A comparison of specs, key information, reviews, and best pricing from top retailers
Last updated -- hours ago | Report incorrect information
MPG 321URX
Company ProductName Specs




M9
Company ProductName Specs




What we think

Chevron down
PerfectRec Logo
The PerfectRec monitor team Learn more
Updated April 23, 2024·

If you prioritize exceptional image quality and color accuracy for HDR gaming and creative work such as photo and video editing, the MSI MPG 321URX with its QD-OLED technology is an excellent choice, despite the higher cost. It has superior contrast, brightness, and color range compared to IPS displays. However, if budget is a concern and you still seek a high-quality display for a mix of productivity, casual gaming, and media consumption, the Sony M9 may better suit your needs. It offers very good image clarity at an upper midrange price, although its performance in color-sensitive tasks and HDR gaming won't match that of the MSI monitor. 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 MSI MPG 321URX (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 brightness
  • 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

Key differences

Chevron down

Casual Gaming

9.9
MPG 321URX
M9
7.3
3840 x 2160
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
144Hz
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
1000:1
1000 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
432 nits
Unknown
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
695 nits
99.0 %
DCI-P3 COLOR GAMUT
67.7 %
Matte
COATING
Matte
The MSI MPG 321URX (QD-OLED) is best in class for casual gaming, while the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is good.

Competitive Gaming

6.8
MPG 321URX
M9
5.7
240Hz
REFRESH RATE
144Hz
0.0 ms
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
8.0 ms
48 - 240 Hz
VARIABLE REFRESH RATE
24 - 144 Hz
No
STROBING / BFI
No
1000 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
432 nits
The MSI MPG 321URX (QD-OLED) is only fair for competitive gaming, while the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is poor.

Productivity

7.6
MPG 321URX
M9
9.6
3840 x 2160
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
139 PPI
PIXELS PER INCH
163 PPI
Yes
ADJUSTABLE STAND
Yes
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is best in class for productivity, while the MSI MPG 321URX (QD-OLED) is good.

Media Consumption

10.0
MPG 321URX
M9
7.5
3840 x 2160
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
1000:1
1000 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
432 nits
Unknown
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
695 nits
Matte
COATING
Matte
The MSI MPG 321URX (QD-OLED) is best in class for media consumption, while the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is good.

Cost

$950
MPG 321URX
M9
$800
Product image
Product image

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

$1,400

The MSI MPG 321URX (QD-OLED) has a price of $950 and the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) costs $800.

HDR Video Editing and Color Grading

Yes
MPG 321URX
M9
No
The MSI MPG 321URX (QD-OLED) is suitable for HDR video editing and color grading while the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is not suitable for HDR video editing and color grading.

Print Photo Editing

Yes
MPG 321URX
M9
No
The MSI MPG 321URX (QD-OLED) is suitable for print photo editing while the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is not suitable for print photo editing.

Key similarities

Chevron down

HDR Gaming and Media Consumption

Yes
MPG 321URX
M9
Yes
Both the MSI MPG 321URX (QD-OLED) and Sony M9 (IPS FALD) are suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption.

Digital Photo Editing

Yes
MPG 321URX
M9
Yes
Both the MSI MPG 321URX (QD-OLED) and Sony M9 (IPS FALD) are suitable for digital photo editing.

Give feedback

We’re constantly working to improve.

How the MSI MPG 321URX (QD-OLED) and the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) compare to other monitors

Chevron down

Spec Comparison

Chevron down
MSI MPG 321URX (QD-OLED)Sony M9 (IPS FALD)
MSI MPG 321URX (QD-OLED)Sony M9 (IPS FALD)

GENERAL

Price
$950
$800
Screen Size
32"27"
Resolution
3840 x 21603840 x 2160
Screen Type
OLEDLED
Screen Sub-type
QD-OLEDIPS FALD
Local Dimming Zones
N/A96

COLOR, CONTRAST & BRIGHTNESS

Native Contrast
Inf:11000:1
SDR Peak Brightness
1000 nits432 nits
HDR Peak Brightness
Unknown695 nits
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption
YesYes
sRGB Color Gamut
138.2 %100 %

MOTION CHARACTERISTICS

Total Response Time
0.03 ms8 ms
Variable Refresh Rate
48 - 240 Hz24 - 144 Hz
Strobing / BFI
NoNo
Persistence Blur Score
8/106.6/10
Ghosting Score
10/107.6/10

TEXT & IMAGE CLARITY

Pixels Per Inch
139 PPI163 PPI
Coating
MatteMatte
Text Clarity Score
6.9/108/10
Image Clarity Score
7.9/108/10

PORTS & CONNECTIVITY

HDMI 1.4 Ports
01
HDMI 2.0 Ports
00
HDMI 2.1 Ports
22
Micro HDMI Ports
00
DisplayPort 1.2 Ports
00

Give feedback

We're constantly perfecting our model

FAQs

Chevron down

Why trust us

Chevron down
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
116,900
Recommendations made
17,535
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

Color LTT LogoGeekwire logo9to5 Mac logoPhone Arena LogoColor Daring Fireball logo