LG 40WP95C-W vs Philips 439P9H
LG 40WP95C-W
39.7″ · 5120×2160 · 72 Hz · IPSPhilips 439P9H
43.4″ · 3840×1200 · 100 Hz · VALG 40WP95C-W and Philips 439P9H are neck and neck on specs: gear scores 60 and 61.
- Resolution: LG 40WP95C-W leads (5120×2160 vs 3840×1200).
- Refresh rate: Philips 439P9H leads (100 Hz vs 72 Hz).
- Response time: Philips 439P9H leads (4 ms vs 5 ms).
LG 40WP95C-W
If you care most about resolution.
Philips 439P9H
If you care most about refresh rate, response time.
Spec-by-spec comparison
| LG 40WP95C-W | Philips 439P9H | |
|---|---|---|
| 60 | Gear score | 61 |
| 39.7″ | Screen size | 43.4″ |
| 5120×2160 | Resolution | 3840×1200 |
| 72 Hz | Refresh rate | 100 Hz |
| IPS | Panel | VA |
| 5 ms | Response time | 4 ms |
| ≈ $1,400 | 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 LG 40WP95C-W or Philips 439P9H better?
LG 40WP95C-W and Philips 439P9H are neck and neck on specs: gear scores 60 and 61. Resolution: LG 40WP95C-W leads (5120×2160 vs 3840×1200). Refresh rate: Philips 439P9H leads (100 Hz vs 72 Hz). Response time: Philips 439P9H leads (4 ms vs 5 ms).
Which has the higher refresh rate?
Refresh rate: Philips 439P9H leads (100 Hz vs 72 Hz).