Desay M3 vs ROE Visual CB3 MkII

3.846 mm against 3.75 mm · specifications from both manufacturers' datasheets

Side-by-side specifications, then the same wall built from each tile, so the comparison is in panels, kilograms, circuits and data runs rather than in marketing copy.

Whole cabinets rarely hit an identical size, so each wall is the closest build to a real video format (16:9 or 16:10) near 8 m wide for that tile: 8.00 × 4.50 m and 7.80 × 4.80 m respectively.

What the numbers say

• ROE Visual CB3 MkII resolves finer: 71,111 pixels per square metre against 67,600 for Desay M3, 5% more. On a 8 m wide wall that is 2,080 px across versus 2,080 px.
• ROE Visual CB3 MkII is the lighter rig: 19 kg/m² against 28 kg/m². Across this wall that is 347 kg of difference, 768 kg versus 1,115 kg, which moves point loads and can change the hoist call.
• ROE Visual CB3 MkII draws more: 833 W/m² against 640 W/m² at full white. For this wall that is 23.1 kW versus 31.2 kW, and 10 versus 13 circuits at a 16 A/230 V supply with an 80% derate.
• Data is lighter on Desay M3: 5 runs against 7, at 10 and 10 panels per port respectively (60 Hz, 8-bit, ports loaded to 80%). Fewer runs means fewer home runs to pull and fewer processor ports to find.
• Different cabinet formats: 800 × 900 mm against 600 × 1200 mm, so 50 tiles versus 52 for the same wall. Fewer, larger cabinets build faster; smaller ones give finer control over wall dimensions and are easier to handle alone.
• Estimated truck space: 2.9 m for Desay M3 against 3.3 m for the other, including spares, cases and cabling.

Full specifications

• Desay M3: specs and calculator
• ROE Visual CB3 MkII: specs and calculator
• All Desay panels
• All ROE Visual panels

Related comparisons

• Absen PL3.9 Pro V10 vs ROE Visual CB3 MkII
• Absen PL3.9 V10 vs ROE Visual CB3 MkII
• Absen PL3.9 Pro V10 vs Desay M3
• Absen PL3.9 V10 vs Desay M3
• Absen PL3.9 XL V10 vs Desay M3