How we score Blog Advertise
  1. Attenborough.film
  2. Compare
  3. PicoFlix vs Mars II Pro

JMGO PicoFlix vs Nebula Mars II Pro

What PicoFlix does better (3) and where Mars II Pro wins (1) — every spec side by side.

JMGO PicoFlix
JMGO · 2024PicoFlix
7.9Score
3 advantages≈ US$350
Higher score
vs
Nebula Mars II Pro
Nebula · 2024Mars II Pro
1 advantage
6.0Picture5.3

Why is PicoFlix better than Mars II Pro?

  1. Resolution (on screen)1920 × 1080 (Full HD) vs 1280 × 720 (HD)
  2. Light source life25,000 h vs 500 h50×
  3. Native panel resolution1920 × 1080 (Full HD) vs 1280 × 720 (HD)

Why is Mars II Pro better than PicoFlix?

  1. Brightness (ANSI / ISO lumens)420 lm vs 500 lm+19%
Specifications

Side by side

JMGO PicoFlixJMGO PicoFlix≈ US$3507.9
Picture
Resolution (on screen)1920 × 1080 (Full HD)1280 × 720 (HD)
Native panel resolution1920 × 1080 (Full HD)1280 × 720 (HD)
Display technologyDLPDLP
Light sourceLED—
Brightness (ANSI / ISO lumens)420 lm500 lm
Contrast ratio (dynamic / claimed)400:1—
HDR supportYes—
HDR formatsHDR10—
Colour gamut (BT.2020)110%—
3D playbackYes—
Gaming
Game / low-latency modeYes—
Lens & placement
Throw ratio1.2:1—
Throw typeStandard throw (1.0:1 and longer)—
Distance for a 100″ 16:9 image2.66 m—
Smallest image size40″—
Largest image size200″—
Lens shiftNone—
AutofocusNo—
Keystone correctionYes—
Automatic keystone correctionYes—
Built-in stand / gimbalYes—
Sound
Built-in speakers (total output)10 W—
Dolby Audio / Dolby Digital PlusYes—
Smart & streaming
Smart platformGoogle TV—
Built-in smart platformYes—
Netflix (officially licensed)Yes—
Wi-FiYes—
BluetoothYes—
Chromecast built-inYes—
Connectivity
HDMI inputs1—
HDMI eARCYes—
USB portYes—
Ethernet (LAN)No—
VGA inputNo—
Audio outputNo—
Battery, power & lifetime
Built-in batteryYes—
Battery life (video)4.5 h—
Power consumption65 W—
Light source life25,000 h500 h
Design & noise
Fan noise26 dB—
Weight1.5 kg—
Width80 mm—
Height230 mm—
Depth80 mm—
ColoursBlackBlack
To compare: 0up to 4 models
Compare