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 12, 2024·
If you prioritize a larger screen and extensive color gamut for tasks like digital photo editing and print photo editing, you might lean towards the Acer XB323U-GX. However, if a high contrast ratio for deeper blacks, better overall image clarity, and superior performance for competitive gaming are more important, the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 would be a better option, especially if you want to save money and still enjoy good quality for media consumption and HDR gaming. Keep in mind that the Acer has better productivity features, which might justify its higher cost if you're using it for work-related tasks. 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 XB323U-GX (IPS)
- Good brightness
Advantages of the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED)
- Best in class for casual gaming
- Very good for competitive gaming
- Good for media consumption
- Good image clarity
- Best in class contrast
- Best in class response time
Key differences
Casual Gaming
5.9
9.5
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
2560 x 1440
270Hz
REFRESH RATE
240Hz
1000:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
Inf:1
400 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
113 nits
600 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
639 nits
95.0 %
DCI-P3 COLOR GAMUT
97.3 %
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is best in class for casual gaming, while the Acer XB323U-GX (IPS) is poor.
Competitive Gaming
5.3
8.9
270Hz
REFRESH RATE
240Hz
8.0 ms
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
1.1 ms
48 - 270 Hz
VARIABLE REFRESH RATE
20 - 240 Hz
Yes
STROBING / BFI
No
400 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
113 nits
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is very good for competitive gaming, while the Acer XB323U-GX (IPS) is poor.
Productivity
4.8
5.7
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
2560 x 1440
91 PPI
PIXELS PER INCH
110 PPI
Yes
ADJUSTABLE STAND
Yes
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and Acer XB323U-GX (IPS) are both poor for productivity, though the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is somewhat better.
Media Consumption
5.4
7.5
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
2560 x 1440
1000:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
Inf:1
400 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
113 nits
600 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
639 nits
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is good for media consumption, while the Acer XB323U-GX (IPS) is poor.
Cost
$1,147
$900
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
$1,800
The Acer XB323U-GX (IPS) has a price of $1,147 and the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) costs $900.
HDR Gaming and Media Consumption
No
Yes
The Acer XB323U-GX (IPS) is not suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption while the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption.
Print Photo Editing
Yes
No
The Acer XB323U-GX (IPS) is suitable for print photo editing while the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is not suitable for print photo editing.
Key similarities
Digital Photo Editing
Yes
Yes
Both the Acer XB323U-GX (IPS) and Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) are suitable for digital photo editing.
HDR Video Editing and Color Grading
No
No
Both the Acer XB323U-GX (IPS) and Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) are not suitable for HDR video editing and color grading.
Give feedback
We’re constantly working to improve.
How the Acer XB323U-GX (IPS) and the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) compare to other monitors
Spec Comparison
 |  | |
| Acer XB323U-GX (IPS) | Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) |
GENERAL | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | |||
$1,147 | $900 | ||
Screen Size | |||
Screen Size | 32" | 27" | |
Resolution | |||
Resolution | 2560 x 1440 | 2560 x 1440 | |
Screen Type | |||
Screen Type | LED | OLED | |
Screen Sub-type | |||
Screen Sub-type | IPS | W-OLED | |
Local Dimming Zones | |||
Local Dimming Zones | 16 | N/A | |
COLOR, CONTRAST & BRIGHTNESS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Native Contrast | |||
Native Contrast | 1000:1 | Inf:1 | |
SDR Peak Brightness | |||
SDR Peak Brightness | 400 nits | 113 nits | |
HDR Peak Brightness | |||
HDR Peak Brightness | 600 nits | 639 nits | |
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | |||
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | No | Yes | |
sRGB Color Gamut | |||
sRGB Color Gamut | 173.4 % | 100 % | |
MOTION CHARACTERISTICS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Total Response Time | |||
Total Response Time | 8 ms | 1.1 ms | |
Variable Refresh Rate | |||
Variable Refresh Rate | 48 - 270 Hz | 20 - 240 Hz | |
Strobing / BFI | |||
Strobing / BFI | Yes | No | |
Persistence Blur Score | |||
Persistence Blur Score | 8.5/10 | 8/10 | |
Ghosting Score | |||
Ghosting Score | 7.6/10 | 9.6/10 | |
TEXT & IMAGE CLARITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Pixels Per Inch | |||
Pixels Per Inch | 91 PPI | 110 PPI | |
Coating | |||
Coating | Matte | Matte | |
Text Clarity Score | |||
Text Clarity Score | 6.1/10 | 6.6/10 | |
Image Clarity Score | |||
Image Clarity Score | 6.1/10 | 7.1/10 | |
PORTS & CONNECTIVITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
HDMI 1.4 Ports | |||
HDMI 1.4 Ports | 0 | 0 | |
HDMI 2.0 Ports | |||
HDMI 2.0 Ports | 1 | 2 | |
HDMI 2.1 Ports | |||
HDMI 2.1 Ports | 0 | 0 | |
Micro HDMI Ports | |||
Micro HDMI Ports | 0 | 0 | |
DisplayPort 1.2 Ports | |||
DisplayPort 1.2 Ports | 1 | 0 | |
Give feedback
We're constantly perfecting our model
More comparisons for you
Compare Acer XB323U-GX (IPS) vs. LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (IPS)
VS
Compare Acer XB323U-GX (IPS) vs. Asus XB273U F (IPS)
VS
Compare Acer XB323U-GX (IPS) vs. MSI MPG 491CQP (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) vs. Dell Alienware AW3423DWF (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) vs. Dell Alienware AW2725DF (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) vs. Cooler Master GZ2711 (W-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
