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 22, 2024·
If you prioritize a wider screen and better HDR performance for media consumption, the Gigabyte CO49DQ with its superior color gamut might be the better investment, despite a lower refresh rate making it less optimal for competitive gaming. However, if you're a serious gamer looking for high refresh rates and very fast response times, and you can handle a smaller screen and subpar productivity and media experiences, the Corsair 45WQHD240 could be worth the extra cost. Keep in mind that the Corsair's text clarity and image sharpness may not be ideal due to its lower pixels per inch. 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 Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED)
- Very good refresh rate
Advantages of the Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED)
- Best in class for casual gaming
- Best in class for media consumption
- Best in class brightness
- Best in class color volume
- Best in class response time
Key differences
Casual Gaming
8.1
9.9
3440 x 1440
RESOLUTION
5120 x 1440
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
144Hz
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
Inf:1
141 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
1000 nits
632 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
Unknown
97.6 %
DCI-P3 COLOR GAMUT
99.0 %
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) is best in class for casual gaming, while the Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) is very good.
Productivity
3.9
5.8
3440 x 1440
RESOLUTION
5120 x 1440
84 PPI
PIXELS PER INCH
108 PPI
No
ADJUSTABLE STAND
No
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) and Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) are both poor for productivity, though the Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) is somewhat better.
Media Consumption
5.7
9.8
3440 x 1440
RESOLUTION
5120 x 1440
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
Inf:1
141 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
1000 nits
632 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
Unknown
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) is best in class for media consumption, while the Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) is poor.
Cost
$1,700
$1,100
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
The Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) has a price of $1,700 and the Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) costs $1,100.
HDR Video Editing and Color Grading
No
Yes
The Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) is not suitable for HDR video editing and color grading while the Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) is suitable for HDR video editing and color grading.
Print Photo Editing
No
Yes
The Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) is not suitable for print photo editing while the Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) is suitable for print photo editing.
Key similarities
Competitive Gaming
5.4
5.5
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
144Hz
1.6 ms
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
0.0 ms
20 - 240 Hz
VARIABLE REFRESH RATE
48 - 144 Hz
No
STROBING / BFI
No
141 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
1000 nits
The Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) and Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) are both poor for competitive gaming.
HDR Gaming and Media Consumption
Yes
Yes
Both the Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) and Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) are suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption.
Digital Photo Editing
Yes
Yes
Both the Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) and Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) are suitable for digital photo editing.
Give feedback
We’re constantly working to improve.
How the Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) and the Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) compare to other monitors
Spec Comparison
 |  | |
| Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) | Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) |
GENERAL | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | |||
$1,700 | $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 | 141 nits | 1000 nits | |
HDR Peak Brightness | |||
HDR Peak Brightness | 632 nits | Unknown | |
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | |||
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | Yes | Yes | |
sRGB Color Gamut | |||
sRGB Color Gamut | 99.6 % | 153.1 % | |
MOTION CHARACTERISTICS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Total Response Time | |||
Total Response Time | 1.6 ms | 0.03 ms | |
Variable Refresh Rate | |||
Variable Refresh Rate | 20 - 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 | 9.3/10 | 10/10 | |
TEXT & IMAGE CLARITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Pixels Per Inch | |||
Pixels Per Inch | 84 PPI | 108 PPI | |
Coating | |||
Coating | Matte | Matte | |
Text Clarity Score | |||
Text Clarity Score | 4/10 | 6.6/10 | |
Image Clarity Score | |||
Image Clarity Score | 5.1/10 | 7/10 | |
PORTS & CONNECTIVITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
HDMI 1.4 Ports | |||
HDMI 1.4 Ports | 0 | 0 | |
HDMI 2.0 Ports | |||
HDMI 2.0 Ports | 0 | 0 | |
HDMI 2.1 Ports | |||
HDMI 2.1 Ports | 2 | 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 Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) vs. LG 45GR95QE (W-OLED)
VS
Compare Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) vs. LG 45GR95QE-B (W-OLED)
VS
Compare Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) vs. LG 45GS95QE (W-OLED)
VS
Compare Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) vs. Asus XB273U F (IPS)
VS
Compare Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) vs. LG 32GS95UE (W-OLED)
VS
Compare Gigabyte CO49DQ (QD-OLED) vs. MSI MPG 491CQP (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
117,800
Recommendations made
17,670
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
