Which is lighter, ROE Visual RB1.5 or Sharp LD-EC151?

Sharp LD-EC151 is the lighter rig: 21 kg/m² against 33 kg/m². Across this wall that is 483 kg of difference — 892 kg versus 1,375 kg, which moves point loads and can change the hoist call.

Which draws more power?

ROE Visual RB1.5 draws more: 840 W/m² against 252 W/m² at full white. For this wall that is 30.2 kW versus 8.6 kW, and 16 versus 4 circuits at a 16 A/230 V supply with an 80% derate.

Which resolves finer?

Both resolve to about the same density — 409,600 and 409,600 pixels per square metre — so pick on weight, power or what your shop already owns rather than on image detail.

RigPlan

Wall in. Truck list out.

ROE Visual RB1.5 vs Sharp LD-EC151

1.56 mm against 1.5 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

	ROE Visual RB1.5	Sharp LD-EC151
Manufacturer	ROE Visual	Sharp
Pixel pitch	1.56 mm	1.5 mm
Cabinet	500 × 500 mm	600 × 337.5 mm
Pixels per cabinet	320 × 320	384 × 216
Pixels per m²	409,600	409,600
Weight	8.16 kg (33 kg/m²)	4.3 kg (21 kg/m²)
Max power	210 W (840 W/m²)	51 W (252 W/m²)
Typical power	105 W	27 W
Max hang	20 panels	not published

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

	ROE Visual RB1.5	Sharp LD-EC151
Wall built	16 × 9 — 8.00 × 4.50 m	13 × 13 — 7.80 × 4.39 m
Panels needed	144 + 8 spare	169 + 9 spare
Resolution	5,120 × 2,880 px	4,992 × 2,808 px
Weight incl. bumpers	1,375 kg	892 kg
Load per point	~550 kg across 3	~357 kg across 3
Power, full white	30.2 kW	8.6 kW
Circuits (16 A/230 V)	16	4
Data runs	32 at ≤5/port	39 at ≤6/port
Truck, linear	6.5 m	7.5 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 — 8.00 × 4.50 m and 7.80 × 4.39 m respectively.

What the numbers say

Both resolve to about the same density — 409,600 and 409,600 pixels per square metre — so pick on weight, power or what your shop already owns rather than on image detail.
Sharp LD-EC151 is the lighter rig: 21 kg/m² against 33 kg/m². Across this wall that is 483 kg of difference — 892 kg versus 1,375 kg, which moves point loads and can change the hoist call.
ROE Visual RB1.5 draws more: 840 W/m² against 252 W/m² at full white. For this wall that is 30.2 kW versus 8.6 kW, and 16 versus 4 circuits at a 16 A/230 V supply with an 80% derate.
Data is lighter on ROE Visual RB1.5: 32 runs against 39, at 5 and 6 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: 500 × 500 mm against 600 × 337.5 mm, so 144 tiles versus 169 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 ROE Visual RB1.5 against 7.5 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

ROE Visual RB1.5 vs Sharp LD-EC151

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