7 matched panels · 1.2 to 1.9 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.
PixelFLEX
Sharp
Panels listed
10
17
Pitch range
1.2 to 10 mm
0.9 to 7.8 mm
Cabinet formats
608×342, 500×500, 960×960 mm
600×337.5, 608×342, 500×500 mm
Weight
30 to 40 kg/m²
21 to 42 kg/m²
Maximum draw
452 to 1,200 W/m²
168 to 720 W/m²
Brightness
600 to 10,000 nits
600 to 5,500 nits
Hang limit published
0 of 10
0 of 17
Typical draw published
0 of 10
17 of 17
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
PixelFLEX and Sharp overlap on 7 matched pairs between 1.2 and 1.9 mm; outside that band one of them has no comparable panel.
PixelFLEX is the lighter cabinet in 4 of 7 matched pairs, Sharp in 3. Across their lineups that is 30 to 40 kg/m² against 21 to 42 kg/m².
PixelFLEX draws less at full white in 0 of 7 matched pairs, Sharp in 7. Lineups: 452 to 1,200 W/m² against 168 to 720 W/m², which sets the circuit count.
Cabinet formats: PixelFLEX builds in 608×342, 500×500, 960×960 mm; Sharp in 600×337.5, 608×342, 500×500 mm. A shop that already owns one format keeps its bumpers and cases.
A hanging limit is published for none of its 10 panels by PixelFLEX and for none of its 17 panels by Sharp; where it is not, the planner uses a conservative placeholder and says so.
Typical draw is estimated as a third of the maximum where a sheet publishes no figure: PixelFLEX for 10 of 10, Sharp for none.
Matched panels, side by side
Each pair is two panels of comparable pitch, one from each maker, with the same wall built from both.