- Attenborough.film
- Compare
- NeoPix 140 vs TX-332
Philips NeoPix 140 vs Technaxx TX-332
What NeoPix 140 does better (1) and where TX-332 wins (5) — every spec side by side.
vs
2.4Picture4.0
2.1Setup & placement5.5
Why is NeoPix 140 better than TX-332?
- Weight0.3 kg vs 0.8 kg2.7×
Why is TX-332 better than NeoPix 140?
- Resolution (on screen)1024 × 768 (XGA) vs 1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
- Brightness (ANSI / ISO lumens)150 lm vs 200 lm+33%
- Light source life20,000 h vs 30,000 h+50%
- Largest image size65″ vs 150″2.3×
- Native panel resolution1024 × 768 (XGA) vs 1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
Specifications
Side by side
| Picture | ||
| Resolution (on screen) | 1024 × 768 (XGA) | 1920 × 1080 (Full HD) |
| Native panel resolution | 1024 × 768 (XGA) | 1920 × 1080 (Full HD) |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| Brightness (ANSI / ISO lumens) | 150 lm | 200 lm |
| Contrast ratio (dynamic / claimed) | 1,000:1 | 1,000:1 |
| Lens & placement | ||
| Smallest image size | — | 27″ |
| Largest image size | 65″ | 150″ |
| Lens shift | None | None |
| Autofocus | No | No |
| Sound | ||
| Built-in speakers (total output) | 3 W | 3 W |
| Smart & streaming | ||
| Wi-Fi | Yes | Yes |
| Bluetooth | — | Yes |
| AirPlay | — | Yes |
| Connectivity | ||
| HDMI inputs | 1 | 1 |
| USB port | Yes | Yes |
| Ethernet (LAN) | No | No |
| VGA input | No | No |
| Audio output | Yes | Yes |
| Battery, power & lifetime | ||
| Light source life | 20,000 h | 30,000 h |
| Design & noise | ||
| Weight | 0.3 kg | 0.8 kg |
| Width | 68 mm | — |
| Height | 142 mm | — |
| Depth | 74 mm | — |
| Colours | — | White |
