A comparison of specs, key information, reviews, and best pricing from top retailers
Last updated -- hours ago | Report incorrect information
Company ProductName Specs
Company ProductName Specs
What we think
The PerfectRec monitor team Learn more
Updated April 23, 2024·
If you're seeking an immersive experience with deep blacks and vibrant colors for HDR gaming and media consumption, both monitors excel due to their OLED technology. The Acer Predator X45 offers a higher refresh rate, which is better for competitive gaming but has a smaller screen and lower resolution, which might affect productivity tasks and immersion in media consumption. On the other hand, the MSI MPG 491CQP has a larger screen and higher resolution, enhancing multitasking for productivity and providing a more cinematic experience for media, but it has a lower refresh rate, which might not be as smooth for fast-paced gaming. If you're focused on competitive gaming and willing to sacrifice some screen size, the Acer might be preferable, but if productivity and an expansive media viewing experience are priorities, the MSI could be better despite its lower refresh rate. Give Feedback
this description is based on the product variant with some specs and product variant with some specs. At the time of writing, the variant with some specs cost some dollars and the variant with some specs cost some dollars.
Advantages of the Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED)
- Very good refresh rate
Advantages of the MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED)
- Best in class for media consumption
- Best in class color volume
Key differences
Competitive Gaming
6.4
5.5
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
144Hz
0.0 ms
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
0.0 ms
48 - 240 Hz
VARIABLE REFRESH RATE
48 - 144 Hz
No
STROBING / BFI
No
1000 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
1000 nits
The Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) is only fair for competitive gaming, while the MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) is poor.
Productivity
4.0
5.8
3440 x 1440
RESOLUTION
5120 x 1440
83 PPI
PIXELS PER INCH
108 PPI
Yes
ADJUSTABLE STAND
Yes
Matte
COATING
Matte
The MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) and Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) are both poor for productivity, though the MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) is somewhat better.
Media Consumption
7.1
9.8
3440 x 1440
RESOLUTION
5120 x 1440
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
Inf:1
1000 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
1000 nits
Unknown
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
Unknown
Matte
COATING
Matte
The MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) is best in class for media consumption, while the Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) is good.
Cost
$1,200
$1,100
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
$1,800
The Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) has a price of $1,200 and the MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) costs $1,100.
Key similarities
Casual Gaming
9.8
9.9
3440 x 1440
RESOLUTION
5120 x 1440
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
144Hz
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
Inf:1
1000 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
1000 nits
Unknown
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
Unknown
98.5 %
DCI-P3 COLOR GAMUT
99.0 %
Matte
COATING
Matte
The MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) and Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) are both best in class for casual gaming.
HDR Gaming and Media Consumption
Yes
Yes
Both the Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) and MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) are suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption.
Digital Photo Editing
Yes
Yes
Both the Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) and MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) are suitable for digital photo editing.
HDR Video Editing and Color Grading
Yes
Yes
Both the Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) and MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) are suitable for HDR video editing and color grading.
Print Photo Editing
Yes
Yes
Both the Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) and MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) are suitable for print photo editing.
Give feedback
We’re constantly working to improve.
How the Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) and the MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) compare to other monitors
Spec Comparison
 |  | |
| Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) | MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) |
GENERAL | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | |||
$1,200 | $1,100 | ||
Screen Size | |||
Screen Size | 45" | 49" | |
Resolution | |||
Resolution | 3440 x 1440 | 5120 x 1440 | |
Screen Type | |||
Screen Type | OLED | OLED | |
Screen Sub-type | |||
Screen Sub-type | W-OLED | QD-OLED | |
Refresh Rate | |||
Refresh Rate | 240Hz | 144Hz | |
COLOR, CONTRAST & BRIGHTNESS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Native Contrast | |||
Native Contrast | Inf:1 | Inf:1 | |
SDR Peak Brightness | |||
SDR Peak Brightness | 1000 nits | 1000 nits | |
HDR Peak Brightness | |||
HDR Peak Brightness | Unknown | Unknown | |
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | |||
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | Yes | Yes | |
sRGB Color Gamut | |||
sRGB Color Gamut | Unknown | 146 % | |
MOTION CHARACTERISTICS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Total Response Time | |||
Total Response Time | 0.01 ms | 0.03 ms | |
Variable Refresh Rate | |||
Variable Refresh Rate | 48 - 240 Hz | 48 - 144 Hz | |
Strobing / BFI | |||
Strobing / BFI | No | No | |
Persistence Blur Score | |||
Persistence Blur Score | 8/10 | 6.6/10 | |
Ghosting Score | |||
Ghosting Score | 10/10 | 10/10 | |
TEXT & IMAGE CLARITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Pixels Per Inch | |||
Pixels Per Inch | 83 PPI | 108 PPI | |
Coating | |||
Coating | Matte | Matte | |
Text Clarity Score | |||
Text Clarity Score | 3.8/10 | 6.6/10 | |
Image Clarity Score | |||
Image Clarity Score | 4.9/10 | 7/10 | |
PORTS & CONNECTIVITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
HDMI 1.4 Ports | |||
HDMI 1.4 Ports | 0 | 0 | |
HDMI 2.0 Ports | |||
HDMI 2.0 Ports | 2 | 0 | |
HDMI 2.1 Ports | |||
HDMI 2.1 Ports | 0 | 2 | |
Micro HDMI Ports | |||
Micro HDMI Ports | 0 | 0 | |
DisplayPort 1.2 Ports | |||
DisplayPort 1.2 Ports | 0 | 0 | |
Give feedback
We're constantly perfecting our model
More comparisons for you
Compare Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) vs. Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) vs. Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED) vs. LG 32GS95UE (W-OLED)
VS
Compare MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) vs. Asus XB273U F (IPS)
VS
Compare MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) vs. Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED) vs. Gigabyte FO32U2 (QD-OLED)
VS
FAQs
Why trust us
This information was produced and vetted by the PerfectRec monitors team. We are a product research and recommendation organization that meticulously reviews and evaluates the latest monitor information and makes it digestible for you.
By the numbers
210
Monitors evaluated
10,500
Monitors stats compiled
15
Proprietary Monitors ratings developed
107,300
Recommendations made
16,095
Consumer hours saved
About the monitor team
Joe Golden, Ph.D
CEO and Monitors Editor
Joe is an entrepreneur and lifelong electronics enthusiast with a Ph.D in Economics from the University of Michigan.
Jason Lew
Staff Expert & Software Engineer
Jason is a staff expert and software engineer that has been making laptop recommendations for 7 years and moderates one of the largest laptop subreddits.
Chandradeep Chowdhury
Staff Expert & Software Engineer
Chandradeep is a staff expert and software engineer and expert in televisions and monitors. He’s been making monitor recommendations for ten years.
Featured in
