Monitors / Comparison

Corsair XENEON 315QHD165 vs Philips 27M1C5500VL

Monitor · Corsair

Corsair XENEON 315QHD165

31.5″ · 2560×1440 · 165 Hz · IPS
GEAR SCORE 70.0 / 100Very good
Refresh rate68
Resolution80
Panel80
Response time30
VS
Monitor · Philips

Philips 27M1C5500VL

27″ · 2560×1440 · 165 Hz · VA
GEAR SCORE 70.0 / 100Very good
Refresh rate68
Resolution80
Panel66
Response time60
Verdict

Corsair XENEON 315QHD165 and Philips 27M1C5500VL are neck and neck on specs: gear scores 70 and 70.

  • Response time: Philips 27M1C5500VL leads (4 ms vs 8 ms).
Pick this

Philips 27M1C5500VL

If you care most about response time.

Spec-by-spec comparison

Corsair XENEON 315QHD165Philips 27M1C5500VL
70Gear score70
31.5″Screen size27″
2560×1440Resolution2560×1440
165 HzRefresh rate165 Hz
IPSPanelVA
8 msResponse time4 ms
≈ $350Estimated 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.

Free · no install

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.

Scan my PCSee the leaderboard →

FAQ

Is Corsair XENEON 315QHD165 or Philips 27M1C5500VL better?

Corsair XENEON 315QHD165 and Philips 27M1C5500VL are neck and neck on specs: gear scores 70 and 70. Response time: Philips 27M1C5500VL leads (4 ms vs 8 ms).

Similar comparisons

Corsair XENEON 315QHD165 vs ASUS ProArt Display PA278CGVCorsair XENEON 315QHD165 vs ASUS ProArt Display PA348CGVCorsair XENEON 315QHD165 vs ASUS ROG Strix XG248QCorsair XENEON 315QHD165 vs BenQ EX2780QCorsair XENEON 315QHD165 vs BenQ XL2540Philips 27M1C5500VL vs ASUS ProArt Display PA278CGVPhilips 27M1C5500VL vs ASUS ProArt Display PA348CGVPhilips 27M1C5500VL vs ASUS ROG Strix XG248QPhilips 27M1C5500VL vs BenQ EX2780Q