Two triple-laser ultra-short-throws — which should you buy?
The short answer
Buy the BenQ V5010i — it is the documented sheet of the two: a manufacturer-stated 2,500 lumens, 98% of DCI-P3, HDR10+ on top of HDR10 and HLG, a 17.9 ms 4K60 input lag, one HDMI 2.1 port with ALLM, and 28 dB of stated noise. Read 'documented' as a statement about the two rows as much as the two products: almost every field on our PX3-PRO row is retailer-sourced, and its input lag, ALLM, HDMI 2.1 count and gamut coverage are absent from our data rather than stated as absent. Buy the Hisense PX3-PRO if the higher claimed brightness and the longer light-source life (25,000 hours against 20,000) decide it — both of those Hisense figures are recorded from a retailer listing where the BenQ's are manufacturer-stated, so they are the two claims to confirm first, with the Hisense tracked below the BenQ today. Either way both are ultra-short-throw, so a lenticular CLR screen is part of the purchase — see the compatibility section.
As tracked by Home Theater Builder: the Hisense PX3-PRO tracks at $2,800; the BenQ V5010i at $2,999.How we verify this data →
Both fire from a credenza, both run triple-laser light engines, and both are 4K-class ($2,800 vs $2,999 as tracked today). The gap between them is mostly a gap in what each sheet is willing to state — and one contrast figure that looks decisive until you read which field it came from.
Specifications · side by side · per-field provenance
● SOURCE-TRACKED
Spec
Hisense PX3-PRO
BenQ V5010i
Price
$2,800
$2,999
Brand
Hisense
BenQ
Technology
Laser DLP
Laser DLP
Native Resolution
4K pixel shift
4K UHD
Brightness Lumens
3000
2500
Contrast Ratio Native
3,000:1
not stated
Light Source Type
triple laser
triple laser
Lamp Life Normal Hrs
25000
20000
Throw Ratio Min
0.22
0.25
Throw Type
ultra short throw UST
ultra short throw UST
Image Size Min Inches
80
not stated
Image Size Max Inches
150
not stated
Frame Interpolation
Yes
Yes
HDMI Inputs
3
3
Contrast Ratio Dynamic
not stated
2,500,000:1
Color Gamut DCI P3 Pct
not stated
98
HDR Support
not stated
HDR10, HDR10+, HLG
Native Aspect Ratio
not stated
16:9
Keystone Vertical
not stated
Yes
Input Lag Ms 4k60
not stated
17.9
HDMI 21 Ports
not stated
1
ALLM
not stated
Yes
Wifi
not stated
Yes
Bluetooth
not stated
Yes
Rs232 Port
not stated
Yes
Trigger 12v
not stated
Yes
Width Inches
not stated
30
Height Inches
not stated
6.4
Depth Inches
not stated
14
Weight Lbs
not stated
29.1
Noise DB Normal
not stated
28
Power Consumption W
not stated
150
Shaded rows differ · green dot = lab-measured · amber = manufacturer-verified · blue = retailer/community-reported · grey = estimated · “not stated” means exactly that
Reading the numbers honestly
The contrast numbers are the trap: the PX3-PRO states 3,000:1 NATIVE contrast, the V5010i states 2,500,000:1 DYNAMIC contrast. Our schema keeps those in separate fields precisely so they are never read against each other — a dynamic figure includes light-source modulation that a native measurement excludes, so this is two different tests, not a three-order-of-magnitude difference in picture. Brightness is a claim on both sides and the provenance differs: the PX3-PRO's 3,000 lumens is recorded from a retailer listing, the V5010i's 2,500 from the manufacturer, and both, like all projector brightness, are measured in the flattering mode. Resolution is stated differently too — 4K pixel shift (Hisense) against 4K UHD (BenQ) — so one row names the mechanism and the other names the output class.
Do the Hisense PX3-PRO and BenQ V5010i need a special screen?
Both the Hisense PX3-PRO and the BenQ V5010i are ultra-short-throw designs, and that decides the screen before it decides anything else: a UST projector fires steeply upward, so it needs a lenticular ceiling-light-rejecting screen built for that geometry — like the Elite Screens Aeon CLR 3 103" in our catalog. On a standard-gain screen the image washes out; our builder flags exactly this pairing as an invariant, whichever projector you pick.
Computed from the catalog's normalized fields — the same fields the builder's compatibility engine reads. A missing field reads as "can't check", never as a pass.
Buy the BenQ V5010i — it is the documented sheet of the two: a manufacturer-stated 2,500 lumens, 98% of DCI-P3, HDR10+ on top of HDR10 and HLG, a 17.9 ms 4K60 input lag, one HDMI 2.1 port with ALLM, and 28 dB of stated noise. Read 'documented' as a statement about the two rows as much as the two products: almost every field on our PX3-PRO row is retailer-sourced, and its input lag, ALLM, HDMI 2.1 count and gamut coverage are absent from our data rather than stated as absent. Buy the Hisense PX3-PRO if the higher claimed brightness and the longer light-source life (25,000 hours against 20,000) decide it — both of those Hisense figures are recorded from a retailer listing where the BenQ's are manufacturer-stated, so they are the two claims to confirm first, with the Hisense tracked below the BenQ today. Either way both are ultra-short-throw, so a lenticular CLR screen is part of the purchase — see the compatibility section.
GamingBenQ V5010i — A stated 17.9 ms at 4K60, stated ALLM and one stated HDMI 2.1 port; the PX3-PRO's input lag, ALLM and HDMI 2.1 count are all unstated in our data.
Color on paperBenQ V5010i — The V5010i states 98% of DCI-P3 and HDR10+ support; the PX3-PRO's gamut coverage and HDR formats are unstated in our data — a disclosure gap between two triple-laser engines, not a proven color difference.
Raw claimed outputHisense PX3-PRO — 3,000 against 2,500 claimed lumens — though the Hisense figure is recorded from a retailer listing and the BenQ's from the manufacturer, so the two claims don't carry the same provenance.
The biggest pictureHisense PX3-PRO — The PX3-PRO states an 80–150-inch image range (manufacturer-stated) and a 0.22 throw ratio recorded from a retailer listing; the V5010i states a manufacturer 0.25 throw ratio and no image-size range in our data.
Light-source lifeHisense PX3-PRO — 25,000 hours against 20,000 — the same field on two laser engines, but not equally sourced: the Hisense figure is recorded from a retailer listing and the BenQ's is manufacturer-stated.
The screen you buy either wayEither — Both state ultra-short throw, which makes a lenticular ceiling-light-rejecting screen an invariant in our builder rather than a preference.
The two contrast figures are different measurements and our schema stores them in different fields: 3,000:1 NATIVE (PX3-PRO) against 2,500,000:1 DYNAMIC (V5010i) — a dynamic figure counts light-source modulation a native reading excludes, so the two are never subtracted from each other here.
Brightness provenance is recorded per field: the PX3-PRO's 3,000-lumen figure comes from a retailer listing, the V5010i's 2,500 from the manufacturer — both are brightness claims measured in the flattering picture mode, but they are not equally sourced, and we label which is which instead of presenting both as manufacturer figures.
The gaming ledger is stated on one side only: 17.9 ms at 4K60, ALLM and one HDMI 2.1 port among three HDMI inputs (BenQ) against three HDMI inputs and no stated lag, ALLM or HDMI 2.1 count (Hisense).
Both state ultra-short throw (0.22 and 0.25 throw ratios), which decides the screen before it decides anything else: a lenticular ceiling-light-rejecting screen, encoded in our compatibility engine as an invariant — on standard material the image washes out.
Light-source life is recorded on BOTH rows and favours the Hisense — 25,000 hours against 20,000 — but the two are not equally sourced, and we label it the same way we label brightness: the Hisense figure comes from a retailer listing, the BenQ's from the manufacturer. What is blank on the BenQ's row is the image-size range: the Hisense states 80–150 inches, the BenQ records none.
Discount-against-list is only checkable where our row records a list price beside the tracked one — as it does on the Hisense today: $2,800 tracked against a recorded $3,499 MSRP. We never infer a list price from a tracked one, so where the MSRP field is empty the page says nothing about the discount rather than implying there is none.