A comparison of specs, key information, reviews, and best pricing from top retailers
Last updated -- hours ago | Report incorrect information
27E1N8900
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 deep blacks and contrast are important to you, especially for HDR gaming and media, the Philips with its OLED panel offers superior image quality. On the other hand, the Sony with an IPS panel has better brightness and is more suited for a bright room, plus it has variable refresh rate support for smoother gaming. The Philips is excellent for photo editing with its wider color gamut, but for general productivity and tasks requiring less accurate color reproduction, the Sony should suffice. If you're a competitive gamer, the Sony's faster response times and refresh rate might be more appealing. Choose based on whether image quality or versatility is your priority. 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 Phillips 27E1N8900 (W-OLED)
  • Best in class for casual gaming
  • Best in class for media consumption
  • Best in class contrast
  • Best in class response time
Advantages of the Sony M9 (IPS FALD)
  • Best in class for productivity
  • Very good text clarity
  • Good color volume

Key differences

Chevron down

Casual Gaming

9.7
27E1N8900
M9
7.3
3840 x 2160
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
60Hz
REFRESH RATE
144Hz
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
1000:1
540 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
432 nits
Unknown
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
695 nits
99.7 %
DCI-P3 COLOR GAMUT
67.7 %
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Phillips 27E1N8900 (W-OLED) is best in class for casual gaming, while the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is good.

Productivity

6.9
27E1N8900
M9
9.6
3840 x 2160
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
163 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 Phillips 27E1N8900 (W-OLED) is only fair.

Media Consumption

9.5
27E1N8900
M9
7.5
3840 x 2160
RESOLUTION
3840 x 2160
Inf:1
NATIVE CONTRAST
1000:1
540 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
432 nits
Unknown
HDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
695 nits
Matte
COATING
Matte
The Phillips 27E1N8900 (W-OLED) is best in class for media consumption, while the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is good.

Print Photo Editing

Yes
27E1N8900
M9
No
The Phillips 27E1N8900 (W-OLED) is suitable for print photo editing while the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) is not suitable for print photo editing.

Key similarities

Chevron down

Competitive Gaming

5.9
27E1N8900
M9
5.7
60Hz
REFRESH RATE
144Hz
0.1 ms
TOTAL RESPONSE TIME
8.0 ms
N/A
VARIABLE REFRESH RATE
24 - 144 Hz
No
STROBING / BFI
No
540 nits
SDR PEAK BRIGHTNESS
432 nits
The Phillips 27E1N8900 (W-OLED) and Sony M9 (IPS FALD) are both poor for competitive gaming.

Cost

$800
27E1N8900
M9
$800
Product imageProduct image

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

The Phillips 27E1N8900 (W-OLED) has a price of $800 and the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) costs $800.

HDR Gaming and Media Consumption

Yes
27E1N8900
M9
Yes
Both the Phillips 27E1N8900 (W-OLED) and Sony M9 (IPS FALD) are suitable for HDR gaming and media consumption.

Digital Photo Editing

Yes
27E1N8900
M9
Yes
Both the Phillips 27E1N8900 (W-OLED) and Sony M9 (IPS FALD) are suitable for digital photo editing.

HDR Video Editing and Color Grading

No
27E1N8900
M9
No
Both the Phillips 27E1N8900 (W-OLED) and Sony M9 (IPS FALD) are not suitable for HDR video editing and color grading.

Give feedback

We’re constantly working to improve.

How the Phillips 27E1N8900 (W-OLED) and the Sony M9 (IPS FALD) compare to other monitors

Chevron down

Spec Comparison

Chevron down
Phillips 27E1N8900 (W-OLED)Sony M9 (IPS FALD)
Phillips 27E1N8900 (W-OLED)Sony M9 (IPS FALD)

GENERAL

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

COLOR, CONTRAST & BRIGHTNESS

Native Contrast
Inf:11000:1
SDR Peak Brightness
540 nits432 nits
HDR Peak Brightness
Unknown695 nits
Suitable for HDR Gaming and Media Consumption
YesYes
sRGB Color Gamut
150 %100 %

MOTION CHARACTERISTICS

Total Response Time
0.1 ms8 ms
Variable Refresh Rate
N/A24 - 144 Hz
Strobing / BFI
NoNo
Persistence Blur Score
5/106.6/10
Ghosting Score
10/107.6/10

TEXT & IMAGE CLARITY

Pixels Per Inch
163 PPI163 PPI
Coating
MatteMatte
Text Clarity Score
6.9/108/10
Image Clarity Score
8/108/10

PORTS & CONNECTIVITY

HDMI 1.4 Ports
01
HDMI 2.0 Ports
20
HDMI 2.1 Ports
02
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
126,800
Recommendations made
19,020
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