If you prioritize a larger screen and higher resolution for a more immersive experience in gaming and media consumption and are willing to pay a premium for it, the Gigabyte FO32U2 (32-inch 4K) would be a better choice. Conversely, if you're looking for high performance in competitive gaming at a lower price and can compromise on screen size and resolution, the MSI MAG 271QPX (27-inch 1440p), with its higher refresh rate, would be more suitable. Both offer excellent color and contrast, being QD-OLED panels, but the Gigabyte may offer better productivity due to its larger, sharper display. 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 Gigabyte FO32U2 (QD-OLED)
Good for productivity
Advantages of the MSI MAG 271QPX (QD-OLED)
Best in class for competitive gaming
Best in class refresh rate
Key differences
Competitive Gaming
6.8/10
10.0/10
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
360Hz
0.0 ms
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
0.0 ms
48 - 240 Hz
VARIABLE REFRESH RATE
48 - 360 Hz
No
STROBING / BFI
No
1000 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
1000 nits
The MSI MAG 271QPX (QD-OLED) is best in class for competitive gaming, while the Gigabyte FO32U2 (QD-OLED) is only fair.
Productivity
7.6/10
6.0/10
3840 x 2160
RESOLUTION
2560 x 1440
139 PPI
PIXELS PER INCH
110 PPI
Yes
ADJUSTABLE STAND
Yes
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Gigabyte FO32U2 (QD-OLED) is good for productivity, while the MSI MAG 271QPX (QD-OLED) is only fair.
Cost
$1,100
$750
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
The Gigabyte FO32U2 (QD-OLED) has a price of $1,100 and the MSI MAG 271QPX (QD-OLED) costs $750.
Key similarities
Casual Gaming
9.9/10
10.0/10
3840 x 2160
RESOLUTION
2560 x 1440
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
360Hz
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
Inf:1
1000 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
1000 nits
Unknown
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
Unknown
99.0 %
DCI-P3 COLOR GAMUT
99.1 %
Matte
COATING
Matte
The MSI MAG 271QPX (QD-OLED) and Gigabyte FO32U2 (QD-OLED) are both best in class for casual gaming.
Media Consumption
10.0/10
9.8/10
3840 x 2160
RESOLUTION
2560 x 1440
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
Inf:1
1000 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
1000 nits
Unknown
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
Unknown
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Gigabyte FO32U2 (QD-OLED) and MSI MAG 271QPX (QD-OLED) are both best in class for media consumption.
HDR Gaming and Media Consumption
Yes
Yes
Both the Gigabyte FO32U2 (QD-OLED) and MSI MAG 271QPX (QD-OLED) are suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption.
Digital Photo Editing
Yes
Yes
Both the Gigabyte FO32U2 (QD-OLED) and MSI MAG 271QPX (QD-OLED) are suitable for digital photo editing.
HDR Video Editing and Color Grading
Yes
Yes
Both the Gigabyte FO32U2 (QD-OLED) and MSI MAG 271QPX (QD-OLED) are suitable for HDR video editing and color grading.
Print Photo Editing
Yes
Yes
Both the Gigabyte FO32U2 (QD-OLED) and MSI MAG 271QPX (QD-OLED) are suitable for print photo editing.
Give feedback
We’re constantly working to improve.
How the Gigabyte FO32U2 (QD-OLED) and the MSI MAG 271QPX (QD-OLED) compare to other monitors
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
117,500
Recommendations made
17,625
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.