The Alienware AW3926QW has been a hotly anticipated review as this is Dell's take on a 39-inch 5K2K ultrawide OLED gaming monitor. It's a particularly tempting option, hitting that sweet spot for ultrawide size that we've talked about in the past: larger than standard 34-inch models while providing increased immersion while gaming and more desktop screen real estate.
This isn't the first 39-inch 5K2K ultrawide to hit the market. That honor went to the LG 39GX950B, which we reviewed in April. At first glance, you might think this Alienware model is simply a variant of the LG, but they actually use different panels, leading to substantial hardware and performance differences.
The Alienware model uses an RGB stripe subpixel layout with a glossy screen coating, while the LG uses RGWB with a white subpixel and a matte screen coating. You might not think that changing the subpixel layout would have much influence, but it fundamentally alters how the OLED panel behaves in terms of brightness and color.
We'll be comparing the two models frequently throughout this review and highlighting their differences, but there are also quite a few similarities. Both feature a 5120 x 2160 resolution at 165Hz, along with a 2560 x 1080 dual mode at 330Hz. Both have the same 1500R screen curvature, and both use the latest generation of LG Display Tandem WOLED technology.
Before you ask, yes, even though the Alienware model does not have a white subpixel, it's still WOLED. The W in WOLED refers to the white emissive layer, not the white subpixel. This white emissive layer is used for all the subpixels and filtered into each color; Dell has simply opted for a version with an RGB stripe layout.
The other substantial difference between the Dell and LG models is price. We thought the LG 39GX950B was too expensive as it launched at $1,800. The AW3926QW meanwhile has been set to just $1,100, making it significantly cheaper than LG's model. Is this an excellent deal for what appears to be similar hardware, or are there performance differences that explain the price discrepancy?
Let's dive into it.
Subpixel Layout and Text: RGB Stripe vs RGWB
First up, let's look at the subpixel layout, which is the most substantial change compared to the LG model. Dell isn't exaggerating here: this is indeed an RGB stripe version of this 5K2K panel. There are only three subpixels, red, green, and blue, arranged in a traditional stripe layout. This is the closest OLED layout to an LCD that we've seen in terms of the arrangement and size of each subpixel.
And this isn't simply a case of Dell disabling the white subpixel. It isn't physically present on this panel, with the red, green, and blue subpixels increasing in size relative to those same colors on the RGWB panel.
Black Text on White
The removal of the white subpixel has a significant effect on how this WOLED panel operates. On previous panels, whenever the display had to show white, it would primarily activate the white subpixel while either dimming or switching off the other RGB subpixels. With the RGB stripe layout, displaying white requires all three subpixels to activate. This has both benefits and drawbacks for the overall presentation.
White Text on Black
The RGB stripe layout is better for text rendering. Modern font rendering uses subpixel-level techniques to improve text quality, but this relies on the renderer knowing the exact subpixel layout of the display. These font-rendering systems were designed around the RGB stripe layout used by most LCDs, so they produce the best results when a display also uses an RGB stripe. That's exactly what this Alienware monitor provides, giving you text quality comparable to an LCD.
The RGWB version gets reasonably close to RGB stripe because it has the R, G, and B subpixels in the correct order and arranged in a stripe layout. However, when rendering grayscale text, such as black text on a white background, the display will often rely primarily on the white subpixel rather than the RGB subpixels. And when it does use the RGB subpixels, there's a physical gap between the G and B subpixels where the white subpixel sits. This creates a mismatch between subpixel font rendering and the display's physical layout, which can lead to subpixel-level text artifacts.
The 39-inch 5K2K RGWB panel isn't particularly problematic when it comes to text artifacts, and we think it's excellent for text rendering overall, primarily because of its high 143 PPI pixel density. But the Alienware model with its RGB stripe layout is sharper.
I used both side by side, and when looking at fine line detail in fonts of various sizes, the RGB stripe panel looks better, with more consistent anti-aliasing and sharper edges. There's a double-whammy effect here because the Alienware's glossy finish also improves text clarity. It has no coating grain, whereas the matte finish on the LG introduces a slight haze that softens text.
How noticeable will the text quality difference be in practice? That will depend on your sensitivity to artifacts and how good your eyesight is at resolving fine detail. If I were choosing one of these panels primarily for desktop application use with lots of font rendering, I'd pick the AW3926QW with its glossy RGB stripe layout without question. I do think it's a noticeable improvement.
Removing the white subpixel does have some drawbacks, though. On the RGWB panel, only one subpixel needs to be active to display white, whereas on the RGB stripe panel, all three subpixels need to activate. This gives the RGWB panel an advantage when displaying white: it can either deliver higher brightness at the same power level or operate more efficiently than an RGB stripe panel at the same white brightness. We'll see the effects of this later in the review.
Screen Coating: It's Glossy
We mentioned it briefly already, but the screen coating is another major difference between the Alienware and LG models. Dell is using LG Display's standard 0% haze glossy finish, whereas LG Electronics uses the matte option. The Dell glossy finish is identical to what we've seen previously on other glossy WOLEDs, such as Asus' "TrueBlack" glossy and Gigabyte's "RealBlack" glossy coatings.
The best choice of coating depends on your usage environment and personal preferences. Matte tends to be the better choice in brighter environments or rooms where you have less control over how much direct light hits the display. Glossy tends to work better in dimmer environments or rooms where you can control the lighting for an optimal experience.
To expand on this, the main advantage of a glossy finish is that it doesn't diffuse light that hits the front of the panel. At certain angles, instead of incoming environmental light spreading across the screen and hurting clarity, you get a more isolated reflection with minimal impact elsewhere. This can help preserve black levels and perceived depth.
There is a trade-off, though. Because the panel doesn't diffuse incoming light, the screen has a mirror-like finish that's prone to direct reflections. The layer structure does a decent job of minimizing these reflections, so they're not terribly distracting, but bright objects are still quite visible, especially when viewing darker content.
The curved nature of the screen also affects reflections. This can be beneficial because the curve reduces the "reflection field of view," so to speak, meaning objects beside the monitor are less likely to appear in reflections compared with a flat panel. However, when something is reflected, the curve can distort and stretch that reflection horizontally, potentially making it appear larger and more distracting.
If you can tolerate reflections, or position the screen in a way that minimizes them, I think the glossy screen coating looks better. As mentioned earlier, there's no coating grain, so the display looks sharper than matte coatings that introduce some grain. The particular glossy finish used on these Tandem WOLED panels is excellent, and you really do get deep-looking blacks even in moderately lit rooms.
Matte coatings still have advantages in certain situations. By diffusing incoming light, they eliminate the mirror-like finish and significantly reduce the visibility of reflections. Yes, they accomplish this by spreading light across the surface, but it's an effective way to remove distracting reflections.
Glossy finishes can be especially problematic when you have a bright light source directly opposite the monitor, such as when using the display near a window during the day. Matte coatings handle this type of direct lighting much better, so if you have a particularly bright room or find reflections extremely distracting, matte is the way to go.
The 39-Inch Size: Ultrawide Sweet Spot
One of the best aspects of the AW3926QW, like the LG model, is its size. Many of the ultrawides we've seen so far use the standard 34-inch 21:9 format, which is equivalent in height to a 27-inch 16:9 monitor but with around 20 cm of additional width. It's a large panel with plenty of horizontal space, but it doesn't offer much vertical height, especially in an era when 32-inch 4K displays are becoming increasingly popular.
A 39-inch panel with a 21:9 aspect ratio is a much better size for immersive gaming. We're now getting roughly the same height as a 32-inch 16:9 monitor, but with around 22 cm of additional width. The extra height is the massive upgrade here, as it allows the screen to occupy much more of your vertical field of view.
It's actually pretty wild how much difference 5 cm of additional height makes when comparing the 39-inch and 34-inch formats. But when you consider that the 39-inch panel has 32% more screen area overall, it makes sense why it feels considerably more immersive and impressive at a typical viewing distance.
It's also not so large that it's difficult to fit on a desk. The even bigger 45-inch format, which has another 33% more screen area than this 39-inch panel, starts to get pretty ridiculous at more than one meter wide. This 39-inch monitor is 92 cm wide, and while it's certainly large, it still feels manageable.
It's narrower than most dual-monitor setups, for example, making it a potentially attractive single-screen alternative.
HDR Performance: Surprisingly QD-OLED-Like
HDR performance is perhaps the most interesting aspect of the AW3926QW. While this display uses Tandem WOLED technology like the 39GX950B, the switch from RGWB to RGB stripe leads to significant differences in HDR performance. Brightness output is different, and Dell has configured the display in a unique way.
The best way to describe the AW3926QW's HDR performance is that it behaves like a QD-OLED, or at the very least delivers the most QD-OLED-like experience we've seen from a WOLED panel. This extends to the HDR modes Dell offers, which are labeled identically to those on the recent AW3426DW.
It's difficult to say whether panel limitations forced Dell to create a QD-OLED-like experience, or whether the company deliberately configured the modes this way to align with the rest of the Alienware lineup, which predominantly uses QD-OLED panels.
There are several HDR modes available, but the main ones of interest are DisplayHDR True Black, HDR Peak 1300, and HDR Peak 1300 Bright. The other available modes behave similarly to True Black.
Dell uses display-side tone mapping over DisplayPort that cannot be disabled, so HDR metadata influences the amount of roll-off at higher brightness levels. Content mastered with 10,000-nit metadata receives much gentler roll-off than 1,000-nit metadata, helping prevent highlight detail from being crushed. In games where you can manually set the peak brightness level, however, you'll mostly see behavior similar to the 1,000-nit result when the setting is configured correctly.
The True Black mode delivers a classic True Black experience. Brightness is limited to around 500 nits, but the mode is otherwise reasonably accurate. Performance is strong with both bright and dark content, though some panel dimming can occur in very bright scenes. Color saturation is also good in this configuration.
Peak 1300 behaves very similarly to the peak brightness modes found on QD-OLED panels. Brightness is uncapped, allowing the panel to reach around 1,200 nits in darker scenes. In these situations, EOTF tracking is accurate and color performance is very good.
However, once we move into brighter scenes, panel dimming becomes apparent, much like it does on QD-OLEDs. This is unusual for a WOLED, as previous WOLED panels generally haven't offered modes that behave this way. Historically, WOLEDs have tended to avoid this level of panel dimming.
The Peak 1300 Bright mode attempts to compensate for panel dimming in brighter scenes, similar to boosted-brightness configurations on QD-OLED monitors. However, this comes at the cost of overbrightening darker content, creating a clear trade-off. Peak 1300 can effectively halve brightness in bright scenes, while Peak 1300 Bright can roughly double brightness in dark scenes.
This is a very different set of configurations from what you get with the 39GX950B. The LG monitor overbrightens content in all of its main HDR modes, perhaps as a way of masking panel dimming, though it's difficult to know whether that's the intention.
On the Dell model, Peak 1300 Bright provides the closest experience to the LG, so you can effectively choose to run the AW3926QW in an "LG-like" configuration if that's what you prefer.
However, Dell also gives you the option to eliminate that overbrightening with Peak 1300, at the expense of panel dimming. This means Dell offers at least one mode that is significantly more accurate in darker scenes than anything available on the LG.
Then there are the lower-brightness modes. Dell's True Black mode is capped at around 500 nits, while the LG's comparable configuration with Peak Brightness set to Low is better in terms of raw output, reaching around 800 nits. However, even that LG mode is overbrightened, meaning Dell's True Black configuration remains more accurate.
I'm sure this is all getting a little confusing, so let's look at some comparison charts before giving the lowdown on which HDR configuration we prefer overall.
In dark scenes, the Alienware offers the better selection of modes. True Black and Peak 1300 are both decent without being amazing, while Peak 1300 Bright is quite inaccurate. By comparison, neither of the LG model's primary HDR configurations is especially accurate.
In bright scenes, the LG model is superior in both of its main brightness configurations. Dell's best mode for bright scenes is still not as accurate, while Peak 1300 performs quite poorly overall because of panel dimming. The LG also generally delivers somewhat better color performance here, though these results include luminance error.
I personally prefer the way Dell has configured this display because it gives you more choice. I was a little frustrated that the LG model overbrightens content in every mode, so Dell offering alternatives is a better approach. LG does have an advantage with its lower-brightness mode, but I don't typically use that configuration, so overall I'd give the win to Dell.
However, I'm not enthused about panel dimming on this WOLED, and I was really disappointed to see this regression compared with previous panels. There's no single optimal HDR configuration here. The best choice depends on whether you're primarily viewing darker or brighter content.
If we go back and look at a 1440p Tandem WOLED, in this case the Asus XG27AQWMG, we find a better maximum-brightness configuration. There is some overbrightening, but it doesn't affect the entire image as it does with the Dell 5K2K model. It's primarily highlight brightness that gets boosted rather than shadows, so the image looks more accurate than Dell's Peak 1300 Bright mode.
Asus ROG Strix XG27AQWMG - HDR10 - Console HDR, Brightness 100, 2% APL18
Asus ROG Strix XG27AQWMG - HDR10 - Console HDR, Brightness 100, 10% APL50
At the same time, the Asus Tandem WOLED shows effectively no panel dimming in bright content while using that same mode. Obviously, we'd prefer perfect EOTF tracking at all times, including in dark scenes, but the Asus configuration is roughly the minimum we would have liked to see from this new RGB stripe 5K2K panel.
Unfortunately, that wasn't to be, and the AW3926QW ends up behaving much more like a QD-OLED.
HDR Brightness: Taking a Hit
Synthetic brightness performance is also interesting. The AW3926QW achieves an average full-screen brightness of 282 nits, which is 20% lower than the 39GX950B but similar to QD-OLEDs.
At a 10% window size, brightness reaches 512 nits. Again, that's very similar to the latest generation of QD-OLEDs, but well behind the LG model, which is 58% brighter.
At a 2% window size, however, the Alienware reaches up to 1,235 nits, which isn't far behind the LG, falling just 11% short. This puts it in roughly the same range as the 2026 QD-OLED panels used in the latest ultrawides.
Looking at brightness versus window size makes the differences quite clear. The 39GX950B delivers substantially better white brightness, especially between 5% and 25% window sizes, though its advantage extends across most of the range.
The AW3926QW initially behaves somewhat like the newest 34-inch V-Stripe QD-OLED in terms of peak brightness, but quickly falls back toward the brightness levels of older QD-OLEDs as window size increases, particularly around 25%. Interestingly, the RGB stripe WOLED then picks up slightly again at a 100% window size.
Generally speaking, though, both the LG model and 2026 QD-OLEDs outperform this RGB stripe WOLED in white brightness.
We see further evidence of this in our real-scene brightness testing. In Peak 1300 mode, the AW3926QW is most similar to the Peak 1000 mode on last year's AW3425DW QD-OLED. In fact, it doesn't quite reach that level of brightness in high-APL scenes, although it can outperform it when displaying the brightest highlights.
The newer AW3426DW is 18% brighter on average across these tests while exhibiting a similar degree of panel dimming, which is a little disappointing for the Alienware 5K2K model.
The LG is simply much brighter, achieving a 48% higher average across our eight test scenes, though this comes with significant overbrightening.
Unfortunately, Peak 1300 Bright doesn't magically make the Dell panel perform like the LG in terms of overall brightness. While it brightens the entire image, it can actually reduce brightness in some scenes by pushing the panel into a higher-APL state when displaying the same content.
So what we see in the synthetic 10% window test is reasonably representative of real-world content. The LG model's RGWB panel can push white brightness considerably higher, and removing the white subpixel clearly hurts the Alienware's white brightness capability.
There is a silver lining, though, and that's color gamut and color brightness.
The Alienware model doesn't quite achieve the same Rec. 2020 coverage as the LG. Both reach 99% DCI-P3, but the 39GX950B covers 83% of Rec. 2020 compared with 77% for the AW3926QW. That's still a good result for the Dell, putting it roughly in line with modern QD-OLEDs and ahead of WOLED panels from before the Tandem generation.
Where the Dell model has a massive advantage is color brightness. In the best cases, the RGB stripe panel is more than twice as bright when displaying individual colors compared with the RGWB panel.
If we think about this in terms of an equivalent white brightness level, the LG delivers color brightness roughly in line with what we'd expect from a panel capable of only around 500 nits of white brightness. The Dell, by comparison, delivers color brightness consistent with a roughly 1,200-nit panel.
Effectively, the LG achieves its very high white brightness figures primarily by boosting output through the dedicated white subpixel. The Dell's RGB stripe layout produces much more balanced brightness between white and colored content.
This gives the AW3926QW a significant advantage in color volume. Even though its color gamut isn't as wide and its peak white brightness isn't as high, overall color volume is 14% greater.
That puts the RGB stripe model roughly in line with QD-OLEDs, though it doesn't quite reach the same level. Color brightness in particular is now very close to QD-OLED, massively reducing what was previously one of the biggest differences between the two OLED panel technologies.
Dolby Vision Support
The AW3926QW supports Dolby Vision, similar to the latest 34-inch QD-OLED models. This is not a feature LG offers with the 39GX950B, so it's unique to the Alienware in this comparison and adds some value.
The way Dolby Vision works in Windows these days is quite different from the early implementation of the feature. Previously, if Dolby Vision was enabled, it would remain active even when displaying regular HDR10 content. HDR10 content would therefore be mapped through Dolby Vision, which could negatively affect brightness and overall performance.
As of mid-2026, that's no longer how it works. With Dolby Vision enabled, Windows can automatically switch the monitor into HDR10 mode when it detects HDR10 content. The screen briefly goes black as it switches out of Dolby Vision and into HDR10.
This is a much better approach because it allows the monitor to use the appropriate mode for each type of content. If you find the mode switching annoying, Dolby Vision can be disabled in the OSD, after which the monitor will always use HDR10.
For PC users, Dolby Vision still isn't especially useful because relatively little content supports it. There are some Dolby Vision-enabled games, but very few, and none of the examples we found are particularly recent. Clearly, the PC ecosystem still needs work here.
Some streaming services may use Dolby Vision for video playback, however, and support becomes much more relevant if you plan to connect a dedicated media player to the monitor. Those devices typically have much broader and more reliable Dolby Vision support than PCs.
The downside to Dolby Vision on the AW3926QW is that the mode is limited to roughly the same brightness capabilities as DisplayHDR True Black, topping out at just over 500 nits. In some cases, you may prefer to disable Dolby Vision and force content into the HDR10 Peak 1300 mode for higher peak brightness.
However, the True Black-like behavior of Dolby Vision actually provides an advantage on PC now that Windows can switch modes automatically. Dolby Vision is brighter and looks better for tone-mapped desktop applications than the HDR10 Peak 1300 mode. With Dolby Vision enabled, you effectively get a useful automatic system where the desktop benefits from True Black-like performance, while compatible HDR10 content can switch over and use the full Peak 1300 mode.
It's worth noting that this automatic switching does not work with all content. For example, watching an HDR YouTube video in Chrome remains in Dolby Vision mode even though the video itself is HDR10. Some games behave similarly. Detection is a little hit or miss, although a large portion of the games I tested did switch automatically into HDR10.
Motion Performance
Moving on to motion performance, Dell is limited by the same panel constraints as LG when it comes to refresh rate. LG Display opted for a maximum refresh rate of just 165Hz at the native 5120 x 2160 resolution.
That's relatively low for a modern flagship gaming monitor, especially when 32-inch 4K OLEDs can reach 240Hz and the latest 34-inch QD-OLED ultrawides reach 360Hz.
Refresh rate essentially dictates the motion clarity you get from an OLED monitor. OLEDs already have extremely fast response times, typically around 0.3ms, so there is little difference in motion clarity between two OLED monitors operating at the same refresh rate. The main way to improve motion clarity is therefore to increase the refresh rate, meaning higher-refresh OLEDs produce clearer motion.
With the AW3926QW topping out at 165Hz, it is at a disadvantage compared with faster OLED gaming monitors.
There are both pros and cons to this when discussing a lower-refresh-rate model. The main downside is straightforward: if the game you're playing can run above 165 FPS, motion clarity would be better on a higher-refresh-rate display. A game running at 200 FPS, for example, will look clearer on a 240Hz OLED than on a 165Hz OLED.
The upside is that if you're gaming at a lower frame rate, there is little practical benefit to having a higher maximum refresh rate. If you're playing at 100 FPS with variable refresh rate enabled, for example, the display is effectively refreshing at 100Hz whether its maximum is 165Hz or 240Hz.
This is especially relevant at 5120 x 2160, a demanding resolution with 33% more pixels than standard 4K. Achieving more than 165 FPS will be challenging in many games. If you primarily target around 80 to 120 FPS in single-player titles, for example, the 165Hz refresh rate is unlikely to be a significant limitation.
However, modern games now offer far more ways to increase frame rates. Running demanding titles at native 5K2K may be difficult, but upscaling is highly viable at this resolution, even using lower-quality modes such as Performance. Depending on the game, that can push frame rates beyond 165 FPS.
Then there's frame generation, which benefits significantly from higher-refresh-rate displays. With a 165Hz ceiling, the highest native render rate you can sustain using basic 2x frame generation without exceeding the monitor's refresh rate is roughly 82 FPS. Go beyond that and the generated output can exceed 165 FPS, potentially introducing tearing unless another frame-rate limit is applied.
In practical terms, this means that with 2x frame generation enabled, a 165Hz monitor limits the latency characteristics to roughly what you'd expect from an 80 FPS native render rate. This is an area where a 240Hz refresh rate would have made a meaningful difference, allowing native render rates of up to around 120 FPS while still accommodating 2x frame generation within the monitor's refresh-rate ceiling.
As with the LG model, considering the range of modern rendering options and the variety of games available today, we really think this panel should be capable of 240Hz. The limitation doesn't sting quite as much on the Dell because it's significantly cheaper than the LG, but this is still a high-end gaming monitor, and ideally it should offer a high-end refresh rate to match.
Dual Mode Pushes It to 330Hz
This monitor also supports Dual Mode, which runs the display at 2560 x 1080 with a refresh rate of 330Hz. This is a potentially useful option for fast-paced multiplayer games, but it's not a true substitute for a high native refresh rate because it drops the resolution to something in the 1080p class.
On a large 39-inch monitor, 2560 x 1080 doesn't look particularly sharp, and the image is noticeably blurrier. This mode is designed purely for gaming scenarios where improved motion clarity matters more than resolution.
Subpixel Layouts
The AW3926QW does not use integer scaling for its 1080p Dual Mode. Instead, a single 1080p pixel is typically represented by between four and six native pixels depending on the situation. This is the standard scaling method used across most Dual Mode displays. Because the subpixel structure of a native 1080p panel differs from that of a 5K2K panel, there is no scaling method that will make Dual Mode look exactly like a "true" 1080p panel. Even integer scaling wouldn't achieve that.
While the resolution isn't amazing, Dual Mode itself works very well. Switching between 5K2K and 2560 x 1080 is seamless, changing only the resolution and refresh rate while every other aspect of the monitor's performance remains identical. Colors are the same, HDR support is the same, and input lag remains low.
Dell also offers 25-inch and 27-inch screen-size emulation through the OSD's "Esports Mode," though these options reduce the resolution even further. The 25-inch mode, for example, runs at 1520 x 885 at 330Hz.
On an OLED like this, 330Hz is also genuinely clearer in motion than 165Hz, so there is a real benefit to using Dual Mode. It's not something I personally found especially useful, but if I were more focused on fast-paced competitive gaming where latency and motion clarity matter, it's something I'd consider using. It also makes the monitor more versatile by allowing it to handle a broader range of games rather than being optimized purely for single-player experiences.
Input latency is low across all modes, including SDR and HDR, both at 5K2K 165Hz and in the 2560 x 1080 330Hz configuration. I also found that the 60Hz mode had low processing delay, so console gamers playing below the maximum refresh rate should still enjoy relatively low latency.
The main consideration with input lag on this monitor is the refresh rate itself. Higher refresh rates reduce latency and provide a more responsive experience, and as mentioned earlier, 165Hz is no longer a premium refresh rate. Compared with 240Hz monitors, the AW3926QW isn't as responsive, which you can see in this chart.
Dell has also implemented an Anti-Flicker mode accessible through the OSD, which is disabled by default. This doesn't work the same way as the OLED Anti-Flicker modes we've seen from brands such as Asus, which typically increase the minimum refresh rate within the VRR range. On the AW3926QW, the minimum refresh rate remains at 48Hz regardless of whether Anti-Flicker is enabled or disabled.
The good news is that Anti-Flicker is effective at reducing or eliminating VRR flicker. OLEDs are prone to flickering during large frame-rate fluctuations, which I don't typically notice during gameplay but do occasionally see in loading screens or menus. In situations where flicker was visible, enabling Anti-Flicker noticeably reduced it.
The bad news is that Anti-Flicker appears to affect how variable refresh rates are delivered to the display. It doesn't disable VRR or alter the supported range, but in my testing it reduced the perceived smoothness of gameplay, particularly during smaller frame-rate fluctuations. Leaving Anti-Flicker disabled produced a smoother experience, so that's my recommendation and likely explains why Dell disables it by default.
SDR Performance
The AW3926QW has good SDR accuracy out of the box. Color temperature is excellent, producing natural-looking tones, gamma is reasonably close to 2.2, and grayscale DeltaE results are also in a good range.
Default Color Performance
There are the usual concerns with oversaturation in SDR content, however, because Rec. 709 gamut emulation isn't enabled by default. With this panel's wide color gamut, SDR colors are expanded to fill the available gamut, making certain colors more saturated than intended. Skin tones appearing redder than they should is one example.
Default ACM Color Performance
There are several ways to improve SDR accuracy. One is Windows Auto Color Management, which eliminates the oversaturation and produces much better color accuracy, with an average ColorChecker DeltaE of 5.5. The other is the monitor's built-in sRGB mode, which is less flexible than using ACM because it locks most settings and prevents white balance adjustments.
sRGB Mode Color Performance
With that said, Dell has done an above-average job calibrating the sRGB mode. White balance remains very good in this configuration, while improvements to gamma reduce the average grayscale DeltaE ITP. Saturation and ColorChecker results are also better than what we saw using ACM, with an average ColorChecker result below 5.0 indicating strong factory calibration.
Compared with other monitors we've tested, the AW3926QW lands around the middle of our grayscale chart. It's not as well calibrated as the AW3426DW we recently reviewed, but it performs a little better than the LG 39GX950B. In ColorChecker testing, the Alienware is also in a good position, again falling slightly behind the 34-inch model while performing similarly to the LG.
Dell doesn't offer hardware calibration here, but the sRGB mode is an excellent choice for anyone wanting the best SDR accuracy.
Full-screen SDR brightness is interesting given the different subpixel layouts used by the Dell and LG models. The AW3926QW produces a very usable 293 nits of white brightness, although it can't quite match the LG, which is 9% brighter.
The Dell is still brighter than most QD-OLEDs in the DisplayHDR True Black 400 class, putting it closer to the True Black 500 tier, albeit toward the lower end of that range. Dell advertises 300 nits of SDR brightness, and our unit fell short by just 2%, which is very close and nothing unusual.
Like most modern OLED monitors, the SDR mode uses uniform brightness, so you won't see distracting brightness shifts depending on window size. Minimum brightness is also good at 37 nits, and viewing angles are excellent. Of course, this is a curved monitor, so you'll realistically want to view it from directly in front for the best experience.
Uniformity: Grey Banding?
Uniformity has been a contentious issue with Tandem WOLEDs due to a flaw commonly referred to as grey banding. However, I'm happy to report that grey banding is not an issue on this monitor.
The ugly vertical bands we've seen in dark grey content on 1440p Tandem WOLEDs are not present on this RGB stripe 5K2K panel, in either the 165Hz or 330Hz configurations. This is also a noticeably better result than what we saw from the RGWB panel used in the 39GX950B.
The LG model doesn't suffer from severe banding, and the issue is typically difficult to spot, especially compared with some 1440p Tandem WOLEDs. But the Dell is clearly better, producing more consistent greys with fewer artifacts.
The AW3926QW doesn't quite achieve perfect grey uniformity, as there is still a small amount of faint dirty screen effect visible in the darkest greys. However, this WOLED comes closer to QD-OLED levels of grey uniformity than any WOLED we've tested. In fact, it's significantly better than most other WOLEDs, perhaps another benefit of moving to an RGB stripe layout.
White uniformity is also good, with no notable issues.
Power consumption reveals another interesting difference between OLED panel types. The AW3926QW uses a lot of power when displaying a full-white image, consuming 85% more than the 39GX950B with its dedicated white subpixel. That's the difference between having to activate all three RGB subpixels on the Dell versus primarily using a single white subpixel on the LG.
Compared with 34-inch QD-OLED panels, the Dell consumes around 50% more power when displaying white despite having 32% more panel area. Against the latest 32-inch 4K QD-OLEDs, power consumption is 32% higher with a panel that's 25% larger.
So the scaling favors QD-OLED, suggesting this RGB stripe WOLED is less efficient than QD-OLED panels, which also rely on three subpixels to produce white.
However, the power consumption gap between RGB stripe and RGWB shrinks considerably in typical gaming content because both panels are now activating a mixture of subpixels. In this test, the Dell still uses 20% more power than the LG, but that's not an unreasonable difference in my opinion, and the results are fine despite overall power consumption being on the high side.
We also measured 33% higher power consumption than the PG32UCDM3 with its current-generation 32-inch QD-OLED panel, which is broadly in line with what we saw in the full-white test.
Ports and Features
For connectivity, the AW3926QW includes one DisplayPort 2.1 UHBR20 input, two HDMI 2.1 ports with the full 48 Gbps bandwidth, a USB-C input with DisplayPort Alt Mode and 90W of power delivery, plus a multi-port 5 Gbps USB hub.
The rear USB-C and USB-B connections act as upstream ports, while there are two USB-A ports and another USB-C port for downstream devices. One USB-A port and the downstream USB-C port are conveniently positioned along the bottom edge of the display, making them very easy to access.
All display inputs are capable of running 5120 x 2160 at 165Hz with 10-bit color, and there is also support for console-friendly resolutions such as 3840 x 2160.
DSC is required over HDMI, but not when using DisplayPort 2.1 UHBR20. Dell provides a DSC toggle in the OSD, allowing you to disable compression when using DisplayPort if you prefer. KVM switch functionality is also included.
Dell has packed several features into the OSD, which is controlled through a directional joystick on the rear of the display. There are multiple preset modes and color controls, a dark stabilizer, picture-in-picture support, the DSC toggle, and controls for the RGB lighting.
Most of Dell's gaming-specific features are grouped under AlienVision, which lets you add crosshairs to the screen and apply various color filters to a defined area of the image.
Unfortunately, Dell's user-adjustable OLED care settings are basically nonexistent. OLED panels remain susceptible to permanent burn-in, making them less suitable for prolonged use with static content, such as desktop applications displayed for extended periods.
Dell has implemented OLED protection features that slightly shift the image and dim the display in certain scenarios, but you have no control over them. They're simply enabled at all times. The better news is that Dell continues to offer a three-year warranty that covers burn-in.
Design: Familiar Alienware Design, Just Bigger
Dell has used a variation of their latest Alienware monitor design for the AW3926QW, enlarged to accommodate the 39-inch panel. It looks broadly similar to the 34-inch models from 2025 and 2026, including the same deep blue plastic finish across much of the exterior.
It's not quite a neutral black and still has a dark overall appearance, but if you look closely, there's a noticeable blue tint. Overall build quality is very good and feels appropriate for an expensive, high-end product.
There are a few design differences compared with Alienware's 34-inch QD-OLED models. The rear panel still looks sleek and excellent in my opinion, but there's now a larger ventilation area to help cool the panel.
The monitor also uses active cooling internally, though fan speeds are low and the fan is essentially silent, even when the display is showing bright content in warmer conditions. Because we're moving from a QD-OLED to a WOLED panel, there's also no chin along the bottom edge. Instead, the front has a more uniform four-sided design with typical slim bezels.
The stand uses a rounded pillar with a cable-management opening, while the base is a relatively small square that doesn't take up much desk space and allows you to place items on top of it. It's quite compact considering the size of the display.
The stand provides acceptable rigidity with relatively little wobble and supports height, tilt, and swivel adjustment. Maximum height is good, although the monitor doesn't extend quite as high as the LG model.
Wrap Up: The 39-Inch OLED to Buy
The Dell Alienware AW3926QW is one of the most interesting monitors we've reviewed in a long time. It's the first panel we've tested to use WOLED technology without a white subpixel, and that leads to substantial performance differences. In some areas, this monitor is stronger than previous Tandem WOLEDs. In others, it doesn't perform as well. That makes it difficult to crown an overall winner in the 39-inch category.
The big battle is between the AW3926QW and the LG 39GX950B. Both use 39-inch 5K2K Tandem WOLED panels running at 165Hz, which on paper looks like essentially the same specification, but we'd argue there are actually more differences than similarities between these monitors.
Let's briefly summarize the similarities first. Both have the same panel size and resolution. This is a fantastic ultrawide format for immersive gaming: it's noticeably larger than a 34-inch ultrawide, offers more screen real estate for desktop applications, and fills more of your field of view. Pixel density is similar to a 32-inch 4K display, which is highly suitable for this panel size, as is the 1500R curvature.
The refresh rate and motion experience are also essentially identical: 5120 x 2160 at 165Hz, or 2560 x 1080 at 330Hz in Dual Mode. At 5K2K, 165Hz is certainly usable given how demanding the resolution is, but it's on the low side for a flagship gaming monitor in 2026. 34-inch ultrawides now reach 360Hz, while 32-inch 4K OLEDs have offered 240Hz for several years. As with the LG model, this really should be a 240Hz display.
SDR performance is great, particularly in the sRGB mode. With per-pixel control and true blacks, we get fantastic contrast in both SDR and HDR. Response times are also lightning fast. These are all the usual benefits we've come to expect from OLED.
At the hardware level, though, the Dell uses a fundamentally different panel with an RGB stripe subpixel layout, compared with the RGWB layout on the LG. Removing the white subpixel changes performance significantly, even though the underlying emissive WOLED structure remains the same. What we end up with is a WOLED panel that behaves like a QD-OLED, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse.
The RGB stripe layout improves text quality, and when combined with the glossy screen coating Dell has chosen, overall sharpness and clarity are noticeably better. We don't dislike the matte coating on the LG, and the RGWB subpixel layout is hardly a disaster at this relatively high pixel density, but side by side, I prefer the way the Alienware panel looks. I really like this glossy WOLED finish, and it's great to finally have it as an option on a 39-inch ultrawide.
The new layout also appears to bring major improvements to dark grey uniformity, nearly eliminating the banding and dirty screen effect seen on the RGWB 5K2K panel. Compared with the 1440p Tandem WOLED panels, the difference is night and day. The new panel is more power-hungry, though, and appears less efficient than QD-OLEDs that also rely on three subpixels.
The biggest performance difference comes down to brightness. SDR brightness is relatively similar, with both options capable of around 300 nits. But the LG pulls ahead in the vast majority of situations involving bright whites in HDR content. Peak brightness is only slightly higher on the LG, but in mid-range scenes, the LG can produce substantially more brightness, leading to an almost 50% higher average in our real-scene testing. That white subpixel really is effective at boosting white luminance.
Other aspects of HDR performance favor the Alienware. Color brightness is more than twice as high on the RGB stripe panel in the best cases, leading to greater overall color volume and a much more QD-OLED-like experience.
We also prefer the way Dell has configured the HDR modes. LG forces you into an overbrightened presentation, whereas Dell gives you the option to avoid that. This means the Alienware can be significantly more accurate in lower- to mid-APL content, although that unfortunately comes at the cost of panel dimming. This is the first time we've seen this sort of QD-OLED-like panel dimming behavior on a WOLED monitor.
With that, the strengths and weaknesses make it difficult to call one panel superior to the other definitively. You can see why LG Display offers both variants. The RGB stripe panel Dell uses has better text rendering, better uniformity, and better color volume. The RGWB panel LG uses is generally brighter and more efficient. Which one you prefer will depend on which characteristics matter most to you.
Personally, I prefer the way the Alienware AW3926QW looks. I prefer the glossy screen coating, the better dark grey uniformity, the sharper image, and the greater control Dell provides over HDR behavior. Sometimes I don't want the overbrightened look of the LG, even if avoiding it means accepting some panel dimming.
Dell also offers a few additional features that are largely unrelated to the panel itself. You get Dolby Vision support, a KVM switch, a somewhat useful Anti-Flicker mode, and a proper three-year burn-in warranty.
LG has its own exclusive features, including AI upscaling and hardware calibration support, but we don't think those are as compelling overall. Plus, thanks to Windows, the LG may also install unwanted software on your system, something we've covered recently.
The real killer, though, and the massive elephant in the room, is the price difference.
Dell has launched the Alienware AW3926QW at $1,099. That's a whopping $700 less than the $1,800 MSRP of the LG 39GX950B, although we checked Amazon before this review went live and LG's pricing is now down to $1,570. I honestly couldn't believe Dell is selling its model for nearly 40% less than the LG. At that price, I suspect it will fly off shelves.
Going into this review, we thought the price difference might be explained by some major feature or performance compromise, but after testing it we actually think the Dell model is better overall. Saving $500-700 relative to the LG is therefore a complete no-brainer, and the AW3926QW earns a full recommendation from us.
I'm sure the LG will receive more significant discounts in the second half of the year, as LG monitors often do, but at MSRP the 39GX950B now looks massively overpriced next to the Alienware. More broadly, $1,099 feels like a much more appropriate price for this class of display. Dell already offers the 34-inch 280Hz AW3426DW QD-OLED ultrawide for $800, so paying a $300 premium for the larger 39-inch model makes sense.