- Attenborough.film
- Compare
- QT12 vs NeoPix 160
Acer QT12 vs Philips NeoPix 160
What QT12 does better (1) and where NeoPix 160 wins (4) — every spec side by side.
6.8Picture2.4
Why is QT12 better than NeoPix 160?
- Brightness (ANSI / ISO lumens)6,500 lm vs 250 lm26×
Why is NeoPix 160 better than QT12?
- Resolution (on screen)1280 × 720 (HD) vs 1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
- Light source life6,500 h vs 30,000 h4.6×
- Native panel resolution1280 × 720 (HD) vs 1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
- Audio outputNo · QT12: Yes
Specifications
Side by side
| Picture | ||
| Resolution (on screen) | 1280 × 720 (HD) | 1920 × 1080 (Full HD) |
| Native panel resolution | 1280 × 720 (HD) | 1920 × 1080 (Full HD) |
| Display technology | LCD (single panel) | — |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| Brightness (ANSI / ISO lumens) | 6,500 lm | 250 lm |
| Lens & placement | ||
| Lens shift | — | None |
| Sound | ||
| Built-in speakers (total output) | — | 5 W |
| Smart & streaming | ||
| Smart platform | — | Google TV |
| Built-in smart platform | — | Yes |
| Netflix (officially licensed) | — | Yes |
| Chromecast built-in | — | Yes |
| Connectivity | ||
| HDMI inputs | 1 | 1 |
| USB port | Yes | Yes |
| Ethernet (LAN) | No | No |
| VGA input | No | No |
| Audio output | No | Yes |
| Battery, power & lifetime | ||
| Light source life | 6,500 h | 30,000 h |
| Design & noise | ||
| Weight | — | 1.23 kg |
| Width | — | 207 mm |
| Height | — | 147 mm |
| Depth | — | 171 mm |
| Colours | White | Black |
