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 your priority is competitive gaming, the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 offers a higher refresh rate, which is ideal for fast-paced games. However, for a more immersive media consumption experience, the MSI MEG 342C's wider screen and better color performance may be more appealing, also making it suitable for print photo editing. The MSI has a slightly lower refresh rate, making it less optimal for competitive gaming compared to the Corsair. Both monitors provide excellent contrast and are appropriate for HDR gaming, but keep in mind the Corsair's lower SDR and HDR peak brightness compared to the MSI. 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)
- Very good for competitive gaming
- Very good refresh rate
Advantages of the MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED)
- Excellent for media consumption
- Best in class color volume
Key differences
Competitive Gaming
8.9
5.1
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
175Hz
1.1 ms
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
1.4 ms
20 - 240 Hz
VARIABLE REFRESH RATE
20 - 175 Hz
No
STROBING / BFI
No
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
236 nits
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is very good for competitive gaming, while the MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED) is poor.
Media Consumption
7.5
9.4
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
3440 x 1440
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
Inf:1
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
236 nits
639 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
446 nits
Matte
COATING
Glossy
The MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED) is excellent for media consumption, while the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is good.
Digital Photo Editing
Yes
No
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is suitable for digital photo editing while the MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED) is not suitable for digital photo editing.
Print Photo Editing
No
Yes
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is not suitable for print photo editing while the MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED) is suitable for print photo editing.
Key similarities
Casual Gaming
9.5
9.5
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
3440 x 1440
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
175Hz
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
Inf:1
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
236 nits
639 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
446 nits
97.3 %
DCI-P3 COLOR GAMUT
99.5 %
Matte
COATING
Glossy
The MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED) and Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) are both best in class for casual gaming.
Productivity
5.7
5.7
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
3440 x 1440
110 PPI
PIXELS PER INCH
110 PPI
Yes
ADJUSTABLE STAND
Yes
Matte
COATING
Glossy
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED) are both poor for productivity.
Cost
$900
$850
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) has a price of $900 and the MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED) costs $850.
HDR Gaming and Media Consumption
Yes
Yes
Both the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED) are suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption.
HDR Video Editing and Color Grading
No
No
Both the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED) are not suitable for HDR video editing and color grading.
Give feedback
We’re constantly working to improve.
How the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and the MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED) compare to other monitors
Spec Comparison
 |  | |
| Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) | MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED) |
GENERAL | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | |||
$900 | $850 | ||
Screen Size | |||
Screen Size | 27" | 34" | |
Resolution | |||
Resolution | 2560 x 1440 | 3440 x 1440 | |
Screen Type | |||
Screen Type | OLED | OLED | |
Screen Sub-type | |||
Screen Sub-type | W-OLED | QD-OLED | |
Refresh Rate | |||
Refresh Rate | 240Hz | 175Hz | |
COLOR, CONTRAST & BRIGHTNESS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Native Contrast | |||
Native Contrast | Inf:1 | Inf:1 | |
SDR Peak Brightness | |||
SDR Peak Brightness | 113 nits | 236 nits | |
HDR Peak Brightness | |||
HDR Peak Brightness | 639 nits | 446 nits | |
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | |||
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | Yes | Yes | |
sRGB Color Gamut | |||
sRGB Color Gamut | 100 % | 98.9 % | |
MOTION CHARACTERISTICS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Total Response Time | |||
Total Response Time | 1.1 ms | 1.4 ms | |
Variable Refresh Rate | |||
Variable Refresh Rate | 20 - 240 Hz | 20 - 175 Hz | |
Strobing / BFI | |||
Strobing / BFI | No | No | |
Persistence Blur Score | |||
Persistence Blur Score | 8/10 | 7.2/10 | |
Ghosting Score | |||
Ghosting Score | 9.6/10 | 9.5/10 | |
TEXT & IMAGE CLARITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Pixels Per Inch | |||
Pixels Per Inch | 110 PPI | 110 PPI | |
Coating | |||
Coating | Matte | Glossy | |
Text Clarity Score | |||
Text Clarity Score | 6.6/10 | 6.6/10 | |
Image Clarity Score | |||
Image Clarity Score | 7.1/10 | 7.1/10 | |
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 MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED) vs. Dell Alienware AW3423DW (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED) vs. Dell U3223QE (IPS Black)
VS
Compare MSI MEG 342C (QD-OLED) vs. Asus PG27AQDM (W-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
