How we score Blog Advertise
  1. Attenborough.film
  2. Compare
  3. QF12 vs TX-177

AOpen QF12 vs Technaxx TX-177

What QF12 does better (4) and where TX-177 wins (3) — every spec side by side.

AOpen QF12
AOpen · 2021QF12
4.4Score
4 advantages≈ US$160
vs
Technaxx TX-177
Technaxx · 2022TX-177
6.7Score
3 advantages≈ US$130
Higher score
5.7Noise, lifetime & portability7.8
Dimensions

Size comparison

QF12TX-177
232 × 92168187 × 96234
QF12TX-177Difference
Height92 mm96 mm−4 mm
Width232 mm187 mm+45 mm
Depth168 mm234 mm−66 mm
Weight1.3 kg1.4 kg−0.1 kg

Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).

Why is QF12 better than TX-177?

  1. Built-in speakers (total output)5 W vs 3 W+67%
  2. Light source life50,000 h vs 40,000 h+25%
  3. Power consumption65 W vs 70 W+8%
  4. Weight1.3 kg vs 1.36 kg+5%

Why is TX-177 better than QF12?

  1. HDMI inputs1 vs 22×
  2. Contrast ratio (dynamic / claimed)1,000:1 vs 1,500:1+50%
  3. Largest image size150″ vs 200″+33%
Specifications

Side by side

AOpen QF12AOpen QF12≈ US$1604.4
Technaxx TX-177Technaxx TX-177≈ US$1306.7
Picture
Resolution (on screen)1920 × 1080 (Full HD)1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
Native panel resolution1920 × 1080 (Full HD)1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
Light sourceLEDLED
Brightness (ANSI / ISO lumens)100 lm—
Contrast ratio (dynamic / claimed)1,000:11,500:1
Lens & placement
Throw ratio1.3:1—
Throw typeStandard throw (1.0:1 and longer)—
Distance for a 100″ 16:9 image2.88 m—
Smallest image size—50″
Largest image size150″200″
Lens shiftNoneNone
Autofocus—No
Keystone correction—Yes
Automatic keystone correction—No
Sound
Built-in speakers (total output)5 W3 W
Smart & streaming
Wi-FiYes—
BluetoothYes—
Connectivity
HDMI inputs12
USB portYesYes
Ethernet (LAN)NoNo
VGA inputNoNo
Audio outputYesYes
Battery, power & lifetime
Power consumption65 W70 W
Light source life50,000 h40,000 h
Design & noise
Fan noise33 dB—
Weight1.3 kg1.36 kg
Width232 mm187 mm
Height92 mm96 mm
Depth168 mm234 mm
ColoursWhite, GoldWhite
To compare: 0up to 4 models
Compare