the following image.

The monitor offers a few scaling options under ‘Aspect Ratio’ in the ‘Picture’ section of the OSD; ‘Full’, ’16:9’, ‘4:3’ and ‘1:1’. The ‘Full’ setting allows the monitor to use interpolation to fill up all pixels of the screen, disregarding the aspect ratio of the source resolution and potentially stretching and distorting things. The ’16:9’ and ‘4:3’ settings enforce a 16:9 and 4:3 aspect ratio, respectively. The ‘1:1’ setting is a pixel mapping mode that only uses pixels called for in the source resolution, displaying it without any interpolation and filling in remaining pixels as a black border. These settings are quickly demonstrated in this section of the OSD video. When running the 1920 x 1080 (Full HD or 1080p) resolution, the interpolation process of the monitor gives things a somewhat softer look than running the Full HD resolution natively on a screen of this size. This isn’t as extreme as some models – better clarity is maintained in comparison. The monitor also offers a few settings that add extra sharpness. This won’t make things look like they would on the native screen, but can offset some of the softening and subjectively give a more pleasing look. There’s ‘Ultra Vivid’ that can be set to ‘Low’, ‘Middle’ or ‘High’ to boost sharpness using a fairly aggressive but not extreme sharpness algorithm. We found the ‘Low’ setting worked fairly well, though looked a bit oversharpened in some respects. Alternatively, you can increase ‘Sharpness’ to ‘3’ or ‘4’ (default is ‘2’) – we found setting this to ‘3’ or perhaps ‘4’ offset some of the softening quite well, whilst giving less of an oversharpened look overall compared to using the ‘Ultra Vivid’ setting. Either way, this is a relatively good interpolation performance from the monitor with decent flexibility to increase sharpness according to taste.

As usual, if you’re running the monitor at 2560 x 1440 and viewing 1920 x 1080 content (for example a video over the internet or a Blu-ray, using movie software) then it is the GPU and software that handles the upscaling. That’s got nothing to do with the monitor itself – there is a little bit of softening to the image compared to viewing such content on a native Full HD monitor, but it’s not extreme and shouldn’t bother most users.

Video review

The video below shows the monitor in action. The camera, processing done and your own screen all affect the output – so it doesn’t accurately represent what you’d see when viewing the monitor in person. It still provides useful visual demonstrations and explanations which help reinforce some of the key points raised in the written piece.

Timestamps:
Features & Aesthetics
Contrast
Colour reproduction
Responsiveness (General)
Responsiveness (VRR)

Conclusion

The Nixeus NX-EDG27X offers the popular combination of 2560 x 1440 (WQHD or 1440p) resolution and 27” screen size, alongside a 165Hz refresh rate. This provides a decent amount of ‘desktop real estate’ and good pixel density. The monitor has a light-weight construction, with a bit of wobble to the screen if you tap it but good ergonomics and a stand that does the job without eating up too much desk space. The port selection is basic and the OSD is fairly limited compared to some competing models with an unintuitive and at times frustrating control system. We found colour channel adjustment lacked the precision we’d usually like, too, which wasn’t ideal when combined with the poorly calibrated white point of our unit.

On the contrast things things were much as expected – a touch stronger than some IPS models including competing Nano IPS monitors. But still pretty limited static contrast coupled with ‘IPS glow’, insufficient for a ‘deep and atmospheric’ experience. The IPS-type panel delivered strong colour consistency, with quite strong DCI-P3 coverage providing a vibrant look to sRGB content. There was no sRGB emulation setting to tame the gamut, whilst the GPU-level sRGB emulation was less than ideal in this case due to significant sRGB undercoverage. For general consumption some will enjoy the vibrant look of the native gamut, but the lack of sRGB emulation will restrict the appeal for others. This model lacks any HDR support, where strong DCI-P3 coverage makes sense. Some competing models offer this, but it’s usually only a very basic HDR experience which certainly doesn’t revolutionise the viewing experience.

The monitor offers highly flexible ‘levels’ of pixel overdrive, with a 0 – 100 slider. Tuning wasn’t perfect and we would’ve liked to have seen some of the relatively slow (but still quite fast) transitions accelerated without introducing obvious overshoot elsewhere. But the monitor still performed well at high refresh rates including its maximum 165Hz, even using a relatively low overdrive setting. And it outperformed the Gigabyte M27Q in this respect, which is already at a level most are comfortable with when it comes to pixel responsiveness. Input lag was low whilst the monitor provided a good VRR experience via both AMD FreeSync and Nvidia’s ‘G-SYNC Compatible Mode’. This included a generous range of operation and a single overdrive mode experience, with respectable performance including relatively low overshoot throughout the VRR range. Overall, we felt this monitor will hit the spot for those after vibrant and consistent colour output as well as a nice ‘set and forget’ overdrive experience and strong overall responsiveness. Though it felt a bit rough around the edges and we’d struggle to recommend it over competing models like the Gigabyte M27Q. Whilst the M27Q is not quite as responsive as the Nixeus, many will still find it hits the spot in that regard. It’s also significantly cheaper, more widely available and more feature-rich – a more thorough comparison is drawn in this post.

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases made using the below link. Where possible, you’ll be redirected to your nearest store. Further information on supporting our work.