AET vs Nanolumens

22 matched panels · 2.976 to 4.808 mm · specifications from both makers' datasheets

The two lineups side by side, then what the matched panels say about weight, power and what each maker publishes. Every figure is the maker's own; the planner adds nothing it cannot point to on a sheet.

Weight and draw are per square metre of cabinet, so different cabinet sizes compare fairly. Ranges run across every panel the maker has in the database, not only the matched ones.

What the sheets say

• AET and Nanolumens overlap on 22 matched pairs between 2.976 and 4.808 mm; outside that band one of them has no comparable panel.
• AET is the lighter cabinet in 19 of 22 matched pairs, Nanolumens in 0, and 3 are within 5%. Across their lineups that is 21 to 54 kg/m² against 25 to 51 kg/m².
• AET draws less at full white in 9 of 22 matched pairs, Nanolumens in -3, and 16 are within 5%. Lineups: 400 to 680 W/m² against 383 to 808 W/m², which sets the circuit count.
• Cabinet formats: AET builds in 480×270, 600×337.5, 500×500, 480×540, 500×1000, 960×540 mm; Nanolumens in 240×150, 304.8×152.4, 300×168.8, 250×250, 600×337.5, 500×500, 1200×675 mm. A shop that already owns one format keeps its bumpers and cases.
• A hanging limit is published for none of its 46 panels by AET and for none of its 48 panels by Nanolumens; where it is not, the planner uses a conservative placeholder and says so.
• Both publish a typical draw for every panel here, so the typical kilowatt figure rests on the sheets, not on an estimate.

Matched panels, side by side

Each pair is two panels of comparable pitch, one from each maker, with the same wall built from both.

• AET QC 2.976 (500×500) (2.976 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 2.9 (2.976 mm)
• AET QC 2.976 (500×1000) (2.976 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 2.9 (2.976 mm)
• AET QC 2.976 Outdoor (500×500) (2.976 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 2.9 (2.976 mm)
• AET QC 2.976 Outdoor (500×1000) (2.976 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 2.9 (2.976 mm)
• AET QR 2.9 (2.976 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 2.9 (2.976 mm)
• AET QR 2.9 (500×1000) (2.976 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 2.9 (2.976 mm)
• AET QR 2.9 Outdoor (2.976 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 2.9 (2.976 mm)
• AET QR 2.9 Outdoor (500×1000) (2.976 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 2.9 (2.976 mm)
• AET QC 3.9 (500×500) (3.906 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 3.9 (3.906 mm)
• AET QC 3.9 (500×1000) (3.906 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 3.9 (3.906 mm)
• AET QC 3.91 Outdoor (500×500) (3.906 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 3.9 (3.906 mm)
• AET QC 3.91 Outdoor (500×1000) (3.906 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 3.9 (3.906 mm)
• AET QR 3.9 (3.906 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 3.9 (3.906 mm)
• AET QR 3.9 (500×1000) (3.906 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 3.9 (3.906 mm)
• AET QR 3.9 Outdoor (3.906 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 3.9 (3.906 mm)
• AET QR 3.9 Outdoor (500×1000) (3.906 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 3.9 (3.906 mm)
• AET QC 4.81 (500×500) (4.808 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 4.8 (4.808 mm)
• AET QC 4.81 (500×1000) (4.808 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 4.8 (4.808 mm)
• AET QC 4.81 Outdoor (500×500) (4.808 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 4.8 (4.808 mm)
• AET QC 4.81 Outdoor (500×1000) (4.808 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 4.8 (4.808 mm)
• AET QR 4.8 Outdoor (4.808 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 4.8 (4.808 mm)
• AET QR 4.8 Outdoor (500×1000) (4.808 mm) vs Nanolumens Performance 500 4.8 (4.808 mm)

More

• All AET panels
• All Nanolumens panels
• All makers compared