- opendesign.foundation
- Compare
- MA270S vs PD3225U
BenQ MA270S vs BenQ PD3225U
What MA270S does better (4) and where PD3225U wins (3) — every spec side by side.
Dimensions
Size comparison
MA270SPD3225U
| MA270S | PD3225U | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Height | 580 mm | 628 mm | −48 mm |
| Width | 614 mm | 715 mm | −101 mm |
| Depth | 220 mm | 273 mm | −53 mm |
| Weight | 8.6 kg | 8.2 kg | +0.4 kg |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is MA270S better than PD3225U?
- Pixel density218 ppi vs 140 ppi+56%
- USB-C charging (Power Delivery)96 W vs 85 W+13%
- Brightness (typical)450 nits vs 400 nits+12%
- Refresh rate70 Hz vs 60 Hz+17%
Why is PD3225U better than MA270S?
- Anti-glare / matte screenNo · MA270S: Yes
- Screen size27″ vs 31.5″+17%
- Weight8.64 kg vs 8.2 kg+5%
Specifications
Side by side
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 27″ | 31.5″ |
| Resolution | 5120 × 2880 | 3840 × 2160 |
| Resolution class | 5K | 4K UHD |
| Pixel density | 218 ppi | 140 ppi |
| Aspect ratio | 16:9 | 16:9 |
| Panel type | IPS | IPS |
| Refresh rate | 70 Hz | 60 Hz |
| Brightness (typical) | 450 nits | 400 nits |
| Contrast ratio (static) | 2,000:1 | 2,000:1 |
| Response time | 5 ms | 5 ms |
| Anti-glare / matte screen | No | Yes |
| Colour | ||
| sRGB coverage | 99% | 98% |
| DCI-P3 coverage | 99% | 98% |
| HDR | DisplayHDR 400 | DisplayHDR 400 |
| Connectivity | ||
| USB-C video input (one cable) | Yes | Yes |
| USB-C charging (Power Delivery) | 96 W | 85 W |
| Thunderbolt | Yes | Yes |
| KVM switch | Yes | Yes |
| HDMI inputs | 2 | 2 |
| DisplayPort inputs | — | 1 |
| USB hub | Yes | Yes |
| Daisy chain (DP MST) | Yes | — |
| Built-in speakers | Yes | Yes |
| Design & ergonomics | ||
| Height adjustment | 150 mm | 150 mm |
| Pivot (portrait rotation) | Yes | Yes |
| Swivel | Yes | Yes |
| VESA mount | 100 × 100 mm | 100 × 100 mm |
| Weight | 8.64 kg | 8.2 kg |
| Width | 614 mm | 715 mm |
| Height | 580 mm | 628 mm |
| Depth | 220 mm | 273 mm |
| Product line | BenQ MA | — |
