12 hours ago
BenQ GP520 Projector Review: Big Bright Picture, Itty Bitty Box
7.8
/ 10
SCORE BenQ GP520 $1,499 at Amazon Pros Highly accurate, lifelike color
Lots of light
Great size Cons Contrast ratio is below average
No zoom
BenQ GP520
7.8/10 CNET Score
$1,499 at Amazon
Since the introduction of HDR, movies and TV shows have gotten brighter and more colorful, and TVs and projectors are doing the same to take advantage of this enhanced content. BenQ's GP520 is a compact, 4K projector with colors that are fantastically lifelike and accurate -- which is quite an achievement given how bright it is.
The GP520 has Google TV built in, and its size should let it fit just about everywhere. Notably, it bucks the current trend of gimbal stands by offering an optional stand that lets you place and position it just about anywhere. While the GP520's contrast ratio isn't particularly good, the picture quality is still impressive. Overall, the BenQGP520 is a great projector in a fairly tiny package.
Specs and such
Geoffrey Morrison/CNET
Resolution: 4K
HDR-compatible: Yes
4K-compatible: Yes
Lumens spec: 2,600
Zoom: No
Lens shift: No
LED life (Normal mode): 30,000 hours (ECO mode)
Despite its size, the GP520 has a fairly standard set of specs for a projector in this price range. There's 4K resolution and HDR compatibility, but there's no zoom or lens shift. BenQ's own HT2060, which is only 1080p yet cheaper, has both. On the other hand, the similarly priced JMGO N1 Ultra and Xgimi Horizon S Max are both 4K but also lack zoom. BenQ's marketing suggests it doesn't expect the GP520 to be permanently mounted, nor paired with a dedicated screen, so the lack of zoom and lens shift is probably not a huge deal.
Rated at 2,600 lumens, I measured 1,258 in its most accurate Cinema mode. This puts it right in the same ballpark as the JMGO, Xgimi and Anker Nebula Cosmos 4K SE. In its less accurate, and very-green Bright mode, I measured an eye-watering 2,166. This is a very bright projector.
The contrast ratio, however, is below average at 369:1. That's not great, but it is in line with many of the brighter, 4K projectors I've reviewed in the last few years. The aforementioned Anker was 232:1, for example, while the more expensive Xgimi Horizon Ultra only managed 316:1. Nearly all projectors in this price range, other than Epson, use TI's DLP chips, and there are only a few variations for home projector use. So it's not too surprising to see them perform similarly in this metric.
Like many new projectors, the GP520 has some automatic setup features to adjust color and keystone based on position and wall color. These features, in any projector, will reduce the image quality. I acknowledge that they can make setup easier and faster for people unfamiliar with projectors, especially if the projector is regularly moved between rooms. They're here if you want to use them, though spending a few minutes positioning the projector correctly will result in a better image.
Connections
Geoffrey Morrison/CNET
HDMI inputs: 2
USB port: 3 (1 USB-C, 1 USB-A, 1 USB-A for service)
Audio output: eARC, 3.5,mm headphone output
Internet: Wireless
Remote: Not backlit
Two HDMI inputs seem like the right number for a projector like this. It's not that much of a stretch to assume most people might have two sources, like an Xbox and a PlayStation. If you'd prefer a different streaming service instead of the built-in Google, there's a USB connection on the back to power a streaming stick.
There's also eARC if you want to send the audio back to a soundbar or receiver. Using external speakers is always a good idea, though I imagine the GP520 will be used on its own more often than not. To that end, there are two 12-watt speakers that sound quite good. Well, quite good considering the size of the box they're in. They play loud enough that you can understand dialogue, though given their physical restrictions, they don't have much bass.
Picture quality comparisons
JMGO N1 Ultra
Xgimi Horizon S Max
The JMGO N1 Ultra, Xgimi Horizon S Max and BenQ GP520 are three closely matched projectors. They're all 4K, similarly sized and equivalently priced -- the JMGO is $100 cheaper than the GP520, while the Xgimi is around $400 more. Both the JMGO and Xgimi are on gimbals, while the BenQ can instead be mounted to a stand in several configurations. I connected them all to an HDMI distribution amplifier and watched the same content on all three at the same time, side-by-side, on a 1.0-gain screen.
Geoffrey Morrison/CNET
Despite a wide discrepancy of claimed brightness -- JMGO's 4,000 lumens, Xgimi's 3,100 and BenQ's (closer) 2,600 -- they all measured comparably, and picture quality was similar, too. They're all bright, highly detailed and have reasonably accurate color. There's no "bad" option, but their differences do make for an interesting comparison. For instance, in their most accurate modes, technically, the Xgimi is very slightly the brightest at 1,300 lumens. The BenQ manages nearly the same brightness, just 42 lumens less, but is more accurate. It's worth noting that the BenQ is capable of more light than the Xgimi in their brightest modes. While the differences in brightness between the three aren't obvious side by side, their differences in color definitely are.
The various mounting possibilities for the GP520. The stand and mount are sold separately.
BenQ
The BenQ is a very accurate projector. Skin tones especially look noticeably better on the BenQ compared to the others. The Xgimi is close, but many colors look a little off, including Caucasian skin tones, which look a little pasty. The JMGO is even farther from accurate, with a slightly cooler color temperature and more oversaturated colors. On their own, the JMGO and Xgimi look pleasing enough, but the more accurate a display is, the more lifelike it looks, and the BenQ has that advantage here.
Where it stumbles a bit is with contrast. It has the lowest of these three, and that results in an image that, while not washed out, does look less punchy than the JMGO's 926:1. Is it a huge difference? No, but it is noticeable. Despite being less accurate and very slightly dimmer, the eye gets drawn toward the JMGO because of that higher contrast ratio. Each definitely has its strengths and weaknesses, and there's no wrong answer here. That said, between the three, I think I'd still choose the GP520 because its color accuracy does lend a more natural look.
Bitty box
The blue ring around the lens is quite stylish.
Geoffrey Morrison/CNET
Given my tepid response to the home theater-specific W2720i, it's probably a surprise (to BenQ, almost certainly) that I like the GP520 far more despite worse performance in the most important aspect of picture quality: contrast ratio. That largely comes down to intention and price. Being a projector designed for a dedicated theater, I had higher expectations for the W2720i, especially since it cost $2,000. The GP520 costs 30% less, is brighter and still looks great. It's also far smaller. Vastly different intentions, for sure, but assuming it fits in my room (remember, no zoom), I'd pick the GP520 over the W2720i. Though honestly, if fit wasn't an issue, I'd still get the short-throw X500i over both.
Looking outside of BenQ, it's a little harder to say. The excellent color accuracy really sets the GP520 apart compared to the JMGO and Xgimi, both of which have roughly similar size, intent and overall performance. I didn't even bother comparing the GP520 to the Anker Cosmos 4K SE, which is basically the same price, since that projector has worse color and contrast. The BenQ's mediocre contrast ratio is a bit of a bummer, but in this class of projector, it's rare to find one with a good contrast ratio. The JMGO is the highest of these four projectors, and it's just barely above average for what I've measured.
So the GP520 is bright, has great color, sounds good and is a great size. It's a very good, though not quite great, projector that will easily fit in a lot of spaces. It's a bright box of lovely colors.
