MSI MAG 323UPF 4K 160Hz 32” Gaming Monitor Review 

This is MSI’s MAG 323UPF, a 4K 160Hz RapidIPS gaming monitor, and I’ll say up front that all-in-all, it’s pretty good. There’s a few things you should know before dropping what is still a pretty hefty chunk of change on this thing, despite it being one of the cheaper high refresh rate 4K gaming monitors on the market, so let’s get into it! Starting off with the claimed figures, they list a 1 millisecond grey-to-grey response time, up to 600 nits of peak brightness, 95% coverage of the DCI P3 spectrum and a 1000:1 contrast ratio. On the face of it, that’s pretty decent spec, but as you should be well aware, not all of those claims are accurate, and luckily I’ve built my own test equipment to help me fact-check this sort of stuff, so let’s get to using it!

Seeing as this is a gaming monitor, I’ll start with the gaming related measurements, specifically the response times and input lag. The on display latency is spot on, my open source response time tool measured it at a hair over 3 milliseconds on average, which is almost exactly half the refresh rate, and virtually no results took over one frame to display, so that’s fantastic. The response times though, that’s a little more disappointing. Remember that MSI claims this is a 1ms grey-to-grey monitor? Well, even being as charitable as possible, using the “FASTER” overdrive mode which gives you a horrendous amount of overshoot, and only looking at the initial response time, as in ignoring the overshoot time, it’s still only running at 5 milliseconds on average. Hell, even if you then cherry picked the absolute lowest result from that mix too, you still only get 2.1 milliseconds. If you’re less charitable, as in more fair and balanced, you’d end up with more like 8 milliseconds on average with the middle “FAST” overdrive mode instead. Now for a 160 hertz display that isn’t the absolute worst, you only end up with one or two frames of ghosting on screen at any one time, and the image ends up being sharp enough for a decent experience – but it is nowhere near being a 1 millisecond monitor. I do wish companies would stop lying about this – MSI is far from alone here. It’s an industry-wide problem, although I’m hoping with so many people using my response time tools – which I still have available at OSRTT.com by the way – we can push for more accurate reporting here. 

Anyway, those results add up to a pretty decent gaming experience. If you have enough horsepower to drive this beast, you’re going to have a great time with it. It’s smooth, responsive, and definitely crisp. The 32 inch form factor definitely suits the high resolution, and for me strikes the best balance between immersion and practicality as it can still actually fit on a desk and be used from relatively close up. Anything larger, like a 42” TV, generally needs to be further away to be used comfortably. One advantage I haven’t mentioned, but did cover in a video MSI sponsored, is the IO. Specifically the two HDMI 2.1 ports, which come complete with the full HDMI 2.1 spec, meaning variable refresh rate and auto low latency mode are fully supported. That means if you want to use this with a console, say a PS5 for example, you get the best experience possible. Gaming on a PS5 is a great experience on this, much better than using it with most TVs for sure, and especially the variable refresh rate support is a pretty benefit and something you’ll notice while playing.

As for the other claims, namely the brightness and colour focused ones, those are a lot more accurate. The 600 nits peak brightness is the HDR brightness, they claim 440 nits is the typical peak brightness, as in the SDR limit, and that’s near spot on with my SpyderX2 reporting 436 nits. Close enough! The colour gamut coverage is actually better than claimed, as I recorded 98% coverage of the DCI P3 spectrum, which is a touch higher than the 95% MSI claims. I also got a better contrast ratio too, with the best result being 1380:1 at 0% brightness – which is still 130 nits by the way, that’s really quite high for the lowest brightness setting you can set – to 1090:1 at 100% brightness. The only let-down here is the colour accuracy, which the SpyderX2 reported as a pretty naff 3.95 DeltaE average. Luckily a colour calibrator like the SpyderX can calibrate out that error with ease, and if you care about colour accuracy you’ll want to have a calibrator on hand anyway so it isn’t too big of a problem. 

As for the rest of the monitor, the on screen menu is pretty easy to navigate with a joystick style switch on the back, and has plenty of options. You’ve got a few extra features like a crosshair and a scope view if you want them, although I’d leave them off personally. You can control all those settings from MSI’s Windows app too, so long as the USB B host cable is plugged in. Speaking of the host cable, you’ve got a three port USB 2 hub, plus a USB C port that can act as a second source, sending USB, DisplayPort, and receiving up to 90 watts of power from the monitor – and the relatively convenient KVM function means if you plug your peripherals into the USB ports, they’ll switch over when you switch display inputs. Handy!

Physically the monitor is pretty standard. It has a pretty large footprint, but it’s decently stable so that’s a good compromise. The stand has plenty of adjustment, namely height, tilt and swivel, although rotation to portrait mode is absent – not that I’d expect anyone to run this thing in portrait mode! Styling wise it’s pretty plain. From the back it’s a pretty typical gaming monitor with a glossy section ripe for fingerprints, and an MSI logo to the side. The front is fairly plain too with fairly thin bezels on the top and sides, and a thick, protruding chin bar with an MSI logo, and that’s about it. Nothing offensive here at least.

On the whole, this is a pretty decent monitor. The response times are a bit slow – and the claims are complete fabrications – but it still offers a good gaming experience, and I do really like the full HDMI 2.1 implementation. That is still a bit of a rarity in the monitor space, so it’s great to see it here. The price tag, at least at the time of filming, makes it one of the cheaper 4K 160Hz gaming monitors available, with only a few 144Hz options coming in notably cheaper. If you’re after a 4K high refresh rate monitor, especially for console gaming, this is definitely a good choice. For a PC, it’s still pretty hard to beat, especially as there aren’t many OLED options in the same sort of spec or price range as of yet. With that said, those are my thoughts, but I’d love to hear yours in the comments down below!