Our Picks
What is the best gaming monitor overall?
For its balance of quality, breadth of features and more, I'm partial to the LG Ultragear 32GS95UE, a 32-inch, 4K QD-OLED with many of the capabilities I expect. There's dual refresh rate support (240Hz at 4K and 480Hz in 1080p), granular control over the settings, a lot of color tools for creators and kick-ass built-in speakers.
It has a pretty steep manufacturer price of $1,400 -- it's not outrageous for a high-end gaming monitor, but it's still a lot to swallow for something that has some potential obsolescence, such as a lack of DisplayPort 2.1 or USB-C video support plus slow USB-A. It was on sale over Black Friday/Cyber Monday for around $1,100, so if you feel like waiting or can't justify the higher price, we may see it similarly discounted during other sales events.
At significantly less than $1,000, Sony's second go at the 27-inch 4K InZone M9 (the M9 2) improves quite a bit in many ways over the original if you're looking for a midpriced gaming monitor with HDR that provides a decent tonal range for games with enemies who lurk in the shadows.
My recommendations for the best gaming monitors are based on our benchmark-based and hands-on testing (we play games too). We continually test displays, so I'll be updating my recommendations as I review the latest models.
Read more:
Best gaming monitors of 2025
It's expensive, but the 4K QD-OLED Ultragear 32GS95UE has a great balance of features, design and performance. It's got excellent display quality -- all the benefits of QD-OLED, including true blacks for high contrast, full P3 gamut coverage, good color accuracy and fast pixel refresh. LG throws in a ton of panel features, such as 240Hz/480Hz dual-refresh rate support (although 480Hz is only in 1080p), built-in color profiles that are updateable via LG's software and an optional color calibrator, almost over-granular control over display settings and more.
In addition, the monitor has terrific integrated under-screen speakers that are significantly better than those you typically find in any monitor. They're loud enough to be usable (and definitely louder than the usual pair of dinky 2W drivers), and are definitely up to ambient audio gameplay, music and movies; the drawback to the design is that off-angle the sound gets a bit muffled.
It's my top pick at the moment, but that's because it offers a good balance, not because it's flawless. It has quite a few flaws -- for a monitor in its price class -- including no DisplayPort 2.1 support, no USB-C (for either video input or power delivery) and artifacts on small text that may be a deal killer for some people. The stand is pretty standard, and while sturdy, it feels a bit plasticky.
My test measurements showed decent but not stellar accuracy out of the box -- not sufficient for color-critical work, at least. Standard white points are generally around 6300K, gamma 2.2-2.3 and brightness is about 265 by default but can hit as high as 400 nits in SDR. Accuracy averages under 3 Delta e 2000, but you can probably improve it with a calibration tune-up. HDR peak brightness hovers around 650 nits for a 10% window -- that's with peak brightness set to low but which has the best tone-mapping curve -- but you can push it to over 1200 nits in a 1% window if you crank everything. You really don't want to.
The display is nominally priced at $1,400, and I don't know that I'd pay that much for it. It's relatively new and still has dropped to as low as $1,100 for discounts, so if you can find it for that or less it's a good deal.
I like the original InZone M9 -- InZone is Sony's line of PC/PS5-adjacent accessories -- but it had some really irritating drawbacks. For the second generation, Sony fixed several of the issues with the 27-inch IPS monitor, incorporating a clever and more functional stand design, adding a 24.5-inch mode, improved default settings and a slightly higher (but still not great) 160Hz maximum refresh rate.
The stand is more conventional than the older, more striking (but stupidly big footprint) design, it's conventional and done well. The base is extra small and flat, so you can now use the space beneath the display, and it can now swivel and pivot. Rather than swiveling the display, the base actually has a recessed turntable, so the whole stand rotates; that means you can rotate it completely from left to right, which is more than usual. The silicone band cable organizer is a low-tech but good solution for a stand and displays that you may be adjusting a lot, and is definitely better than the old, tiny plastic piece.
For the price, the DisplayHDR 600-certified M9 2 is especially good for inexpensive HDR. OLED is higher contrast because it turns the illumination off entirely for blacks, but it also tends to clip shadows a lot; it's easier and more visually acceptable to remap bright highlights to bring them into the displayable tonal range rather than increase gain for the black/shadows (noisy), which is why the brightest-of-brights are hyped. but clipped shadows make me nuts and you need shadow detail for many games more than you need details in brights.
In HDR, the M9 2 tests out with a 96% P3 gamut, a white point of approximately 6300K and a peak brightness of 795 nits in a 10% window; plus, it has several HDR presets for gaming, movies and generic DisplayHDR parameters. The local dimming gives it excellent contrast and allows the minimum black to get very low (at least as low as my colorimeter seems to be able to measure, 0.017 nits). The SDR default setting measured pretty cool -- about 7400K with local dimming off -- but it hit 400 nits in a full window and had a 2.2 gamma. The SDR gamut is just 91% P3.
The only color profile is for sRGB, which is accurate (average Delta e 2000 of 1.11, 99% gamut coverage, 2.2 gamma and 6200K white point). It has a lot of gaming presets, which take advantage of a ton of the settings options beyond the usual brightness, gamma and white point: They include sharpness, saturation (RGB values for each), local dimming level and more. It has specific brightness settings for all of the presets, something which is done for reference display profiles but is not as common in consumer models.
My biggest gripe with the M9 2 is that Sony removed the USB-C connection that's on the older model. The display does have some motion blur. Sony added backlight scanning for motion blur reduction, but all it does is trade a little blur for unsightly haloing.
The manufacturer price of $800 is a little higher than it merits, but you can probably get it for less during sale seasons. The holiday pricing of $700 is better, but I kind of want to see it at about $650 given the not-very-high refresh rate.
OLED screens tend to be glossy, which a lot of people like; colors pop more and they tend to look a little slicker. If you're in front of the screen for hours or there's particularly reflective stuff behind you (like a window, for example) your eyes and brain will thank you for a less reflective screen. The Alienware AW3225QF's fits the bill. It's also important because the display is curved, which means it can potentially reflect objects on your sides, depending on the environment.
In addition to that, there's more to like about the monitor. It still suffers from my Alienware monitor pet peeve -- the video connections aren't easy to get to but it's better than earlier years' -- it's otherwise reasonably well and strikingly designed. It's curved, with a lot of venting and heat dissipation around the electronics section and a height scale on the stand for consistent adjustment. I'm not wild about the fussy cable management, which requires you to feed them into a small opening at the base of the stand, but I've seen worse.
It's got a boatload of game presets, both for SDR and HDR, plus three Dolby Vision options and a couple of color profiles built in for DCI-P3 and sRGB. Dedicated DCI-P3 profiling isn't rare, but it's not very common, either: It requires a specific white point, gamma and low brightness that differs from the more common D65 P3. This one's just okay, partly because it seems to have the wrong gamma setting (2.2); you can manually choose gamma separately if that's an issue. The sRGB is sufficiently accurate, with an average Delta e 2000 of 1.1 (max 2.6) white point of about 6200K, 2.2 gamma, and 97% gamut coverage (which is a little low because of the way it's calculated).
On the default settings, it's somewhat dim (170 nits) and warm (6,000K), but everything is adjustable to your taste. It's also set to Smart HDR -- like many of these automatic HDR preset pickers, there's a Desktop mode that maps HDR to the SDR color and tonal range used by the operating system. But it all means there are a lot of automatic changes being made that are flying under your radar. Luckily, you can turn them on and off manually. In addition to the standard set of HDR presets (game, movie, DisplayHDR), there's an HDR Peak 1000, which hits 1000 nits in a 2% window. Normally it's about 450 nits in a 10% window.
For a 240Hz 4K HDR monitor, especially one at its $1,200 price, I miss niceties like USB-C video (it's a 5Gps data connection with 15w power delivery) and DisplayPort 2.1. If you can find it on sale, it's a lot more attractive; for instance, over Black Friday/Cyber Money it dropped as low as $900, which is a good price.
When you're budget-strapped and shopping, "cheap" doesn't mean something's an amazing bargain. It means "manage your expectations, all ye who enter here." For gaming monitors, the cheapest ones are usually 25 inches and make notable tradeoffs which may be fine for some people but deal breakers for others. That's what it's all about for the 25-inch Legion R25f-30.
Lenovo's "official" pricing is always a lot higher than the typical prices, so don't let the nominal $200 put you off: It's closer to $140 or so. If you see it for $200 just laugh and move on.
In exchange for a 240Hz refresh rate and OK-in-a-pinch low-power speakers, you get a high-contrast VA screen that's not great off-angle. You also get a weirdly big stand. It can overclock to 280Hz, but it's probably not worth it. You might see a mention of HDR support, but it doesn't do it. It can just do the math.
Given all the caveats, if you're short on cash but want a gaming monitor with a little speed on it, this one's in a reasonable ballpark.
Other notable gaming monitors we've tested
Sony InZone M3: The 27-inch InZone M3 remains the entry-level model in Sony's lineup, a 1080p 240Hz model with support for Auto HDR on the PS5 and HDMI 2.1. It's still close to its original launch price (down to about $400) which is high for a 1080p with a poorly designed stand, but if you can find it on sale for close to $300 it might be worth it.
LG Ultragear OLED 27 27GR95QE-B (2023): Last year's model of the Ultragear 27-inch OLED 1440p 240Hz HDR monitor wasn't one of my favorites -- it's well designed with a ton of features but had some brightness issues and remote-control-only operation. Over Black Friday/Cyber Monday it dropped to $599 (versus $1,000), a much better price. It's back up to $1,000 now, although if you look you may find some coupons (such as $120 off at B&H).
HP Omen 27QS: This is a solid 1440p budget model, but it's only worth the money if you can find it on sale. Or you can opt for its now-old predecessor, which doesn't have the 240Hz refresh rate (it's 165Hz) but has an even more attractive discounted price of $170.
Factors to consider when buying a gaming monitor
For gamers looking to get the most performance for their money, the trick to finding the right gaming monitor is getting sufficient performance, display area, contrast and color to play games at an affordable price without sacrificing too much in other areas. Here's our expert advice on what to consider to get the most gaming monitor for your money.
Size
All else being equal, if you've got the space and budget, bigger is almost always better. Screen size labeling is based on the diagonal measurement: That made it easy to compare monitor sizes when almost every screen had the same aspect ratio -- essentially the proportions of the screen rectangle, which is the ratio of horizontal to vertical pixels. Wide and ultrawide screens on desktops and newer ratios on laptops (such as 3:2 or 16:10) make cross-size comparisons a little more difficult. You may need to factor in the aspect ratios your favorite games support. If they only offer 16:9 options, configuring them for a widescreen 21:9, 24:10 or 32:9 monitor can be annoying and frustrating; you may also be able to save some money.
If you remember your geometry and algebra, you can calculate the width and height of the display if you also know the aspect ratio. (Because width/height = aspect ratio and width² + height² = diagonal²) The further from 1:1 the aspect ratio is, the wider the screen and more of it will be out to the sides -- and therefore in your peripheral vision if you're sitting close. It will also let you figure out the physical dimensions of the screen, most notably the width, to ensure it will fit in the allotted space.
DPI Calculator can do the math for you, but keep in mind that the numbers only represent the panel size, not the size of the display, which includes bezels and the mount. Nor does it take into account curved displays, which tend to have smaller horizontal dimensions than their flat-screen equivalent.
Resolution
Resolution, the number of vertical by horizontal pixels that comprise the image, is inextricable from screen size when you're choosing a monitor. What you really want to optimize is pixel density, the number of pixels per inch the screen can display, because that's what primarily determines how sharp the screen looks as well as how big elements of the interface, such as icons and text, can appear. If you're gaming with a controller at distances further than you'd be sitting at a desk, it can be critical. For instance, I've discovered that I can't read the text well enough to even make it through a tutorial in 1440p on a 32-inch monitor from more than about 4 feet away.
Standard resolutions with a 16:9 aspect ratio include 4K UHD (3,840x2,160 pixels), QHD (Quad HD, 2,560x1,440 pixels) and FHD (Full HD, 1,920x1,080 pixels): You're better off looking at the numbers than the alphabet soup because when you get to variations like UWQHD they can get mind-bogglingly ambiguous. When you see references to "1080p" or "1440p," it's shorthand for the vertical resolution. Examples of widescreen resolutions, which you'll tend to see in 34-inch and larger curved displays, include 3,440x1,440 pixels (21:9) and 5,120x1,440 pixels (32:9).
On a 27-inch display, 1,920x1,080 has a pixel density of 81.59 ppi. On a 24-inch display, 1080p works out to 91.79 ppi. Because a higher density is better (up to a point), FHD will look better on the smaller screen. This also depends on your vision: For me, too low a resolution and I can see the pixel grid and at slightly better than that I see nothing but jaggies on small serif type. So "optimal" really depends on what you're looking at and personal preference. My preference for working, highly detailed sims, games with a lot of text and so on is at least 100ppi; if you're moving so fast there's no time to stop and shoot the flowers, you can probably drop to as low as 90ppi. Once again, the DPI Calculator can do the math for you. (A related spec is dot pitch, the size of the space between the center of the pixels, which is just the inverse of pixel density. For that, smaller is better.)
Because of the way Windows (and MacOS) works, you're always better off with the highest resolution possible: You can always change the settings to make things that are too small on a high-res screen larger and change settings to increase frame rates, but you can't make things that are too large on a low-res screen bigger.
Screen type
OLED or QD-OLED generally have the best contrast, color and pixel refresh speeds, although they may have some artifacts on text because OLED's one-pixel-one-color structure doesn't antialias (essentially blur the edges of the characters) as well as the filter array technologies (three-primaries-one-pixel-one backlight) used by other panel types. IPS screens with LED backlights are cheaper but still good, and if they use Samsung's Quantum Dot technology, they have better color than without.
Refresh rate
Refresh rate is the number of times per second (in Hertz, or Hz) the screen can update, and can produce unwanted artifacts such as blur, tearing and stuttering which occur when there's a difference between the rate at which the graphics card is feeding the display and the rate at which the screen updates. Pixel response, also known as Motion Picture Response Time or Gray-to-Gray time (though those two aren't the same thing), is how fast an individual pixel can switch states from black to white or from gray to gray (the more commonly provided spec). It's measured in milliseconds. Faster is better, and you generally want a maximum of 5ms or less GtG for all but esports-level gaming. Monitors will sometimes offer a branded motion blur-reduction mode, which performs some technological sleight of pixels to reduce perceived blur. Your mileage may vary with these.
Refresh rate and pixel response time are inextricable from each other: a display with a fast refresh rate will have a fast pixel response unless something is very wrong. Both specs are sometimes provided in an overclocked mode. The current "stratospheric" refresh rates are 360Hz through 480Hz, which are primarily intended for esports. Most gamers should be fine with 120Hz to 240Hz. You can find everything you've ever wanted to know about the subject and more at Blur Busters.
Color
The bigger the color gamut the screen covers the better. At a minimum, you want 100% sRGB, but 90% or higher P3 (also known as DCI-P3) is best, as it delivers more colors. Look for specific gamut coverage percentages rather than terms like "1 billion colors," which are essentially meaningless.
HDR
High dynamic range refers to scenes rendered with brighter highlights, greater shadow detail and a wider range of color, for a better-looking image. For gaming HDR, in contrast to TV HDR, it means more than just a prettier picture: the better you can see what's lurking in the bright and dark areas, the more likely you are to avoid danger and spot clues and looks a lot better than the black-level boost settings a monitor may have.
Games used to explicitly require supported HDR as well, but Auto HDR in the Xbox Series X/S and Windows 11 changes that: The operating systems can automatically expand the brightness and color ranges of non-HDR games. It's not the same as having a game that was rendered to use the expanded ranges, but it can give it a bump to make it look better than it otherwise would.
The HDR10 Plus Gaming standard, a variation of the HDR10 Plus that's been available on TVs for a while, adds Source Side Tone Mapping, which adjusts the brightness range on a scene level based on data embedded by the game developer -- HDR10 has a single range that has to work for the whole game. It also includes the ability to automatically trigger a display's low latency mode, to compensate for the additional overhead imposed by the HDR data (more important for TVs than monitors), as well as support for variable refresh rates in 4K at 120Hz on consoles (still not implemented in the PS5 as of today).
Price
Unless you can't afford it, at least $300 (full price, not discounted) for a current-generation model, closer to $600 minimum for OLED and/or decent HDR.
Gaming monitor FAQs
How we test gaming monitors
All measurements are performed using the most recent version of Portrait Display's Calman Ultimate software, an X-Rite i1Display Pro Plus (rebranded as Calibrite ColorChecker Display Plus HL), and a variety of included patch sets. Additional HDR testing is performed using a Murideo Six-G pattern generator and/or the Client3 HDR patterns within Calman. We periodically spot-check the colorimeter's accuracy against the Konica Minolta CS-2000 spectroradiometer used for our TV testing.
Core tests -- those we run on every display, regardless of intent or price -- include:
- The white point, brightness (peak and minimum), contrast and gamma for sRGB and the native color space measured across 21 gray patches (0 to 100%), reported rounded down to the nearest 50K if there are no big variations. A plus or minus 200K variation around the target color temperature is considered acceptable for all but the most color-critical displays.
- Color gamut coverage and accuracy for sRGB and the native color space using Calman's standard Pantone patch set, plus grayscale and skin tone patches.
- We add Blur Busters' motion tests for gaming monitors to judge motion artifacts (such as ghosting) or refresh rate-related problems.
You can find a more detailed description of our test methodology on our How CNET Tests Monitors page.