Alienware AW3225QF
Sharper desk decisions
- Display: 31.6 in
- Refresh rate: 240 Hz
- Response time: 0.03 ms
- Brightness: 1,000 nits
Compare every shared field with exact values, visual meters and a clear winner for each measurable specification.
It wins 4 fields to 2, with 0 ties. This count covers listed numeric fields—not total product quality.
Sharper desk decisions
Sharper desk decisions
Each card names the product with the measurable advantage and the size of the gap.
ASUS ProArt Display PA279CRV wins usb-c power by 9600000000000%.
Alienware AW3225QF wins refresh rate by 300%.
Alienware AW3225QF wins brightness by 150%.
Alienware AW3225QF wins response time by 99%.
Longer means stronger only for the stated direction. Exact values remain beside every bar.
A larger diagonal provides more physical workspace when resolution and desk depth suit it.
A higher refresh rate can make supported motion appear smoother.
Response-time claims use different test methods and should be treated as listed specifications.
Higher peak brightness can improve highlights and visibility in bright rooms.
Higher power delivery can charge a wider range of compatible laptops.
Port count is useful only when the included port types match your setup.
Move the sliders to show how much each field matters to you. The result changes instantly and stays separate from the factual field winners.
8 of 8 fields have values for both products. Descriptive fields are shown without inventing a winner.
| Specification | Alienware AW3225QF | ASUS ProArt Display PA279CRV | Field winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Display | |||
| Display sizeA larger diagonal provides more physical workspace when resolution and desk depth suit it. | 31.6 inWinner | 27 in | Larger workspace Alienware AW3225QF has the higher listed value. |
| Peak listed brightnessHigher peak brightness can improve highlights and visibility in bright rooms. | 1,000 nitsWinner | 400 nits | Higher peak brightness Alienware AW3225QF has the higher listed value. |
| ResolutionResolution affects workspace and sharpness alongside screen size and scaling. | 3840 x 2160 | 3840 x 2160 | Tie Both products list the same value. |
| Panel technologyPanel labels do not capture every aspect of image quality. | QD-OLED | IPS | No winner This field is descriptive, so no automatic winner is assigned. |
| Motion | |||
| Maximum refresh rateA higher refresh rate can make supported motion appear smoother. | 240 HzWinner | 60 Hz | Higher refresh rate Alienware AW3225QF has the higher listed value. |
| Listed response timeResponse-time claims use different test methods and should be treated as listed specifications. | 0.03 msWinner | 5 ms | Lower response time Alienware AW3225QF has the lower listed value. |
| Connectivity | |||
| USB-C power deliveryHigher power delivery can charge a wider range of compatible laptops. | 0 W | 96 WWinner | More USB-C charging power ASUS ProArt Display PA279CRV has the higher listed value. |
| Listed connectivity portsPort count is useful only when the included port types match your setup. | 6 | 8Winner | More ports ASUS ProArt Display PA279CRV has the higher listed value. |
Its strongest measurable advantages in this head-to-head are:
Its strongest measurable advantages in this head-to-head are:
Dell UltraSharp U2723QE wins usb-c power by 9000000000000%.
See the full comparisonAlienware AW3225QF wins ports by 20%.
See the full comparisonLG UltraGear 32GS95UE-B wins brightness by 30%.
See the full comparisonASUS ProArt Display PA279CRV wins usb-c power by 9600000000000%.
See the full comparisonASUS ProArt Display PA279CRV wins usb-c power by 9600000000000%.
See the full comparisonASUS ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDM wins refresh rate by 300%.
See the full comparison