According to what you are writing, it is much bigger than your display:
if your display had a 27'' diagonal, and was 25'' wide, it would be 10'' tall. (Which makes little sense: it would be a 5:2 proportion.) So it would have an area of 250 sqi.
Versus the ~350 sqi of the LG. (It is quite a jump: the rounded √2 jump, 5:7, Ax proportion, "do it twice to double".)
The steeper (or flatter) the proportion, the less the area per diagonal size.
But I guess the display for comparison is more likely a 24''x13'' scarce, ~300 sqi.
You brought the measurements of your 16:9 : yes, one of the points was that a 27'' diagonal with a 25'' side cannot be 16:9, and is in fact more like 5:2, as written. Going from 25'' to 23.5'' makes a lot of difference in proportions.
if your display had a 27'' diagonal, and was 25'' wide, it would be 10'' tall. (Which makes little sense: it would be a 5:2 proportion.) So it would have an area of 250 sqi.
Versus the ~350 sqi of the LG. (It is quite a jump: the rounded √2 jump, 5:7, Ax proportion, "do it twice to double".)
The steeper (or flatter) the proportion, the less the area per diagonal size.
But I guess the display for comparison is more likely a 24''x13'' scarce, ~300 sqi.