Corsair XENEON 32QHD165 vs LG 49WQ95C-W
Corsair XENEON 32QHD165
32″ · 2560×1440 · 165 Hz · IPSLG 49WQ95C-W
49″ · 5120×1440 · 144 Hz · Nano IPSCorsair XENEON 32QHD165 and LG 49WQ95C-W are neck and neck on specs: gear scores 74 and 74.
- Resolution: LG 49WQ95C-W leads (5120×1440 vs 2560×1440).
- Refresh rate: Corsair XENEON 32QHD165 leads (165 Hz vs 144 Hz).
- Response time: Corsair XENEON 32QHD165 leads (3 ms vs 5 ms).
Corsair XENEON 32QHD165
If you care most about refresh rate, response time.
LG 49WQ95C-W
If you care most about resolution.
Spec-by-spec comparison
| Corsair XENEON 32QHD165 | LG 49WQ95C-W | |
|---|---|---|
| 74 | Gear score | 74 |
| 32″ | Screen size | 49″ |
| 2560×1440 | Resolution | 5120×1440 |
| 165 Hz | Refresh rate | 144 Hz |
| IPS | Panel | Nano IPS |
| 3 ms | Response time | 5 ms |
| — | Estimated price | ≈ $1,500 |
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 32QHD165 or LG 49WQ95C-W better?
Corsair XENEON 32QHD165 and LG 49WQ95C-W are neck and neck on specs: gear scores 74 and 74. Resolution: LG 49WQ95C-W leads (5120×1440 vs 2560×1440). Refresh rate: Corsair XENEON 32QHD165 leads (165 Hz vs 144 Hz). Response time: Corsair XENEON 32QHD165 leads (3 ms vs 5 ms).
Which has the higher refresh rate?
Refresh rate: Corsair XENEON 32QHD165 leads (165 Hz vs 144 Hz).