PixelFLEX FLEXUltra XT 1.9 vs Planar CLI1.9-F

1.9 mm against 1.9 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.

Specifications

	PixelFLEX FLEXUltra XT 1.9	Planar CLI1.9-F
Manufacturer	PixelFLEX	Planar
Pixel pitch	1.9 mm	1.9 mm
Cabinet	608 × 342 mm	500 × 500 mm
Brightness	600 nits	800 nits
Refresh rate	3,840 Hz	3,840 Hz
Viewing angle	170° / 160°	140° / 140°
Pixels per cabinet	320 × 180	256 × 256
Pixels per m²	277,008	262,144
Weight	8 kg (38 kg/m²)	4.3 kg (17 kg/m²)
Max power	94 W (452 W/m²)	300 W (1200 W/m²)
Typical power	31 W*	150 W
Max hang	not published	not published

* Average draw estimated as max ÷ 3; this manufacturer publishes no average figure.

The same wall, built from eachclosest 16:9 / 16:10 near 8 m wide, flown, EU power, 60 Hz 8-bit

	PixelFLEX FLEXUltra XT 1.9	Planar CLI1.9-F
Wall built	13 × 13, 7.90 × 4.45 m	16 × 9, 8.00 × 4.50 m
Panels needed	169 + 9 spare	144 + 8 spare
Resolution	4,160 × 2,340 px	4,096 × 2,304 px
Weight incl. bumpers	1,517 kg	819 kg
Load per point	~607 kg across 3	~328 kg across 3
Power, full white	15.9 kW	43.2 kW
Circuits (16 A/230 V)	7	16
Data runs	26 at ≤9/port	32 at ≤7/port
Truck, linear	7.3 m	6.5 m

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: 7.90 × 4.45 m and 8.00 × 4.50 m respectively.

What the numbers say

PixelFLEX FLEXUltra XT 1.9 resolves finer: 277,008 pixels per square metre against 262,144 for Planar CLI1.9-F, 6% more. On a 8 m wide wall that is 4,160 px across versus 4,096 px.
Planar CLI1.9-F is the lighter rig: 17 kg/m² against 38 kg/m². Across this wall that is 698 kg of difference, 819 kg versus 1,517 kg, which moves point loads and can change the hoist call.
Planar CLI1.9-F draws more: 1200 W/m² against 452 W/m² at full white. For this wall that is 15.9 kW versus 43.2 kW, and 7 versus 16 circuits at a 16 A/230 V supply with an 80% derate.
Data is lighter on PixelFLEX FLEXUltra XT 1.9: 26 runs against 32, at 9 and 7 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: 608 × 342 mm against 500 × 500 mm, so 169 tiles versus 144 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: 6.5 m for Planar CLI1.9-F against 7.3 m for the other, including spares, cases and cabling.

Comparing something else, or your own OEM tile? The comparison tool takes any panels, up to four at once, at your wall size. Add your own spec once in the calculator and it appears there alongside the catalogue.

Open these two in the tool

PixelFLEX FLEXUltra XT 1.9 vs Planar CLI1.9-F

Specifications

The same wall, built from eachclosest 16:9 / 16:10 near 8 m wide, flown, EU power, 60 Hz 8-bit

What the numbers say

Full specifications

Related comparisons