Corsair XENEON 315QHD165 vs Philips 27M1C5200W
Corsair XENEON 315QHD165
31.5″ · 2560×1440 · 165 Hz · IPSPhilips 27M1C5200W
27″ · 1920×1080 · 240 Hz · VACorsair XENEON 315QHD165 and Philips 27M1C5200W are neck and neck on specs: gear scores 70 and 70.
- Resolution: Corsair XENEON 315QHD165 leads (2560×1440 vs 1920×1080).
- Refresh rate: Philips 27M1C5200W leads (240 Hz vs 165 Hz).
- Response time: Philips 27M1C5200W leads (4 ms vs 8 ms).
Corsair XENEON 315QHD165
If you care most about resolution.
Philips 27M1C5200W
If you care most about refresh rate, response time.
Spec-by-spec comparison
| Corsair XENEON 315QHD165 | Philips 27M1C5200W | |
|---|---|---|
| 70 | Gear score | 70 |
| 31.5″ | Screen size | 27″ |
| 2560×1440 | Resolution | 1920×1080 |
| 165 Hz | Refresh rate | 240 Hz |
| IPS | Panel | VA |
| 8 ms | Response time | 4 ms |
| ≈ $350 | Estimated price | — |
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 Corsair XENEON 315QHD165 or Philips 27M1C5200W better?
Corsair XENEON 315QHD165 and Philips 27M1C5200W are neck and neck on specs: gear scores 70 and 70. Resolution: Corsair XENEON 315QHD165 leads (2560×1440 vs 1920×1080). Refresh rate: Philips 27M1C5200W leads (240 Hz vs 165 Hz). Response time: Philips 27M1C5200W leads (4 ms vs 8 ms).
Which has the higher refresh rate?
Refresh rate: Philips 27M1C5200W leads (240 Hz vs 165 Hz).