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 12, 2024·
If you're focused on competitive gaming and looking for a lower-cost option, the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 is a solid choice with excellent refresh rates and response times for smooth gameplay. However, if you're interested in an immersive experience for media consumption and productivity, with a wider screen for multitasking and high HDR brightness, the Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 could be worth the additional investment, despite its higher price. Keep in mind, the Samsung's ultra-wide screen is better for expansive views but may not suit all gaming or desk setups. 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
- Good image clarity
Advantages of the Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED)
- Excellent for media consumption
- Best in class color volume
Key differences
Competitive Gaming
8.9
5.6
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
240Hz
1.1 ms
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
1.0 ms
20 - 240 Hz
VARIABLE REFRESH RATE
20 - 240 Hz
No
STROBING / BFI
Yes
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
236 nits
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is very good for competitive gaming, while the Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED) is poor.
Media Consumption
7.5
9.2
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
5120 x 1440
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
Inf:1
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
236 nits
639 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
465 nits
Matte
COATING
Glossy
The Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED) is excellent for media consumption, while the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is good.
Cost
$900
$1,200
$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 Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED) costs $1,200.
Print Photo Editing
No
Yes
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) is not suitable for print photo editing while the Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED) is suitable for print photo editing.
Key similarities
Casual Gaming
9.5
9.6
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
5120 x 1440
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
240Hz
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
Inf:1
113 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
236 nits
639 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
465 nits
97.3 %
DCI-P3 COLOR GAMUT
99.5 %
Matte
COATING
Glossy
The Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED) and Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) are both best in class for casual gaming.
Productivity
5.7
5.6
2560 x 1440
RESOLUTION
5120 x 1440
110 PPI
PIXELS PER INCH
107 PPI
Yes
ADJUSTABLE STAND
Yes
Matte
COATING
Glossy
The Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED) are both poor for productivity.
HDR Gaming and Media Consumption
Yes
Yes
Both the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED) are suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption.
Digital Photo Editing
Yes
Yes
Both the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED) are suitable for digital photo editing.
HDR Video Editing and Color Grading
No
No
Both the Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) and Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (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 Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED) compare to other monitors
Spec Comparison
 |  | |
| Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 (W-OLED) | Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED) |
GENERAL | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | |||
$900 | $1,200 | ||
Screen Size | |||
Screen Size | 27" | 49" | |
Resolution | |||
Resolution | 2560 x 1440 | 5120 x 1440 | |
Screen Type | |||
Screen Type | OLED | OLED | |
Screen Sub-type | |||
Screen Sub-type | W-OLED | QD-OLED | |
Refresh Rate | |||
Refresh Rate | 240Hz | 240Hz | |
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 | 465 nits | |
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | |||
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption | Yes | Yes | |
sRGB Color Gamut | |||
sRGB Color Gamut | 100 % | 100 % | |
MOTION CHARACTERISTICS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Total Response Time | |||
Total Response Time | 1.1 ms | 1 ms | |
Variable Refresh Rate | |||
Variable Refresh Rate | 20 - 240 Hz | 20 - 240 Hz | |
Strobing / BFI | |||
Strobing / BFI | No | Yes | |
Persistence Blur Score | |||
Persistence Blur Score | 8/10 | 8/10 | |
Ghosting Score | |||
Ghosting Score | 9.6/10 | 9.6/10 | |
TEXT & IMAGE CLARITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Pixels Per Inch | |||
Pixels Per Inch | 110 PPI | 107 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 | 6.9/10 | |
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 | 1 | |
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 Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED) vs. Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED) vs. Gigabyte FO32U2P (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED) vs. Acer Predator X45 (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
