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 11, 2024·
If you prioritize a wide, immersive display and exceptional gaming performance with high refresh rates and vibrant colors, the Corsair 45WQHD240 may justify its higher price point. However, its text clarity and image clarity are weaker, making it less suitable for productivity. In contrast, the Sony M9 excels in productivity tasks with its sharper text and image quality, and is a strong contender for HDR gaming and media consumption, at a typically lower price. It's not as tailored for competitive gaming as the Corsair, given its lower refresh rate and response time, but it still offers a solid experience for casual gaming. Consider your primary needs: if they're high-end gaming and a wide aspect ratio, go with the Corsair; if it's a balance of work and play, especially at a smaller desk space, the Sony might be your best bet. 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 for casual gaming
- Very good refresh rate
- Best in class contrast
- Excellent response time
Advantages of the Sony M9 (IPS FALD)
- Best in class for productivity
- Good for media consumption
- Very good text clarity
- Very good image clarity
- Good brightness
- Good color volume
Key differences
Casual Gaming
8.1
7.3
3440 x 1440
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
144Hz
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
1000:1
141 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
432 nits
632 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
695 nits
97.6 %
DCI-P3 COLOR GAMUT
67.7 %
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) is very good for casual gaming, while the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is good.
Productivity
3.9
9.6
3440 x 1440
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
84 PPI
PIXELS PER INCH
163 PPI
No
ADJUSTABLE STAND
Yes
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is best in class for productivity, while the Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) is poor.
Media Consumption
5.7
7.5
3440 x 1440
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
1000:1
141 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
432 nits
632 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
695 nits
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is good for media consumption, while the Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) is poor.
Cost
$1,700
$800
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
The Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) has a price of $1,700 and the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) costs $800.
Key similarities
Competitive Gaming
5.4
5.7
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
144Hz
1.6 ms
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
8.0 ms
20 - 240 Hz
VARIABLE REFRESH RATE
24 - 144 Hz
No
STROBING / BFI
No
141 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
432 nits
The Sony M9 (IPS FALD) 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 Sony M9 (IPS FALD) are suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption.
Digital Photo Editing
Yes
Yes
Both the Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) and Sony M9 (IPS FALD) are suitable for digital photo editing.
HDR Video Editing and Color Grading
No
No
Both the Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) and Sony M9 (IPS FALD) are not suitable for HDR video editing and color grading.
Print Photo Editing
No
No
Both the Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) and Sony M9 (IPS FALD) are not suitable for print photo editing.
Give feedback
We’re constantly working to improve.
How the Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) and the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) compare to other monitors
Spec Comparison
 |  | |
| Corsair 45WQHD240 (W-OLED) | Sony M9 (IPS FALD) |
GENERAL | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | |||
$1,700 | $800 | ||
Screen Size | |||
Screen Size | 45" | 27" | |
Resolution | |||
Resolution | 3440 x 1440 | 3840 x 2160 | |
Screen Type | |||
Screen Type | OLED | LED | |
Screen Sub-type | |||
Screen Sub-type | W-OLED | IPS FALD | |
Local Dimming Zones | |||
Local Dimming Zones | N/A | 96 | |
COLOR, CONTRAST & BRIGHTNESS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Native Contrast | |||
Native Contrast | Inf:1 | 1000:1 | |
SDR Peak Brightness | |||
SDR Peak Brightness | 141 nits | 432 nits | |
HDR Peak Brightness | |||
HDR Peak Brightness | 632 nits | 695 nits | |
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | |||
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | Yes | Yes | |
sRGB Color Gamut | |||
sRGB Color Gamut | 99.6 % | 100 % | |
MOTION CHARACTERISTICS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Total Response Time | |||
Total Response Time | 1.6 ms | 8 ms | |
Variable Refresh Rate | |||
Variable Refresh Rate | 20 - 240 Hz | 24 - 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 | 7.6/10 | |
TEXT & IMAGE CLARITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Pixels Per Inch | |||
Pixels Per Inch | 84 PPI | 163 PPI | |
Coating | |||
Coating | Matte | Matte | |
Text Clarity Score | |||
Text Clarity Score | 4/10 | 8/10 | |
Image Clarity Score | |||
Image Clarity Score | 5.1/10 | 8/10 | |
PORTS & CONNECTIVITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
HDMI 1.4 Ports | |||
HDMI 1.4 Ports | 0 | 1 | |
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 Sony M9 (IPS FALD) vs. KTC M27P20 Pro (IPS MiniLED)
VS
Compare Sony M9 (IPS FALD) vs. Innocn 32M2V (IPS MiniLED)
VS
Compare Sony M9 (IPS FALD) vs. MSI MAG 341CQP (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
