ASUS ProArt Display PA348CGV vs MSI Oculux NXG251R
ASUS ProArt Display PA348CGV
34″ · 3440×1440 · 120 Hz · IPSMSI Oculux NXG251R
24.5″ · 1920×1080 · 240 Hz · TNASUS ProArt Display PA348CGV and MSI Oculux NXG251R are neck and neck on specs: gear scores 70 and 70.
- Resolution: ASUS ProArt Display PA348CGV leads (3440×1440 vs 1920×1080).
- Refresh rate: MSI Oculux NXG251R leads (240 Hz vs 120 Hz).
- Response time: MSI Oculux NXG251R leads (1 ms vs 2 ms).
ASUS ProArt Display PA348CGV
If you care most about resolution.
MSI Oculux NXG251R
If you care most about refresh rate, response time.
Spec-by-spec comparison
| ASUS ProArt Display PA348CGV | MSI Oculux NXG251R | |
|---|---|---|
| 70 | Gear score | 70 |
| 34″ | Screen size | 24.5″ |
| 3440×1440 | Resolution | 1920×1080 |
| 120 Hz | Refresh rate | 240 Hz |
| IPS | Panel | TN |
| 2 ms | Response time | 1 ms |
The gear score is computed from specifications only (e.g. for a mouse: weight, sensor, polling rate, connection and release year). It isn’t a lab test and doesn’t measure personal preferences like shape or grip.
Which one adds more to your setup?
The scanner finds your graphics card, CPU, RAM, monitor, mouse and keyboard in under a minute. You get a score out of 100, estimated FPS in games, a bottleneck check and upgrade tips made for you.
FAQ
Is ASUS ProArt Display PA348CGV or MSI Oculux NXG251R better?
ASUS ProArt Display PA348CGV and MSI Oculux NXG251R are neck and neck on specs: gear scores 70 and 70. Resolution: ASUS ProArt Display PA348CGV leads (3440×1440 vs 1920×1080). Refresh rate: MSI Oculux NXG251R leads (240 Hz vs 120 Hz). Response time: MSI Oculux NXG251R leads (1 ms vs 2 ms).
Which has the higher refresh rate?
Refresh rate: MSI Oculux NXG251R leads (240 Hz vs 120 Hz).