Monday, February 19th 2024

Incoming MSI QD-OLED Gaming Monitors Receive Permanent Price Cuts

MSI is preparing to launch its MPG 321URX QD-OLED monitor this month—we first spotted this model during an official expansion of the company's QD-OLED gaming monitor lineup—utilizing Samsung Display Gen 3 panels. The announcement outlined an initial MSRP of $1199 for MSI's MPG 321URX gaming monitor, although a time-limited special introductory offer of $949 was later advertised. ASUS Republic of Gamers (ROG) released its Swift OLED PG32UCDM gaming monitor (in USA and UK markets) late last week—competing at a $1299 price point with MSI's 321URX model. The two companies are attempting to outdo each other—earlier this month MSI pledged a 3-year warranty on its OLED panel products, semi-forcing ASUS into matching that generous offer—they previously advertised a two-year period for ROG Swift OLED monitors.

Monitors Unboxed has investigated alleged permanent MSI MSRP price cuts—affecting the MPG 321URX, as well the 49-inch 491CQP and 27-inch 271QRX QD-OLED models. The manufacturer appears prepped to undercut its competition to the tune of $350 (MPG 321URX vs. PG32UCDM): "I've gotten a second update from MSI regarding the MSRP of their QD-OLEDs. They have decided to change their mind and offer their previously lowered pricing permanently, instead of just as an introductory price. That means the official MSRPs of their products are as follows (read more after the jump)." At the time of writing, MSI's MPG 321URX QD-OLED is available to pre-order at a few North American and UK e-tailers, although a couple of listings state the item is "coming soon," or due in stock by early April.
According to a Monitors Unboxed comment, the revised prices are:
  • MSI MPG 321URX QD-OLED 32" at US$949.99
  • MSI MPG 271QRX QD-OLED 27" at US$799.99
  • MSI MPG 491CQP QD-OLED 49" at US$1099.99
Sources: Monitors Unboxed, NoteBookCheck, VideoCardz
Add your own comment

27 Comments on Incoming MSI QD-OLED Gaming Monitors Receive Permanent Price Cuts

#1
Denver
It's strange that an OLED TV (larger) costs less than a 32" monitor.
Posted on Reply
#2
Vayra86
DenverIt's strange that an OLED TV (larger) costs less than a 32" monitor.
They oughta make an oled monitor with an Amazon, Facebook, Netflix, TikTok, Disney, HBO and Instagram button on the front, then it'd be same price :)
Posted on Reply
#3
R0H1T
DenverIt's strange that an OLED TV (larger) costs less than a 32" monitor.
Not strange at all, they're at times sold at a loss as well. They recoup money with their preloaded "apps" or built in adware!
Posted on Reply
#4
Denver
Vayra86They oughta make an oled monitor with an Amazon, Facebook, Netflix, TikTok, Disney, HBO and Instagram button on the front, then it'd be same price :)
Please send the idea to the manufacturers. If they can adjust the prices to be more reasonable, I don't foresee any issues. :p
Posted on Reply
#5
Vayra86
DenverPlease send the idea to the manufacturers. If they can adjust the prices to be more reasonable, I don't foresee any issues. :p
Next year we'll be looking at a copy of this news post. Like an exact copy. 'Inflation' canceled our savings
Posted on Reply
#6
Metroid
The only one to get is the MEG version with DP 2.1 but that one will cost a lot more for it, I'm sure of it.
Posted on Reply
#7
Baba
DenverIt's strange that an OLED TV (larger) costs less than a 32" monitor.
Panels are not the same. Samsung OLED TVs just got bumped from 120Hz to 144Hz. These Samsung panel based monitors are at 240Hz.
Add KVM switch and DisplayPort.

Very competitive price. Inferior LG WOLED 42" C3/4 panel is the same price. More real estate but it could be too much for some. I already have a 32" so I know it will work for my setup. I'll be getting this once some reviews are out and confirm all is well.
Posted on Reply
#8
Upgrayedd
MetroidThe only one to get is the MEG version with DP 2.1 but that one will cost a lot more for it, I'm sure of it.
The lack of DP 2.1 made these instanty outdated. Totally uninterested.

They seem like console first displays to me. Like they're not meant for PC but they'll work with PC.
Posted on Reply
#9
Baba
MetroidThe only one to get is the MEG version with DP 2.1 but that one will cost a lot more for it, I'm sure of it.
That's a totally different monitor. www.msi.com/Monitor/MEG-342C-QD-OLED

Both ports can handle 240Hz. If DP1.4 bothers you still why not use HDMI instead?

Display Port: 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz)
HDMI™ 2.1: 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz)
Type C(DP alt.): 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz) and 90W PD charging
Posted on Reply
#10
Metroid
BabaThat's a totally different monitor. www.msi.com/Monitor/MEG-342C-QD-OLED

Both ports can handle 240Hz. If DP1.4 bothers you still why not use HDMI instead?

Display Port: 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz)
HDMI™ 2.1: 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz)
Type C(DP alt.): 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz) and 90W PD charging
It's not lossless. They will tell you the compressed image looks lossless, technical people will never fall for the BS.
Posted on Reply
#11
kapone32
Well, what were the prices before? Those are still high.
Posted on Reply
#12
Veseleil
Considering that any decent 32" UHD IPS is not much cheaper, it's not bad, though it's still a dream away from my budget.
Posted on Reply
#13
mechtech
too bad that 27" wasn't 4k....................
Posted on Reply
#14
konga
MetroidIt's not lossless. They will tell you the compressed image looks lossless, technical people will never fall for the BS.
It's "visually lossless," as in extremely difficult to tell the difference, even for experienced users looking at compressed and uncompressed images side by side. I have actually used DSC monitors side by side with non-DSC monitors for a few years now, and not once have I been able to tell a difference. I'd consider DSC safe for visual production work, even. Don't let that aspect be what scares you away. The only valid reason to avoid DSC is if you like using DLDSR, because Nvidia drivers don't support DLDSR over DSC currently.
Posted on Reply
#15
Upgrayedd
BabaThat's a totally different monitor. www.msi.com/Monitor/MEG-342C-QD-OLED

Both ports can handle 240Hz. If DP1.4 bothers you still why not use HDMI instead?

Display Port: 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz)
HDMI™ 2.1: 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz)

Type C(DP alt.): 3840 x 2160 (Up to 240Hz) and 90W PD charging
lol that's a good one because neither one of them can do that without a crutch. That's why it seems like it's a console display more than anything.

I had way too many problems setting up one of the new 240Hz 1440p LG displays via HDMI 2.1. I ended up having to use a 3rd party tool and delete some stuff related to LG's implementation of HDMI and its metadata. I did like LFC+G-Sync though, that was pretty cool once I got the display working.

But with Display port you just don't have those problems when connected to a PC. DP 2.1 is also much faster than HDMI 2.1
HDMI 2.1 is good for like 4K 150Hz 10-bit uncompressed.
DP 1.4a is like 95Hz
DP 2.1 is like 265Hz
Posted on Reply
#16
Chaitanya
Vayra86They oughta make an oled monitor with an Amazon, Facebook, Netflix, TikTok, Disney, HBO and Instagram button on the front, then it'd be same price :)
Samsung is already charging extra for "smart" monitors.
Posted on Reply
#17
trsttte
ChaitanyaSamsung is already charging extra for "smart" monitors.
LG as well.
Posted on Reply
#18
Keivz
kongaIt's "visually lossless," as in extremely difficult to tell the difference, even for experienced users looking at compressed and uncompressed images side by side. I have actually used DSC monitors side by side with non-DSC monitors for a few years now, and not once have I been able to tell a difference. I'd consider DSC safe for visual production work, even. Don't let that aspect be what scares you away. The only valid reason to avoid DSC is if you like using DLDSR, because Nvidia drivers don't support DLDSR over DSC currently.
You can absolutely use dldsr with DSC—to a point. I use it all the time with my 4k144hz monitor (10 bit hdr). I’ve only run into trouble at higher levels of dsc (eg 4k160hz) or with multi monitors (still useable to a degree).
Posted on Reply
#19
sephiroth117
In Europe the 32 inch is 1400EUR still…

that US/EU delta for those specific monitors is absolutely bonkers, they won’t have my money, I’ll wait for asus/gigabyte/hp to release their own version of that panel in EU
Posted on Reply
#20
trsttte
sephiroth117In Europe the 32 inch is 1400EUR still…

that US/EU delta for those specific monitors is absolutely bonkers, they won’t have my money, I’ll wait for asus/gigabyte/hp to release their own version of that panel in EU
US prices don't include taxes, Europe ones do. But you're right about waiting for the same price reduction the US market got to apply to Europe
Posted on Reply
#21
Baba
  • 32" Asus PG32UCDM QD-OLED – $1,299.00
  • 27" MSI 271QPX QD-OLED – $749.99
  • 27" MSI 271QRX QD-OLED – $799.99 (with USB ports)
  • 32" MSI 321UPX QD-OLED – $899.99
  • 32" MSI 321URX QD-OLED – $949.99 (with USB ports)
  • 34" MSI 341CQP QD-OLED – $899.99
  • 49" MSI 491CQP QD-OLED – $1,099.99
Here are the prices so far. Could save $50 if you don't need USB-A ports on your monitor.

Here is all that's coming out.

























27"LG 27GS95QEWOLED1440p16:9 flat240Hz
32"LG 32GS95UEWOLED4K16:9 flat240/480Hz
34"LG 34GS95QEWOLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
39"LG 39GS95QEWOLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
45"LG 45GS95QEWOLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
45"LG 45GS96QBWOLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
27"Asus PG27AQDPWOLED1440p16:9 flat480HzBFI
32"Asus PG32UCDMQD-OLED4K16:9 flat240HzDolby Vision
32"Asus PG32UCDPWOLED4K16:9 flat240/480HzBFI
39"Asus PG39WCDMWOLED1440p21:9 curved240HzBFI
27"Samsung G6QD-OLED1440p16:9 flat360Hz
32"Samsung G8QD-OLED4K16:9 flat240Hz
49"Samsung G9QD-OLED1440p32:9 curved240Hz
27"Dell Alienware AW2725DFQD-OLED1440p16:9 flat360Hz
32"Dell Alienware AW3225QFQD-OLED4K16:9 curved240Hz
27"Gigabyte FO27Q3QD-OLED1440p360Hz
32"Gigabyte FO32U2PQD-OLED4K16:9 flat240HzDisplayPort 2.1
32"Gigabyte FO32U2QD-OLED4K16:9 flat240Hz
34"Gigabyte MO34WQC2QD-OLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
27"MSI 271QPXQD-OLED1440p16:9 flat360Hz
32"MSI 321UPXQD-OLED4K16:9 flat240Hz
34"MSI 341CQPQD-OLED1440p21:9 curved175Hz
49"MSI 491CQPQD-OLED1440p32:9 curved144Hz
34"Acer X34XWOLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
39"Acer X39WOLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
27"ASRock PGO27QFS2AWOLED1440p16:9 curved240Hz
27"ASRock PGO270W2AQD-OLED1440p16:9360Hz
34"ASRock PGO34QRT2AWOLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
32"HP TranscendQD-OLED4K16:9 flat240Hz
Upgrayeddlol that's a good one because neither one of them can do that without a crutch. That's why it seems like it's a console display more than anything.

I had way too many problems setting up one of the new 240Hz 1440p LG displays via HDMI 2.1. I ended up having to use a 3rd party tool and delete some stuff related to LG's implementation of HDMI and its metadata. I did like LFC+G-Sync though, that was pretty cool once I got the display working.

But with Display port you just don't have those problems when connected to a PC. DP 2.1 is also much faster than HDMI 2.1
HDMI 2.1 is good for like 4K 150Hz 10-bit uncompressed.
DP 1.4a is like 95Hz
DP 2.1 is like 265Hz
Honestly, will you be able to tell over 144hz at 4k that it's compressed? I doubt I'll have a fast enough video card to go over 144hz anyway. Currently gaming on 4k60hz LED and can't wait to go OLED. There is one monitor with DP2.1 and UHBR 20 support on the list if you really want it. No price info yet.
32"Gigabyte FO32U2PQD-OLED4K16:9 flat240HzDisplayPort 2.1
Posted on Reply
#22
Upgrayedd
Baba
  • 32" Asus PG32UCDM QD-OLED – $1,299.00
  • 27" MSI 271QPX QD-OLED – $749.99
  • 27" MSI 271QRX QD-OLED – $799.99 (with USB ports)
  • 32" MSI 321UPX QD-OLED – $899.99
  • 32" MSI 321URX QD-OLED – $949.99 (with USB ports)
  • 34" MSI 341CQP QD-OLED – $899.99
  • 49" MSI 491CQP QD-OLED – $1,099.99
Here are the prices so far. Could save $50 if you don't need USB-A ports on your monitor.

Here is all that's coming out.

























27"LG 27GS95QEWOLED1440p16:9 flat240Hz
32"LG 32GS95UEWOLED4K16:9 flat240/480Hz
34"LG 34GS95QEWOLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
39"LG 39GS95QEWOLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
45"LG 45GS95QEWOLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
45"LG 45GS96QBWOLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
27"Asus PG27AQDPWOLED1440p16:9 flat480HzBFI
32"Asus PG32UCDMQD-OLED4K16:9 flat240HzDolby Vision
32"Asus PG32UCDPWOLED4K16:9 flat240/480HzBFI
39"Asus PG39WCDMWOLED1440p21:9 curved240HzBFI
27"Samsung G6QD-OLED1440p16:9 flat360Hz
32"Samsung G8QD-OLED4K16:9 flat240Hz
49"Samsung G9QD-OLED1440p32:9 curved240Hz
27"Dell Alienware AW2725DFQD-OLED1440p16:9 flat360Hz
32"Dell Alienware AW3225QFQD-OLED4K16:9 curved240Hz
27"Gigabyte FO27Q3QD-OLED1440p360Hz
32"Gigabyte FO32U2PQD-OLED4K16:9 flat240HzDisplayPort 2.1
32"Gigabyte FO32U2QD-OLED4K16:9 flat240Hz
34"Gigabyte MO34WQC2QD-OLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
27"MSI 271QPXQD-OLED1440p16:9 flat360Hz
32"MSI 321UPXQD-OLED4K16:9 flat240Hz
34"MSI 341CQPQD-OLED1440p21:9 curved175Hz
49"MSI 491CQPQD-OLED1440p32:9 curved144Hz
34"Acer X34XWOLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
39"Acer X39WOLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
27"ASRock PGO27QFS2AWOLED1440p16:9 curved240Hz
27"ASRock PGO270W2AQD-OLED1440p16:9360Hz
34"ASRock PGO34QRT2AWOLED1440p21:9 curved240Hz
32"HP TranscendQD-OLED4K16:9 flat240Hz




Honestly, will you be able to tell over 144hz at 4k that it's compressed? I doubt I'll have a fast enough video card to go over 144hz anyway. Currently gaming on 4k60hz LED and can't wait to go OLED. There is one monitor with DP2.1 and UHBR 20 support on the list if you really want it. No price info yet.
32"Gigabyte FO32U2PQD-OLED4K16:9 flat240HzDisplayPort 2.1
nothing interests me currently.
Gonna have to be DP 2.1 with actual Gsync hardware for 4K 240 OLED. So probably an alienware around the release of GTA6 on PC.

There's plenty of competitive titles you can run over 144fps at 4K. Can I tell the difference? I don't know I don't really wanna find out. Hardware costs too much leave stuff on the table like that.

I would imagine it gets worse the higher your fps but I don't know exactly how dsc behaves. Compressing your data stream in half has to be noticeable somewhere.
Posted on Reply
#23
trsttte
BabaHere are the prices so far. Could save $50 if you don't need USB-A ports on your monitor.
Saving some bucks is always nice but you're making a big mistake buying one of these monitors without USB-A ports, no USB-A also means no user upgradable firmware and that's a no go with something as new as this.
UpgrayeddGonna have to be DP 2.1 with actual Gsync hardware
That doesn't exist, nvidia didn't even update the gsync modules to hdmi 2.1, I wouldn't bet on them launching a version with DP 2.1 any time soon, probably not ever and that's not a terrible thing. The hole concept was about cornering the market with an expensive add on only they control, it has some small advantages but I rather see it die than allowing nvidia to gatekeep another technology.
Posted on Reply
#24
Baba
trsttteSaving some bucks is always nice but you're making a big mistake buying one of these monitors without USB-A ports, no USB-A also means no user upgradable firmware and that's a no go with something as new as this.



That doesn't exist, nvidia didn't even update the gsync modules to hdmi 2.1, I wouldn't bet on them launching a version with DP 2.1 any time soon, probably not ever and that's not a terrible thing. The hole concept was about cornering the market with an expensive add on only they control, it has some small advantages but I rather see it die than allowing nvidia to gatekeep another technology.
Valid point. I see some early issues in reviews that will require a firmware update in the future. I wonder why you can't use USB-C for firmware updates.
Upgrayeddnothing interests me currently.
Gonna have to be DP 2.1 with actual Gsync hardware for 4K 240 OLED. So probably an alienware around the release of GTA6 on PC.

There's plenty of competitive titles you can run over 144fps at 4K. Can I tell the difference? I don't know I don't really wanna find out. Hardware costs too much leave stuff on the table like that.

I would imagine it gets worse the higher your fps but I don't know exactly how dsc behaves. Compressing your data stream in half has to be noticeable somewhere.
Watchout for Alienware. The Dell calls the HDMI ports "2.1" on the AW2725DF but they only have 2.0 bandwidth (18Gbps). The maximum refresh rate at 1440p is only 144Hz.

Posted on Reply
#25
Upgrayedd
BabaValid point. I see some early issues in reviews that will require a firmware update in the future. I wonder why you can't use USB-C for firmware updates.



Watchout for Alienware. The Dell calls the HDMI ports "2.1" on the AW2725DF but they only have 2.0 bandwidth (18Gbps). The maximum refresh rate at 1440p is only 144Hz.

Yeah I've noticed that. I'm sure they'll have 4K DP 2.1+ screens with gsync modules by the time that game releases on PC.

I was shopping around for an AV receiver a while back and a lot of brands were really bad about advertising their HDMI speeds so I just gave up until they get past the transition models.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 1st, 2024 01:08 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts