Skip to content

Alienware AW3225QF 32" vs Huawei MateView

Side-by-side comparison of viewing distance, PPI, and specifications

Alienware AW3225QF 32"

31.6" · 3840×2160 · QD-OLED
Optimal Viewing Distance 63cm
Open in calculator →

Huawei MateView

28.2" · 3840×2560 · IPS
Optimal Viewing Distance 53cm
Open in calculator →
Specification Alienware AW3225QF 32" 2024 Huawei MateView 2021
Screen Size 31.6" (Better) 28.2"
Resolution 3840×2160 3840×2560 (Better)
Pixel Density (PPI) 139 164 (Better)
Optimal Viewing Distance 63cm 53cm (Better)
Panel Type QD-OLED IPS
Viewing Angle 178° 178°
Aspect Ratio 16:9 3:2
Refresh Rate 240 Hz (Better) 60 Hz
Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) G-SYNC Compatible None
Response Time 0.0 ms GTG (Better) 8 ms GTG
HDR Certification DisplayHDR True Black 400 DisplayHDR 400
SDR Brightness 260 nits 500 nits (Better)
HDR Peak Brightness 1000 nits (Better) 600 nits
Contrast Ratio 1:1,000,000 (Better) 1:1,200
Ports 2x HDMI · 1x DP · USB-C · USB Hub 1x HDMI · 1x DP · USB-C · USB Hub
USB-C Power Delivery 65 W
Color Gamut sRGB 100% · DCI-P3 98% · Adobe RGB 97% (Better) sRGB 100% · DCI-P3 98% · Adobe RGB 93%
Year 2024 (Better) 2021

Summary

The Huawei MateView has higher pixel density (164 PPI), making it sharper at close range.

The Huawei MateView allows sitting closer (53cm) while maintaining retina quality.

The Alienware AW3225QF 32" offers a larger 31.6" display for more immersive viewing.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which has better PPI: Alienware AW3225QF 32" or Huawei MateView?
The Huawei MateView has 164 PPI compared to 139 PPI for the Alienware AW3225QF 32".
Which has a closer optimal viewing distance?
The Huawei MateView requires 53cm vs 63cm for the Alienware AW3225QF 32" to reach retina quality.

Methodology & Sources

Formula: Retina distance (cm) = 3438 / PPI. Displayed values are rounded for readability.

Sources: Official manufacturer spec sheets and product pages. Specs are normalized before comparisons.

Comparison winners are calculated metric by metric (higher is better for most specs; lower is better for distance/response time).

Last updated:

Related Comparisons