HP omen x25f blur : disappointed

Everything about displays and monitors. 120Hz, 144Hz, 240Hz, 4K, 1440p, input lag, display shopping, monitor purchase decisions, compare, versus, debate, and more. Questions? Just ask!
User avatar
speancer
Posts: 241
Joined: 03 May 2020, 04:26
Location: EU

Re: HP omen x25f blur : disappointed

Post by speancer » 17 Mar 2021, 10:06

Max_hz wrote:
17 Mar 2021, 07:15
In a nutshell, the experience I have (I only play CS:GO) with inputlag, responstimes or smoothness with the VG259QM IPS vs X25f TN was negligible or almost imperceptible.
I am not using any kind of sync, playing fullscreen on native resolution, biggest and most important difference for me was the absence of the typical TN pixel inversion artifacts and blurry text in windows with the VG259QM IPS and ofc the better colors, contrast and viewing angles, all those pros together makes this monitor more suitable for general use and not only for gaming.
Must be lucky this time in the panel lottery I guess because the typical negative IPS properties (IPS glow and Backlight bleeding) are minimal on my unit or maybe the new 2020s IPS are less prone to it, that's also possible ofc.
In that respect the LG 24LG600 or XG2402 (although I appreciate the XG2402) don't even come close to the VG259QM.
I totally agree with you here. I only play CS:GO as well, I've also tested Omen X25f (and a few more TNs) and the level of pixel inversion artifacts on this monitor was unacceptable, just like XL2546 (probably the worst inversion artifacts I've ever seen on this one), I honestly have no idea how people can use these monitors and be ok with an eye-piercing issue like this, not even mentioning the typical TN downsides here (I also get annoyed by that weird blurriness of TN in desktop use). VG259QM is a really solid contender. I was switching between XL2540K, XL2546K and VG259QM lately, and to be honest, I'd still choose the ASUS, as for now. The difference, in my opinion, is just not big enough to justify turning a blind eye on all the TN downsides or on a very high price point of XL2546K. Unless one loves strobing, I'd not really recommend XL2546K, and it also can have pixel inversion issues. One of my two XL2546K's was fine with just minimal (not visible in normal use, only from very close look-up) inversion artifacts, the other one had typical TN inversion issue, clearly visible.
Chief Blur Buster wrote:
17 Mar 2021, 07:59
It's further real world confirmation that I've been witnessing the best IPS performance finally truly overlap (or exceed) average TN performance.
Even more confirmations for you, Chief! :)

/Edit: minor text correction
Last edited by speancer on 17 Mar 2021, 10:53, edited 2 times in total.
Main display (TV/PC monitor): LG 42C21LA (4K 120 Hz OLED / WBE panel)
Tested displays: ASUS VG259QM/VG279QM [favourite LCD FPS display] (280 Hz IPS) • Zowie XL2546K/XL2540K/XL2546 (240 Hz TN DyAc) • Dell S3222DGM [favourite LCD display for the best blacks, contrast and panel uniformity] (165 Hz VA) • Dell Alienware AW2521HFLA (240 Hz IPS) • HP Omen X 25f (240 Hz TN) • MSI MAG251RX (240 Hz IPS) • Gigabyte M27Q (170 Hz IPS) • Acer Predator XB273X (240 Hz IPS G-SYNC) • Acer Predator XB271HU (165 Hz IPS G-SYNC) • Acer Nitro XV272UKV (170 Hz IPS) • Acer Nitro XV252QF (390 Hz IPS) • LG 27GN800 (144 Hz IPS) • LG 27GL850 (144 Hz nanoIPS) • LG 27GP850 (180 Hz nanoIPS) • Samsung Odyssey G7 (240 Hz VA)

OS: Windows 11 Pro GPU: Palit GeForce RTX 4090 GameRock OC CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D + be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4 + Arctic MX-6 RAM: 32GB (2x16GB dual channel) DDR5 Kingston Fury Beast Black 6000 MHz CL30 (fully optimized primary and secondary timings by Buildzoid for SK Hynix die on AM5 platform) PSU: Corsair RM1200x SHIFT 1200W (ATX 3.0, PCIe 5.0 12VHPWR 600W) SSD1: Kingston KC3000 1TB NVMe PCIe 4.0 x4 SSD2: Corsair Force MP510 960GB PCIe 3.0 x4 MB: ASUS ROG STRIX X670E-A GAMING WIFI (GPU PCIe 5.0 x16, NVMe PCIe 5.0 x4) CASE: be quiet! Silent Base 802 Window White CASE FANS: be quiet! Silent Wings 4 140mm PWM (3x front, 1x rear, 1x top rear, positive pressure) MOUSE: Logitech G PRO X Superlight (white) Lightspeed wireless MOUSEPAD: ARTISAN FX HIEN (wine red, soft, XL) KEYBOARD: Logitech G915 TKL (white, GL Tactile) Lightspeed wireless HEADPHONES: Sennheiser Momentum 4 Wireless (white) 24-bit 96 KHz + Sennheiser BTD600 Bluetooth 5.2 aptX Adaptive CHAIR: Herman Miller Aeron (graphite, fully loaded, size C)

1000WATT
Posts: 391
Joined: 22 Jul 2018, 05:44

Re: HP omen x25f blur : disappointed

Post by 1000WATT » 17 Mar 2021, 10:51

Chief Blur Buster wrote:
17 Mar 2021, 07:59
Thanks!

It's further real world confirmation that I've been witnessing the best IPS performance finally truly overlap (or exceed) average TN performance.

Max_hz and speancer
They came across tn monitors with inversion artifacts (most likely they were vertical stripes), no luck, is there any point in comparing them with ips? Choosing between a 240tn monitor with inversion artifacts and a 120-144tn monitor without artifacts, I will choose 120tn without artifacts.

It's further real world confirmation that I've been witnessing the best 120 performance finally truly overlap (or exceed) average 240 performance.

Or I'm wrong as usual. :lol:
I often do not clearly state my thoughts. google translate is far from perfect. And in addition to the translator, I myself am mistaken. Do not take me seriously.

User avatar
speancer
Posts: 241
Joined: 03 May 2020, 04:26
Location: EU

Re: HP omen x25f blur : disappointed

Post by speancer » 17 Mar 2021, 11:06

1000WATT wrote:
17 Mar 2021, 10:51
Chief Blur Buster wrote:
17 Mar 2021, 07:59
Thanks!

It's further real world confirmation that I've been witnessing the best IPS performance finally truly overlap (or exceed) average TN performance.

Max_hz and speancer
They came across tn monitors with inversion artifacts (most likely they were vertical stripes), no luck, is there any point in comparing them with ips? Choosing between a 240tn monitor with inversion artifacts and a 120-144tn monitor without artifacts, I will choose 120tn without artifacts.

It's further real world confirmation that I've been witnessing the best 120 performance finally truly overlap (or exceed) average 240 performance.

Or I'm wrong as usual. :lol:
I'm not exactly sure what you mean, but high refresh rate IPS panels, from my experiences, are less likely to be affected with distracting pixel inversion issues, but they can also be affected. There's probably a fairly higher chance of getting an IPS panel free from pixel inversion artifacts, TN panels seem to be more prone to this issue. The latest high refresh rate IPS panels are really good contenders that challenge TN performance, without typical TN downsides.
Main display (TV/PC monitor): LG 42C21LA (4K 120 Hz OLED / WBE panel)
Tested displays: ASUS VG259QM/VG279QM [favourite LCD FPS display] (280 Hz IPS) • Zowie XL2546K/XL2540K/XL2546 (240 Hz TN DyAc) • Dell S3222DGM [favourite LCD display for the best blacks, contrast and panel uniformity] (165 Hz VA) • Dell Alienware AW2521HFLA (240 Hz IPS) • HP Omen X 25f (240 Hz TN) • MSI MAG251RX (240 Hz IPS) • Gigabyte M27Q (170 Hz IPS) • Acer Predator XB273X (240 Hz IPS G-SYNC) • Acer Predator XB271HU (165 Hz IPS G-SYNC) • Acer Nitro XV272UKV (170 Hz IPS) • Acer Nitro XV252QF (390 Hz IPS) • LG 27GN800 (144 Hz IPS) • LG 27GL850 (144 Hz nanoIPS) • LG 27GP850 (180 Hz nanoIPS) • Samsung Odyssey G7 (240 Hz VA)

OS: Windows 11 Pro GPU: Palit GeForce RTX 4090 GameRock OC CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D + be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4 + Arctic MX-6 RAM: 32GB (2x16GB dual channel) DDR5 Kingston Fury Beast Black 6000 MHz CL30 (fully optimized primary and secondary timings by Buildzoid for SK Hynix die on AM5 platform) PSU: Corsair RM1200x SHIFT 1200W (ATX 3.0, PCIe 5.0 12VHPWR 600W) SSD1: Kingston KC3000 1TB NVMe PCIe 4.0 x4 SSD2: Corsair Force MP510 960GB PCIe 3.0 x4 MB: ASUS ROG STRIX X670E-A GAMING WIFI (GPU PCIe 5.0 x16, NVMe PCIe 5.0 x4) CASE: be quiet! Silent Base 802 Window White CASE FANS: be quiet! Silent Wings 4 140mm PWM (3x front, 1x rear, 1x top rear, positive pressure) MOUSE: Logitech G PRO X Superlight (white) Lightspeed wireless MOUSEPAD: ARTISAN FX HIEN (wine red, soft, XL) KEYBOARD: Logitech G915 TKL (white, GL Tactile) Lightspeed wireless HEADPHONES: Sennheiser Momentum 4 Wireless (white) 24-bit 96 KHz + Sennheiser BTD600 Bluetooth 5.2 aptX Adaptive CHAIR: Herman Miller Aeron (graphite, fully loaded, size C)

1000WATT
Posts: 391
Joined: 22 Jul 2018, 05:44

Re: HP omen x25f blur : disappointed

Post by 1000WATT » 17 Mar 2021, 11:27

speancer wrote:
17 Mar 2021, 11:06

I'm not exactly sure what you mean, but high refresh rate IPS panels, from my experiences, are less likely to be affected with distracting pixel inversion issues, but they can also be affected. There's probably a fairly higher chance of getting an IPS panel free from pixel inversion artifacts, TN panels seem to be more prone to this issue.
If we are talking about the lottery, then it is certainly much more difficult to get visible inversion artifacts when buying ips, including the old 165hz 1440p ones.
But there are x25f / x25 / without visible artifacts. And you're out of luck.
speancer wrote: The latest high refresh rate IPS panels are really good contenders that challenge TN performance, without typical TN downsides.
Regardless of my personal views, I advise buying exactly ips. ;)
I often do not clearly state my thoughts. google translate is far from perfect. And in addition to the translator, I myself am mistaken. Do not take me seriously.

User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
Posts: 11647
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: HP omen x25f blur : disappointed

Post by Chief Blur Buster » 17 Mar 2021, 14:26

1000WATT wrote:
17 Mar 2021, 10:51
Max_hz and speancer
They came across tn monitors with inversion artifacts (most likely they were vertical stripes), no luck, is there any point in comparing them with ips? Choosing between a 240tn monitor with inversion artifacts and a 120-144tn monitor without artifacts, I will choose 120tn without artifacts.

It's further real world confirmation that I've been witnessing the best 120 performance finally truly overlap (or exceed) average 240 performance.

Or I'm wrong as usual. :lol:
We are talking about all-around performance, not just inversion. Also, X25f is a 240Hz TN monitor. ;)

Even without inversion artifacts (zero versus zero), some of the better 240Hz IPS can look nicer with less GtG blur/ghosting than an average 240Hz TN. It depends on the panel.

There are several 240 Hz IPS with equal and/or clearer browser scroll than an average 240 Hz TN (strobe OFF versus strobe OFF). So I am confused by your post. You notice they did say browser scrolling was clearer on IPS - that has nothing to do with inversion.

The GtG performance venn diagam overlaps nowadays even ignoring inversion. Crappy tuning unfixable via menu settings is one variable, but regardless, IPS used to not be able to do this until recently. It used to be that even the best IPS couldn’t outperform the worst same-Hz TN.
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter

Image
Forum Rules wrote:  1. Rule #1: Be Nice. This is published forum rule #1. Even To Newbies & People You Disagree With!
  2. Please report rule violations If you see a post that violates forum rules, then report the post.
  3. ALWAYS respect indie testers here. See how indies are bootstrapping Blur Busters research!

1000WATT
Posts: 391
Joined: 22 Jul 2018, 05:44

Re: HP omen x25f blur : disappointed

Post by 1000WATT » 17 Mar 2021, 15:49

Chief Blur Buster wrote:
17 Mar 2021, 14:26
So I am confused by your post.
I am also confused by posts in which you can easily change variables.
Example.

It's further real world confirmation that I've been witnessing the best TN performance finally truly overlap (or exceed) average IPS performance.
Even without inversion artifacts (zero versus zero), some of the better 240Hz TN can look nicer with less GtG blur/ghosting than an average 240Hz IPS. It depends on the panel.
There are several 240 Hz TN with equal and/or clearer browser scroll than an average 240 Hz IPS (strobe OFF versus strobe OFF).


Isn't that true of the statement? Perhaps in different languages this is perceived differently.

This is the only sentence where the change of variables will turn a lie. It used to be that even the best IPS couldn’t outperform the worst same-Hz TN.
Chief Blur Buster wrote: You notice they did say browser scrolling was clearer on IPS - that has nothing to do with inversion.
I did not take this into account, this is my mistake.
Have mercy, master. ;)
I often do not clearly state my thoughts. google translate is far from perfect. And in addition to the translator, I myself am mistaken. Do not take me seriously.

User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
Posts: 11647
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: HP omen x25f blur : disappointed

Post by Chief Blur Buster » 17 Mar 2021, 16:18

1000WATT wrote:
17 Mar 2021, 15:49
It's further real world confirmation that I've been witnessing the best TN performance finally truly overlap (or exceed) average IPS performance.
Even without inversion artifacts (zero versus zero), some of the better 240Hz TN can look nicer with less GtG blur/ghosting than an average 240Hz IPS. It depends on the panel.
There are several 240 Hz TN with equal and/or clearer browser scroll than an average 240 Hz IPS (strobe OFF versus strobe OFF).


Isn't that true of the statement?
Where the statement fails and becomes false -- is that it makes an assumption that there previously existed IPS that outperformed TN, and that TN had to catch up. That part is not true (even if you replace "240" with "144" or "60") since IPS performance was so far behind TN

Imagine the racetrack lapping equivalent -- TN lapped ahead. But now both TN and IPS are sharing same lap and jockeying each other, some TN-ahead-IPS and IPS-ahead-TN.

Years ago, it was conssitently IPS-virtually-always-behind-TN. The gap has significantly narrowed that performance envelopes now overlap. Cherrypick good-TN-vs-bad-IPS and bad-TN-vs-good-IPS, if you will, but it used to be the case that cherrypick any-TN-vs-any-IPS, the TN usually almost always won in motion performance. But now you can buy a random TN and a random 2020s-era high-Hz Fast IPS (of the same Hz), and you may even have 50-50 odds now that the IPS outperforms the TN in motion performance. Who knows what you'll get if you don't do your homework? The point being, is that IPS is no longer a racetrack lap behind.

If you didn't see that, then you missed my point. <insert-animated-meme.gif> ;) We're talking about the change that happened where non-overlapping venn diagrams that finally overlapped. As a nod to your confusion, I may not have described my point perfectly to language-proof short paragraphs, I'm better at writing longer texts than shorter texts.

In 2005, I had one of the first 2ms-GtG 1080p TN desktop monitors (I think Samsung 245BW). Although it was not CRT clarity, No other LCD panels were able to touch its motion performance for many years. At the time, IPS had about ~16ms GtG, and it took time before 8ms GtG came out. The GtG differentials were almost an order of magnitude one time, and the differential steadily shrinked over the years but stubbornly stuck to about 2:1 to 3:1 ratio (TN:IPS ratio having ~3x more visible ghosting than TN, whether it be 1ms:3ms advertised or 5ms:15ms realworld or whatever). But today (inflection point about ~2020) is when that differential suddenly mostly disappeared, that ghosting differential is completely gone on certain models of IPS.

2005 panel -- about a 8:1 ghosting differential for IPS:TN
2015 panel -- about a 3:1 ghosting differential for IPS:TN
2021 panel -- nearly a 1:1 ghosting differential for IPS:TN

Yes, yes, cherrypicking, you can come up with situations like 1.5:1 ghosting differentials (extra blur from slower GtG), but tuning differences, panel lottery, and manufacturer quality, can actually turn it into a 0.8:1 ghosting differential (meaning good IPS outperforms poor TN, better looking window-scroll / windor-drag / gaming).

Cue, the overlapping motion performance venn diagram. That wasn't true before for IPS.
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter

Image
Forum Rules wrote:  1. Rule #1: Be Nice. This is published forum rule #1. Even To Newbies & People You Disagree With!
  2. Please report rule violations If you see a post that violates forum rules, then report the post.
  3. ALWAYS respect indie testers here. See how indies are bootstrapping Blur Busters research!

1000WATT
Posts: 391
Joined: 22 Jul 2018, 05:44

Re: HP omen x25f blur : disappointed

Post by 1000WATT » 17 Mar 2021, 17:41

Chief Blur Buster wrote:
17 Mar 2021, 16:18
2021 panel -- nearly a 1:1 ghosting differential for IPS:TN
I look at it and I think there is something to add, but I already wasted a lot of your time.
decided to remain silent.
After you edited the post and added)
Chief Blur Buster wrote: Yes, yes, cherrypicking, you can come up with situations like 1.5:1 ghosting differentials (extra blur from slower GtG), but tuning differences, panel lottery, and manufacturer quality, can actually turn it into a 0.8:1 ghosting differential (meaning good IPS outperforms poor TN, better looking window-scroll / windor-drag / gaming).
Cue, the overlapping motion performance venn diagram. That wasn't true before for IPS.
0.8:1-1.5:1 ghosting differentials
This is without considering one example of using the monitor for gaming with vrr and low refresh rates of 50-75.
Doesn't this scenario fit in as part of overall monitor usage?
In which the monitor from 2021ips is very close to 2015ips. And between tn i ips there is again an abyss.
And most likely this scenario is not in the "venn diagram".

In any case, this is true.=>
Chief Blur Buster wrote: Imagine the racetrack lapping equivalent -- TN lapped ahead. But now both TN and IPS are sharing same lap and jockeying each other, some TN-ahead-IPS and IPS-ahead-TN.

(I am lowering the amount of nicotine, it seems I have become overly aggressive.)
I often do not clearly state my thoughts. google translate is far from perfect. And in addition to the translator, I myself am mistaken. Do not take me seriously.

Falkentyne
Posts: 2793
Joined: 26 Mar 2014, 07:23

Re: HP omen x25f blur : disappointed

Post by Falkentyne » 17 Mar 2021, 17:50

Chief Blur Buster wrote:
17 Mar 2021, 16:18
1000WATT wrote:
17 Mar 2021, 15:49
It's further real world confirmation that I've been witnessing the best TN performance finally truly overlap (or exceed) average IPS performance.
Even without inversion artifacts (zero versus zero), some of the better 240Hz TN can look nicer with less GtG blur/ghosting than an average 240Hz IPS. It depends on the panel.
There are several 240 Hz TN with equal and/or clearer browser scroll than an average 240 Hz IPS (strobe OFF versus strobe OFF).


Isn't that true of the statement?
Where the statement fails and becomes false -- is that it makes an assumption that there previously existed IPS that outperformed TN, and that TN had to catch up. That part is not true (even if you replace "240" with "144" or "60") since IPS performance was so far behind TN

Imagine the racetrack lapping equivalent -- TN lapped ahead. But now both TN and IPS are sharing same lap and jockeying each other, some TN-ahead-IPS and IPS-ahead-TN.

Years ago, it was conssitently IPS-virtually-always-behind-TN. The gap has significantly narrowed that performance envelopes now overlap. Cherrypick good-TN-vs-bad-IPS and bad-TN-vs-good-IPS, if you will, but it used to be the case that cherrypick any-TN-vs-any-IPS, the TN usually almost always won in motion performance. But now you can buy a random TN and a random 2020s-era high-Hz Fast IPS (of the same Hz), and you may even have 50-50 odds now that the IPS outperforms the TN in motion performance. Who knows what you'll get if you don't do your homework? The point being, is that IPS is no longer a racetrack lap behind.

If you didn't see that, then you missed my point. <insert-animated-meme.gif> ;) We're talking about the change that happened where non-overlapping venn diagrams that finally overlapped. As a nod to your confusion, I may not have described my point perfectly to language-proof short paragraphs, I'm better at writing longer texts than shorter texts.

In 2005, I had one of the first 2ms-GtG 1080p TN desktop monitors (I think Samsung 245BW). Although it was not CRT clarity, No other LCD panels were able to touch its motion performance for many years. At the time, IPS had about ~16ms GtG, and it took time before 8ms GtG came out. The GtG differentials were almost an order of magnitude one time, and the differential steadily shrinked over the years but stubbornly stuck to about 2:1 to 3:1 ratio (TN:IPS ratio having ~3x more visible ghosting than TN, whether it be 1ms:3ms advertised or 5ms:15ms realworld or whatever). But today (inflection point about ~2020) is when that differential suddenly mostly disappeared, that ghosting differential is completely gone on certain models of IPS.

2005 panel -- about a 8:1 ghosting differential for IPS:TN
2015 panel -- about a 3:1 ghosting differential for IPS:TN
2021 panel -- nearly a 1:1 ghosting differential for IPS:TN

Yes, yes, cherrypicking, you can come up with situations like 1.5:1 ghosting differentials (extra blur from slower GtG), but tuning differences, panel lottery, and manufacturer quality, can actually turn it into a 0.8:1 ghosting differential (meaning good IPS outperforms poor TN, better looking window-scroll / windor-drag / gaming).

Cue, the overlapping motion performance venn diagram. That wasn't true before for IPS.
The only thing I worry about is the infamous "IPS lottery" of horrific IPS glow and severe backlight bleeding.
I don't know if that's still a thing or not these days. My last two TN purchases were lottery winners though (XL2720Z in 2013 and XL2746S last week). I hope the IPS I wind up getting is as good (unless I jump ship to OLED, but I have no room for a 40" display).

User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
Posts: 11647
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: HP omen x25f blur : disappointed

Post by Chief Blur Buster » 17 Mar 2021, 18:15

1000WATT wrote:
17 Mar 2021, 17:41
This is without considering one example of using the monitor for gaming with vrr and low refresh rates of 50-75.
Doesn't this scenario fit in as part of overall monitor usage?
In which the monitor from 2021ips is very close to 2015ips. And between tn i ips there is again an abyss.
And most likely this scenario is not in the "venn diagram".
No chasm there either.

With NVIDIA native chip GSYNC, I’ve seen similar 75fps at 240 Hz VRR on IPS than 75fps at 240 Hz VRR on TN. NVIDIA are pros at great VRR overdrive where the overdrive automatically adjusts in realtime during VRR to keep ghosting/coronas away at all frame rates.

I cannot yet say the same for generic untuned VESA Adaptive Sync that ghosts differently at different Hz. FreeSync is a bit slow to catch up in re-tuning VRR overdrive for 240Hz FreeSync. I hope they hurry up with regenerating new OD algorithms as native-va-native. Generic TN VRR often has similar behaviors too.

You have same chasm with 240Hz VRR fixed-overdrive TN versus 240Hz VRR variable-overdrive TN, too.

And have same chasm with 240Hz VRR fixed-overdrive IPS versus 240Hz VRR variable-overdrive IPS, too.

This VRR ghost problem is not always a TN-vs-IPS problem! Also, “G-SYNC Compatible” usually is fixed overdrive. It’s just a bit better than the average uncertified panel. But G-SYNC native versus G-SYNC compatible is sometimes still a ghosting chasm even for same panel type!

People who hate VRR ghosting have the choice to pay the premium of native VRR variable-overdrive chips (like higher end versions of FreeSync or G-SYNC). This helps VRR ghosting more than TN-vs-IPS.

People who have seen thousands of displays like me, generally agree with me. You begin to see patterns of VRR ghosting issues between different models.
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter

Image
Forum Rules wrote:  1. Rule #1: Be Nice. This is published forum rule #1. Even To Newbies & People You Disagree With!
  2. Please report rule violations If you see a post that violates forum rules, then report the post.
  3. ALWAYS respect indie testers here. See how indies are bootstrapping Blur Busters research!

Post Reply