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 competitive gaming and want deep blacks and exceptional contrast, the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 with its OLED panel is a strong choice. However, for tasks like digital photo editing, the LG 32GQ950 with its larger screen and higher resolution might be more suitable, providing clear images and more workspace. The LG might also be preferable for casual gaming and productivity, offering a good balance between performance and visual fidelity. Keep in mind the LG’s higher price, and if you're interested in HDR gaming and media, the Corsair shows better brightness performance but is not suited for HDR video editing. 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
- Good for media consumption
- Very good refresh rate
- Best in class contrast
- Best in class response time
Advantages of the LG 32GQ950 (IPS)
- Very good for productivity
- Good text clarity
Key differences
Casual Gaming
9.5
6.2
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
160Hz
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
921:1
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
367 nits
639 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
1007 nits
97.3 %
DCI-P3 COLOR GAMUT
94.6 %
Matte
COATING
Semi-Gloss
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is best in class for casual gaming, while the LG 32GQ950 (IPS) is only fair.
Competitive Gaming
8.9
4.7
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
160Hz
1.1 ms
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
5.8 ms
20 - 240 Hz
VARIABLE REFRESH RATE
20 - 160 Hz
No
STROBING / BFI
No
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
367 nits
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is very good for competitive gaming, while the LG 32GQ950 (IPS) is poor.
Productivity
5.7
8.1
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
110 PPI
PIXELS PER INCH
139 PPI
Yes
ADJUSTABLE STAND
Yes
Matte
COATING
Semi-Gloss
The LG 32GQ950 (IPS) is very good for productivity, while the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is poor.
Media Consumption
7.5
6.6
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
921:1
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
367 nits
639 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
1007 nits
Matte
COATING
Semi-Gloss
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is good for media consumption, while the LG 32GQ950 (IPS) is only fair.
HDR Gaming and Media Consumption
Yes
No
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption while the LG 32GQ950 (IPS) is not suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption.
Key similarities
Cost
$900
$930
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) has a price of $900 and the LG 32GQ950 (IPS) costs $930.
Digital Photo Editing
Yes
Yes
Both the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and LG 32GQ950 (IPS) are suitable for digital photo editing.
HDR Video Editing and Color Grading
No
No
Both the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and LG 32GQ950 (IPS) are not suitable for HDR video editing and color grading.
Print Photo Editing
No
No
Both the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and LG 32GQ950 (IPS) are not suitable for print photo editing.
Give feedback
We’re constantly working to improve.
How the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and the LG 32GQ950 (IPS) compare to other monitors
Spec Comparison
 |  | |
| Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) | LG 32GQ950 (IPS) |
GENERAL | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | |||
$900 | $930 | ||
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 | IPS | |
Local Dimming Zones | |||
Local Dimming Zones | N/A | 32 | |
COLOR, CONTRAST & BRIGHTNESS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Native Contrast | |||
Native Contrast | Inf:1 | 921:1 | |
SDR Peak Brightness | |||
SDR Peak Brightness | 113 nits | 367 nits | |
HDR Peak Brightness | |||
HDR Peak Brightness | 639 nits | 1007 nits | |
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | |||
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | Yes | No | |
sRGB Color Gamut | |||
sRGB Color Gamut | 100 % | 99.5 % | |
MOTION CHARACTERISTICS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Total Response Time | |||
Total Response Time | 1.1 ms | 5.8 ms | |
Variable Refresh Rate | |||
Variable Refresh Rate | 20 - 240 Hz | 20 - 160 Hz | |
Strobing / BFI | |||
Strobing / BFI | No | No | |
Persistence Blur Score | |||
Persistence Blur Score | 8/10 | 7/10 | |
Ghosting Score | |||
Ghosting Score | 9.6/10 | 8.1/10 | |
TEXT & IMAGE CLARITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Pixels Per Inch | |||
Pixels Per Inch | 110 PPI | 139 PPI | |
Coating | |||
Coating | Matte | Semi-Gloss | |
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 | 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 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 LG 32GQ950 (IPS) vs. Asus PG27AQN (IPS)
VS
Compare LG 32GQ950 (IPS) vs. LG 38WN95C (IPS)
VS
Compare LG 32GQ950 (IPS) vs. MSI MPG 321URX (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
116,600
Recommendations made
17,490
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
