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 high refresh rates and very responsive gameplay are important to you, the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 would be a better choice, especially for competitive gaming. However, if you require extremely sharp image quality for tasks like detailed photo editing, the LG UltraFine 5K with its higher resolution would be more suitable, although it comes at a higher price and with poorer gaming performance due to its lower refresh rate. The Xeneon's OLED panel offers excellent contrast and is good for HDR gaming, but the LG's IPS display provides better color consistency and is very suitable for productivity. 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 LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (IPS)
- Very good for productivity
- Best in class text clarity
- Best in class image clarity
- Good brightness
Key differences
Casual Gaming
9.5
6.0
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
5120 x 2880
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
60Hz
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
1200:1
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
500 nits
639 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
Unknown
97.3 %
DCI-P3 COLOR GAMUT
99.0 %
Matte
COATING
Glossy
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is best in class for casual gaming, while the LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (IPS) is only fair.
Competitive Gaming
8.9
5.0
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
60Hz
1.1 ms
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
14.0 ms
20 - 240 Hz
VARIABLE REFRESH RATE
N/A
No
STROBING / BFI
No
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
500 nits
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is very good for competitive gaming, while the LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (IPS) is poor.
Productivity
5.7
8.7
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
5120 x 2880
110 PPI
PIXELS PER INCH
218 PPI
Yes
ADJUSTABLE STAND
Yes
Matte
COATING
Glossy
The LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (IPS) is very good for productivity, while the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is poor.
Media Consumption
7.5
7.0
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
5120 x 2880
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
1200:1
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
500 nits
639 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
Unknown
Matte
COATING
Glossy
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (IPS) are both good for media consumption, though the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is somewhat better.
Cost
$900
$1,179
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
$1,800
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) has a price of $900 and the LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (IPS) costs $1,179.
HDR Gaming and Media Consumption
Yes
No
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption while the LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (IPS) is not suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption.
Key similarities
Digital Photo Editing
Yes
Yes
Both the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (IPS) are suitable for digital photo editing.
HDR Video Editing and Color Grading
No
No
Both the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (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 UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (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 UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (IPS) compare to other monitors
Spec Comparison
 |  | |
| Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) | LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (IPS) |
GENERAL | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | |||
$900 | $1,179 | ||
Screen Size | |||
Screen Size | 27" | 27" | |
Resolution | |||
Resolution | 2560 x 1440 | 5120 x 2880 | |
Screen Type | |||
Screen Type | OLED | LED | |
Screen Sub-type | |||
Screen Sub-type | W-OLED | IPS | |
Refresh Rate | |||
Refresh Rate | 240Hz | 60Hz | |
COLOR, CONTRAST & BRIGHTNESS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Native Contrast | |||
Native Contrast | Inf:1 | 1200:1 | |
SDR Peak Brightness | |||
SDR Peak Brightness | 113 nits | 500 nits | |
HDR Peak Brightness | |||
HDR Peak Brightness | 639 nits | Unknown | |
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | |||
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | Yes | No | |
sRGB Color Gamut | |||
sRGB Color Gamut | 100 % | 100 % | |
MOTION CHARACTERISTICS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Total Response Time | |||
Total Response Time | 1.1 ms | 14 ms | |
Variable Refresh Rate | |||
Variable Refresh Rate | 20 - 240 Hz | N/A | |
Strobing / BFI | |||
Strobing / BFI | No | No | |
Persistence Blur Score | |||
Persistence Blur Score | 8/10 | 5/10 | |
Ghosting Score | |||
Ghosting Score | 9.6/10 | 6/10 | |
TEXT & IMAGE CLARITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Pixels Per Inch | |||
Pixels Per Inch | 110 PPI | 218 PPI | |
Coating | |||
Coating | Matte | Glossy | |
Text Clarity Score | |||
Text Clarity Score | 6.6/10 | 10/10 | |
Image Clarity Score | |||
Image Clarity Score | 7.1/10 | 10/10 | |
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 | 0 | |
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 UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (IPS) vs. Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (IPS) vs. Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL (IPS) vs. Gigabyte FO32U2P (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
