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 competitive gaming and high refresh rates are your top priorities, the Corsair Xeneon, with its exceptional contrast and low ghosting, could be worth the premium cost. However, for general productivity and media consumption with higher resolution, the Gigabyte M32UC is better suited and also offers great value for casual gaming. Keep in mind, though, the Corsair's OLED panel could experience burn-in over time with static images, while the Gigabyte's larger screen and higher resolution can be more immersive but might not be as responsive for fast-paced games. 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 Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED)
- Best in class for casual gaming
- Very good for competitive gaming
- Very good refresh rate
- Best in class contrast
- Best in class response time
Advantages of the Gigabyte M32UC (VA)
- Best in class for productivity
- Good text clarity
- Good brightness
Key differences
Casual Gaming
9.5
7.3
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
160Hz
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
2776:1
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
500 nits
639 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
506 nits
97.3 %
DCI-P3 COLOR GAMUT
85.4 %
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is best in class for casual gaming, while the Gigabyte M32UC (VA) is good.
Competitive Gaming
8.9
4.7
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
160Hz
1.1 ms
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
8.7 ms
20 - 240 Hz
VARIABLE REFRESH RATE
20 - 144 Hz
No
STROBING / BFI
Yes
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
500 nits
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is very good for competitive gaming, while the Gigabyte M32UC (VA) is poor.
Productivity
5.7
9.6
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
110 PPI
PIXELS PER INCH
139 PPI
Yes
ADJUSTABLE STAND
Yes
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Gigabyte M32UC (VA) is best in class for productivity, while the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is poor.
Cost
$900
$550
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) has a price of $900 and the Gigabyte M32UC (VA) costs $550.
HDR Gaming and Media Consumption
Yes
No
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption while the Gigabyte M32UC (VA) is not suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption.
Digital Photo Editing
Yes
No
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is suitable for digital photo editing while the Gigabyte M32UC (VA) is not suitable for digital photo editing.
Key similarities
Media Consumption
7.5
7.3
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
2776:1
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
500 nits
639 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
506 nits
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and Gigabyte M32UC (VA) are both good for media consumption.
HDR Video Editing and Color Grading
No
No
Both the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and Gigabyte M32UC (VA) are not suitable for HDR video editing and color grading.
Print Photo Editing
No
No
Both the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and Gigabyte M32UC (VA) are not suitable for print photo editing.
Give feedback
We’re constantly working to improve.
How the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and the Gigabyte M32UC (VA) compare to other monitors
Spec Comparison
 |  | |
| Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) | Gigabyte M32UC (VA) |
GENERAL | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | |||
$900 | $550 | ||
Screen Size | |||
Screen Size | 27" | 32" | |
Resolution | |||
Resolution | 2560 x 1440 | 3840 x 2160 | |
Screen Type | |||
Screen Type | OLED | LED | |
Screen Sub-type | |||
Screen Sub-type | W-OLED | VA | |
Refresh Rate | |||
Refresh Rate | 240Hz | 160Hz | |
COLOR, CONTRAST & BRIGHTNESS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Native Contrast | |||
Native Contrast | Inf:1 | 2776:1 | |
SDR Peak Brightness | |||
SDR Peak Brightness | 113 nits | 500 nits | |
HDR Peak Brightness | |||
HDR Peak Brightness | 639 nits | 506 nits | |
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | |||
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | Yes | No | |
sRGB Color Gamut | |||
sRGB Color Gamut | 100 % | 95.8 % | |
MOTION CHARACTERISTICS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Total Response Time | |||
Total Response Time | 1.1 ms | 8.7 ms | |
Variable Refresh Rate | |||
Variable Refresh Rate | 20 - 240 Hz | 20 - 144 Hz | |
Strobing / BFI | |||
Strobing / BFI | No | Yes | |
Persistence Blur Score | |||
Persistence Blur Score | 8/10 | 7/10 | |
Ghosting Score | |||
Ghosting Score | 9.6/10 | 7.4/10 | |
TEXT & IMAGE CLARITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Pixels Per Inch | |||
Pixels Per Inch | 110 PPI | 139 PPI | |
Coating | |||
Coating | Matte | Matte | |
Text Clarity Score | |||
Text Clarity Score | 6.6/10 | 7.9/10 | |
Image Clarity Score | |||
Image Clarity Score | 7.1/10 | 7.9/10 | |
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 | 1 | |
Micro HDMI Ports | |||
Micro HDMI Ports | 0 | 0 | |
DisplayPort 1.2 Ports | |||
DisplayPort 1.2 Ports | 0 | 0 | |
Shopping
Gigabyte M32UC (VA)
See more
Dig into reviews and images
Tom's Hardware
Christian Eberle | December 2022
"The Gigabyte M32UC is a terrific value. For around $600, you get a full-featured 4K gaming monitor with top-shelf video processing, a colorful bright image and a form factor suited for both work and play."
Give feedback
We're constantly perfecting our model
More comparisons for you
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
Compare Gigabyte M32UC (VA) vs. Dell U2723QE (IPS Black)
VS
Compare Gigabyte M32UC (VA) vs. Asus PA329CV (IPS)
VS
Compare Gigabyte M32UC (VA) vs. BenQ XL2566K (TN)
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
