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 prioritize a top-notch gaming experience with better response times and a higher refresh rate, the Dell Alienware may be the better option, despite its higher cost. Its OLED technology provides exceptional contrast and color depth that is particularly beneficial for HDR gaming and media consumption. On the other hand, if you're looking for a good all-around performer with a focus on productivity and image clarity, and if cost is a concern, the Sony M9, with its IPS display and matte coating, offers a great balance and costs less, with good brightness and color accuracy for professional tasks. However, it won't match the Dell's performance in gaming scenarios. 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 Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED)
- Best in class for casual gaming
- Best in class for media consumption
- Very good refresh rate
- Best in class contrast
- Best in class color volume
- Best in class response time
Advantages of the Sony M9 (IPS FALD)
- Best in class for productivity
- Very good text clarity
- Very good image clarity
- Good brightness
Key differences
Casual Gaming
9.7
7.3
3840 x 2160
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
144Hz
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
1000:1
244 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
432 nits
448 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
695 nits
98.8 %
DCI-P3 COLOR GAMUT
67.7 %
Glossy
COATING
Matte
The Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED) is best in class for casual gaming, while the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is good.
Productivity
7.0
9.6
3840 x 2160
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
140 PPI
PIXELS PER INCH
163 PPI
Yes
ADJUSTABLE STAND
Yes
Glossy
COATING
Matte
The Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is best in class for productivity, while the Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED) is good.
Media Consumption
9.7
7.5
3840 x 2160
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
1000:1
244 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
432 nits
448 nits
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
695 nits
Glossy
COATING
Matte
The Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED) is best in class for media consumption, while the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is good.
Cost
$1,200
$800
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
$1,800
The Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED) has a price of $1,200 and the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) costs $800.
Key similarities
Competitive Gaming
6.0
5.7
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
144Hz
0.4 ms
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
8.0 ms
20 - 240 Hz
VARIABLE REFRESH RATE
24 - 144 Hz
No
STROBING / BFI
No
244 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
432 nits
Although they have very similar scores, PerfectRec considers Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED) to be only fair for competitive gaming, while the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is poor.
HDR Gaming and Media Consumption
Yes
Yes
Both the Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED) and Sony M9 (IPS FALD) are suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption.
Digital Photo Editing
Yes
Yes
Both the Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED) and Sony M9 (IPS FALD) are suitable for digital photo editing.
HDR Video Editing and Color Grading
No
No
Both the Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED) and Sony M9 (IPS FALD) are not suitable for HDR video editing and color grading.
Print Photo Editing
No
No
Both the Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED) and Sony M9 (IPS FALD) are not suitable for print photo editing.
Give feedback
We’re constantly working to improve.
How the Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED) and the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) compare to other monitors
Spec Comparison
 |  | |
| Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED) | Sony M9 (IPS FALD) |
GENERAL | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | |||
$1,200 | $800 | ||
Screen Size | |||
Screen Size | 32" | 27" | |
Resolution | |||
Resolution | 3840 x 2160 | 3840 x 2160 | |
Screen Type | |||
Screen Type | OLED | LED | |
Screen Sub-type | |||
Screen Sub-type | QD-OLED | IPS FALD | |
Local Dimming Zones | |||
Local Dimming Zones | N/A | 96 | |
COLOR, CONTRAST & BRIGHTNESS | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Native Contrast | |||
Native Contrast | Inf:1 | 1000:1 | |
SDR Peak Brightness | |||
SDR Peak Brightness | 244 nits | 432 nits | |
HDR Peak Brightness | |||
HDR Peak Brightness | 448 nits | 695 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 | 0.4 ms | 8 ms | |
Variable Refresh Rate | |||
Variable Refresh Rate | 20 - 240 Hz | 24 - 144 Hz | |
Strobing / BFI | |||
Strobing / BFI | No | No | |
Persistence Blur Score | |||
Persistence Blur Score | 8/10 | 6.6/10 | |
Ghosting Score | |||
Ghosting Score | 9.9/10 | 7.6/10 | |
TEXT & IMAGE CLARITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Pixels Per Inch | |||
Pixels Per Inch | 140 PPI | 163 PPI | |
Coating | |||
Coating | Glossy | Matte | |
Text Clarity Score | |||
Text Clarity Score | 6.9/10 | 8/10 | |
Image Clarity Score | |||
Image Clarity Score | 8/10 | 8/10 | |
PORTS & CONNECTIVITY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
HDMI 1.4 Ports | |||
HDMI 1.4 Ports | 0 | 1 | |
HDMI 2.0 Ports | |||
HDMI 2.0 Ports | 0 | 0 | |
HDMI 2.1 Ports | |||
HDMI 2.1 Ports | 2 | 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 Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED) vs. Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 G95SC (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED) vs. Gigabyte FO32U2P (QD-OLED)
VS
Compare Dell Alienware AW3225QF (QD-OLED) vs. Acer Predator X45 (W-OLED)
VS
Compare Sony M9 (IPS FALD) vs. KTC M27P20 Pro (IPS MiniLED)
VS
Compare Sony M9 (IPS FALD) vs. Innocn 32M2V (IPS MiniLED)
VS
Compare Sony M9 (IPS FALD) vs. MSI MAG 321UPX (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
