The Xeneon 34WQHD240-C is the newest 34-inch QD-OLED ultrawide from Corsair. Similar to we noticed with the Gigabyte MO34WQC2 a couple of weeks in the past, these new QD-OLED ultrawide panels function a 240Hz refresh charge, providing a major refresh charge improve over first-gen fashions. Whereas the newer panel would not change different basic capabilities, it is nonetheless a extremely aggressive providing normally.
Corsair’s new 34″ gaming monitor is a dear one, debuting at $1,200, which is a bit larger than a few of its direct opponents. It is significantly dearer than the favored Dell Alienware AW3423DWF with its decrease 165Hz refresh charge, which generally retails for between $700 and $900. So, this Corsair monitor must ship excellent efficiency to justify its price ticket.
One space the place this monitor units itself aside is its white and silver design, providing one thing completely different from the standard all-black designs we see from different manufacturers. Apart from the panel space on the entrance, almost each a part of the monitor has been given a light-mode remedy, even the small rim across the panel’s edge, seen from the entrance. This offers the Corsair mannequin a two-tone look from the entrance, whereas the rear encompasses a placing white design.
Options and Design
Corsair’s tackle the ‘central field’ design we see throughout OLED panels is a bit of larger and chunkier than traditional, however the essence remains to be there, and the skinny OLED panel nonetheless extends out on the edges.
For a $1,200 monitor, although, we weren’t overly impressed with the construct high quality. The plastic used all through many of the design feels a bit low cost, and there are many seen seams – not one thing we often see on top-tier merchandise. The large stand legs are metallic and look good, however we do not suppose it is as well-made because the Alienware ultrawides, which often are available at a less expensive value level.
The 34WQHD240-C does have a couple of issues going for it. The ports are very simple to entry on the again, quite than being tucked away or hidden, however that would create a messier look behind your show relying on the way you set issues up. The facility twine goes into the underside proper nook, making it arduous to neaten that up. There’s additionally fairly a little bit of ergonomic adjustability, together with an honest vary of top and loads of swivel.
For ports on the left, we’ve got one DisplayPort 1.4 with DSC and two HDMI 2.1 48 Gbps ports, each able to the total 240Hz refresh charge. There’s additionally a USB-C enter supporting DP-Alt mode and 65W of energy supply, plus a four-port USB 3.1 5 Gbps hub on the proper, with a further Sort-C upstream port. Corsair has included a KVM swap right here as effectively.
The OSD is managed via a directional toggle alongside the underside fringe of the monitor, nevertheless it would not provide lots of options. There’s some shade management and some gaming choices like a crosshair and refresh overlay, however not a lot else.
There are solely a few OLED care options as effectively, simply an orbit function and a brightness stabilizer, which is not as feature-rich as what we’re seeing from different OLED gaming screens in the intervening time. We do not know whether or not that may impression OLED lifespan – Corsair gives an industry-standard 3-year burn-in guarantee – nevertheless it’s one space the place you get much less customization than its opponents.
Display Coating, Subpixel Format and Burn In
Whereas this 240Hz panel is newer than first-generation QD-OLED ultrawides, the subpixel construction and panel composition stay unchanged. The textual content readability right here is usually higher than related WOLED ultrawides just like the Asus PG34WCDM.
There’s some pink-green fringing alongside the higher and decrease edges of textual content, so the textual content readability is not nearly as good as an analogous decision LCD, nevertheless it’s usable, and we have heard from lots of you who do not even discover this artifact.
The display screen composition nonetheless displays ambient gentle in brighter environments, elevating obvious black ranges when gentle sources are in entrance of the show. This reduces the richness of OLED blacks in sure eventualities, particularly in comparison with WOLED panels, that are usually able to deeper blacks in vibrant rooms.
In our opinion, this is among the greatest flaws with QD-OLED panels and impacts the expertise when utilizing the show with lights on or home windows open. Nevertheless, this situation could be mitigated by making certain gentle sources are behind the show, and there is little to no impression in darkish rooms.
Other than ambient gentle reflectivity, this Corsair mannequin has a shiny display screen like most different QD-OLEDs, so there are additionally some mirror-like reflections in brighter rooms. We discover this side of reflection dealing with to be fairly good for a shiny display screen, and the shortage of matte coating grain will please readability and vibrance purists.
OLED screens nonetheless carry the chance of everlasting burn-in when used to show static content material for lengthy intervals. This makes OLED a less-than-ideal alternative for desktop app utilization and productiveness work, although occasional utilization in these methods is okay and unlikely to trigger burn-in. Our burn-in exams are nonetheless ongoing if you wish to verify them out.
Response Time Efficiency
Response time efficiency is superb on this QD-OLED monitor, as it’s for different OLED shows we have examined up to now. OLED gives lightning-fast response occasions, across the 0.3ms mark at its most 240Hz refresh charge, resulting in implausible movement readability.
OLEDs additionally preserve the identical efficiency in any respect refresh charges, so even when testing at 120Hz or 60Hz, we see related leads to the 0.3ms vary. This can be a good profit for variable refresh charge players, leading to a single overdrive mode expertise. In distinction, many LCDs usually carry out worse at decrease refresh charges relative to their most refresh.
The foremost limiting issue to OLED movement efficiency proper now could be the refresh charge itself. As a sample-and-hold monitor, OLEDs nonetheless have some blur in fast-motion scenes, and the extent of blur depends upon the refresh charge.
At 240Hz, readability is superb, delivering a quick expertise for aggressive players. However when operating the show nearer to 60Hz, readability is decreased just because the refresh charge is decrease, regardless that response time efficiency is mainly equivalent at 240Hz and 60Hz.
This additionally applies to comparisons between 240Hz and 175 or 165Hz ultrawides: 240Hz fashions are clearer when run at 240Hz as a result of the refresh charge is larger, regardless that response occasions are related. But when each are run on the identical refresh charge, you may see related outcomes. Nevertheless, having such quick response occasions offers OLED a noticeable benefit over a slower-response LCD operating on the identical refresh charge.
There’s successfully no distinction in response time efficiency between this QD-OLED and different OLED screens, together with WOLED variants. This implies movement readability is equivalent when the refresh charge is identical.
Nevertheless, OLEDs are a lot sooner than even the quickest LCDs we have examined, and that is true whether or not we have a look at the very best efficiency or common efficiency throughout the refresh charge vary. Not solely are OLEDs quick, however additionally they haven’t any overshoot artifacts, which could be a problem with some LCD fashions.
When viewing cumulative deviation outcomes, we will see that OLEDs get a lot nearer to best response time conduct, and most often, provide efficiency an order of magnitude higher on this metric than LCDs.
In apply, this results in round a 1.5x benefit in readability at a given refresh charge, so 240Hz QD-OLEDs just like the 34WQHD240-C provide an analogous expertise to 360Hz LCDs. The one shows with clearly superior readability are LCDs that provide elite backlight strobing, a function that comes with its personal set of limitations, like incompatibility with variable refresh charges – and often, this isn’t out there in an ultrawide format.
Enter latency is superb, providing a sub-0.5ms processing delay in each the SDR and HDR modes. Mixed with quick response occasions and a excessive refresh charge, this OLED feels very snappy to make use of and is well-suited to all kinds of video games.
With that stated, most different QD-OLEDs even have low enter lag, so the principle distinction between the assorted fashions is the refresh charge, which does impression latency.
By way of energy consumption, there is not a lot of a distinction between the Corsair variant and different 34-inch QD-OLEDs. The Gigabyte equal makes use of barely extra energy, however normally, it is a negligible distinction.
WOLEDs do have an effectivity benefit when evaluating full white energy consumption resulting from their further white subpixel, so the PG34WCDM finally ends up consuming round 20 watts much less on this check. Nevertheless, throughout a variety of content material, we usually see the QD-OLED and WOLED fashions commerce blows in energy consumption.
Colour Efficiency
Colour House: Corsair Xeneon 34WQHD240-C – D65-P3
All QD-OLEDs we have examined up to now provide a really related shade area. Within the case of the 34WQHD240-C, we’re taking a look at 99.5% DCI-P3 protection, in addition to 98% Adobe RGB protection – robust outcomes for viewing HDR content material or working in these shade areas. In complete, we noticed 82.8% protection of Rec. 2020, which, as you may see from the chart, is mainly the identical as different QD-OLEDs we have examined and gives a better shade gamut than competing WOLEDs.
Default Colour Efficiency
For SDR shade accuracy out of the field, this Corsair monitor is common. Whereas white steadiness is usually effective, the gamma curve is a bit off, resulting in common deltaEs. There’s additionally the standard situation of oversaturation, because the gamut is left unclamped by default. So whenever you evaluate this to different screens throughout each greyscale and ColorChecker, the outcomes are common to unimpressive.
sRGB Mode Colour Efficiency
Now, Corsair does provide an sRGB mode, nevertheless it locks you out of some settings. Some of the irritating settings locks is sharpness, which for some cause is mounted at a price of 0, making the display screen look fairly blurry in comparison with a ‘regular’ worth of 5. We don’t know why this setting has been locked, as a result of it makes the sRGB mode unusable resulting from the way it reduces the readability of the picture.
If this setting weren’t locked, the efficiency on provide could be very affordable, with deltaE ITP averages beneath 5.0 throughout the board. This may be an honest and aggressive stage of efficiency, matching up moderately effectively with different screens, however we simply cannot advocate utilizing it with the sharpness setting locked.
Calibrated Colour Efficiency
Calibration, after all, could be improved via Calman with nice outcomes, as it is a large gamut monitor with wonderful protection of DCI-P3 and Adobe RGB. That is the easiest way to get a extra correct sRGB expertise, however ideally, this may be achievable in {hardware}.
Most brightness in SDR mode is virtually equivalent to different QD-OLED screens we have examined. The Corsair mannequin produces 253 nits full-screen white, mainly the identical stage of brightness because the Gigabyte mannequin. That is beneath the extent of most LCDs, however ample for typical indoor use.
Corsair disables any computerized brightness limiter in SDR mode, so there isn’t any want for a uniform brightness setting as brightness is all the time capped at round 250 nits. This prevents annoying conduct the place the monitor will get brighter as you resize apps, and we want it to work this fashion.
A minimal brightness of simply 14 nits additionally gives a superb vary for individuals who wish to use it in a really dim room.
We had been very impressed with the viewing angles of this panel. They’re very large, making it simple to view the show even at fairly excessive angles, although, after all, the curve must be factored in right here because it does cut back the dimensions of the candy spot for viewing. Uniformity was additionally excellent with our unit – good and uniform when viewing full white and no soiled display screen impact when viewing darkish greys.
HDR Efficiency
The Corsair 34WQHD240-C is well-suited to HDR from a {hardware} perspective. OLED panels, together with QD-OLED, straight emit gentle and have particular person pixel management, making them best for displaying HDR content material.
This function permits every pixel to independently swap off or show vibrant highlights, giving us deep, zero-level blacks and per-pixel native dimming. The extent of management OLEDs present minimizes blooming in high-contrast eventualities and permits for a clear distinction between vibrant and darkish areas which might be shut collectively.
In comparison with LCDs with a multi-zone backlight, OLEDs have far fewer ugly illumination artifacts, that are most noticeable when displaying troublesome eventualities like starfields or subtitles. There aren’t any zone transitions as vibrant objects transfer across the show.
With per-pixel management as its foremost benefit, OLEDs are greatest at displaying high-contrast scenes with wealthy shadow element, which is vital to a very good HDR presentation. Darker content material interspersed with dazzling vibrant highlights brings out the very best in OLED shows, as does HDR content material with quick movement. For players particularly, enter latency on most OLEDs is low in HDR mode.
The weak point of the HDR presentation on an OLED is general brightness. Whereas peak brightness could be excessive in the very best circumstances, full-screen brightness is low, and this limits the punch in vibrant daytime scenes.
LCDs might not have per-pixel management, however zoned backlights can merely get considerably brighter in vibrant scenes. Relying on what you need out of an HDR monitor, your desire may swing extra towards LCDs or OLEDs – however usually, OLEDs are an amazing alternative that delivers a implausible HDR presentation.
This monitor has two HDR configurations: the default HDR mode, which is analogous to the ‘True Black 400’ mode seen on different QD-OLEDs, and an HDR Peak Brightness mode, which is the ‘Peak 1,000 nit’ configuration. This gives the identical efficiency traits as different screens utilizing QD-OLED panels.
The ‘HDR’ mode is the extra correct of the 2. It has nice EOTF monitoring in any respect window sizes, eliminating panel dimming and delivering robust shade accuracy. Nevertheless, peak brightness is proscribed to only 460 nits, which is not very vibrant and prevents you from accessing the total 1,000 nits the panel is able to.
The HDR Peak Brightness setting unlocks brightness, offering simply over 1,000 nits for the smallest parts. This mode can be usually correct for much less vibrant scenes, with good EOTF monitoring for smaller window sizes. Nevertheless, it suffers from panel dimming in brighter scenes, exhibiting up as poor EOTF monitoring for bigger window sizes.
Primarily, the trade-off right here is brighter highlights in darker scenes, with successful to accuracy and brightness in brighter scenes. That is one other QD-OLED monitor the place you can not get the very best of each worlds, which is disappointing and a basic flaw with this technology of QD-OLED screens.
In artificial exams, we get round 260 to 270 nits of brightness full display screen in HDR mode, whatever the setting you select. That is additionally true for a ten% window dimension, the place the monitor is able to about 460 nits.
At a 2% window dimension, we see the variations between the principle configurations, with the default HDR mode locked to only 463 nits. All different screens on this chart are utilizing their most correct configuration that ensures most brightness.
For actual scene brightness, the 34WQHD240-C gives an analogous expertise to different QD-OLEDs, particularly when wanting on the Peak Brightness mode outcomes. There’s panel dimming, as we will see from the numbers on the proper aspect of the chart, whereas real-world outcomes are in step with different QD-OLEDs.
The Gigabyte competitor solely gives a bizarre ‘brightness boosted’ configuration, which helps with panel dimming and may enhance brightness in some scenes, however this comes on the expense of accuracy, notably in dimmer scenes.
HDR accuracy is typical, coming in towards the center of the charts, particularly once we have a look at the Peak Brightness mode. HDR shade quantity is superb, just like different QD-OLEDs, and superior to WOLEDs, because of larger shade brightness values.
HUB Necessities Guidelines
Within the Necessities Guidelines, Corsair does a very good job of promoting this monitor. It is a true HDR product with efficiency that matches the listed specs for probably the most half, outdoors of the standard points with response time numbers.
Within the function assist matrix, it is a very typical exhibiting for a QD-OLED. Typically, nice numbers are put up throughout the distinction and movement sections, plus fairly a couple of function inclusions, corresponding to a KVM swap, swish SDR/HDR switching, and a USB-C port with 65W of energy supply. Nevertheless, there are additionally a couple of downsides, such because the locked sRGB mode and the chance of everlasting burn-in.
We additionally gave Corsair a cross for the “no different firmware points” part as a result of, twice when utilizing this monitor, it appeared to show off out of the blue. Now, this might be associated to the panel safety options activating with out a warning or another situation, nevertheless it was fairly weird conduct.
We consider it was doing a panel compensation cycle, and if that is the case, it is a a lot worse option to provoke that function than different screens that both warn you or solely run it when the monitor is in standby mode.
A Stable QD-OLED, however Too Costly at Launch
On the finish of the day, we do not suppose the Corsair Xeneon 34WQHD240-C is a foul monitor, nevertheless it would not do sufficient to justify its excessive price ticket. At $1,200, you’d need this to be the very best 34-inch ultrawide available on the market, and whereas some points of it are good – such because the 240Hz refresh charge – it simply is not the most suitable choice for most individuals.
The refresh charge improve over earlier technology QD-OLED screens is the spotlight right here, going from 165 or 175Hz as much as 240Hz. Mixed with wonderful response occasions, this Corsair monitor gives nice movement readability and loads of refresh charge headroom for years of gaming.
Nevertheless, these advantages solely come into play when operating the monitor above 175Hz, so if you happen to’re largely taking part in video games within the 60 to 120 FPS vary, there’s not going to be any movement readability distinction in comparison with OLED screens with a decrease most refresh charge.
Most different points of this show are equivalent to what we have seen from different QD-OLEDs over the previous couple of years. Identical textual content readability and display screen coating, identical brightness traits, identical HDR expertise. Corsair is not doing something distinctive with this product, which is not essentially a foul factor on condition that QD-OLED panels are wonderful. It simply implies that in a sea of competitors, the 34WQHD240-C would not stand out in any important manner.
If something, we expect this show lacks the polish wanted to justify the excessive price ticket. The construct high quality just isn’t wonderful and never on the premium stage we would often affiliate with this class of monitor. The sRGB mode is well-calibrated however locks the sharpness setting to a blurry stage. The panel safety options appear to activate with out warning, and there is solely a restricted array of OLED care choices. It is one of many extra fundamental OLED choices that we have examined, nevertheless it’s additionally on the dearer aspect.
Now, we would not essentially advocate the Gigabyte 240Hz QD-OLED various over this Corsair mannequin, as a result of the Gigabyte model additionally has its share of points. Like this Corsair unit, we felt the MO34WQC2 was too costly. As a substitute, for most individuals desirous to sport on a QD-OLED ultrawide, we would advocate the Dell Alienware AW3423DWF.
It has higher efficiency and options, and it is usually round $400 to $500 cheaper than the Corsair. The one factor you’re sacrificing is the refresh charge, which drops to 165Hz, however actually, for many players, that refresh charge is enough, and upgrading to 240Hz just isn’t price a 50% value premium.
Provided that the panel expertise used between the first-gen and this second-gen models may be very related, we do not suppose the 240Hz variants can justify an enormous premium. In our opinion, these fashions, together with the Corsair, ought to be priced no larger than $900, and a price ticket of $800 could be even higher. At $1,200, we simply cannot advocate it.
