EPOMAKER HE80 vs EPOMAKER LUMA100
EPOMAKER LUMA100 — Pick the EPOMAKER LUMA100 — it leads these groups: Design 1
Tap a group name to see the proof · The scoring method is public
The short answer
EPOMAKER LUMA100 wins this comparison with a score of 68.0/100, ahead of EPOMAKER HE80 (67.6).
The main differences: Weight (830 g vs 620 g) · Switch type (Epomaker MagneX Switch vs Epomaker Low Profile Mint).
Scores are computed from 5 public spec attributes; missing values stay marked unknown in tables and are imputed at the category median, never passed off as measured.
At a glance
0–100 per group, normalized within the category · Tap a group for details
| EPOMAKER HE80 | EPOMAKER LUMA100 | |
|---|---|---|
| Design | 89 | 91 |
How to choose
Pick the EPOMAKER LUMA100 if you care about…
- Weight 620 g +210 g vs 830 g
Best price now
Cheap alternatives
Logitech MX Keys S
Razer BlackWidow V4 Pro
Aula F99
MCHOSE G75 Pro
Lofree -68
B.FRIENDit K23
Where they differ
2 · Only rows that actually differ, with a verdict per row
| EPOMAKER HE80 | EPOMAKER LUMA100 | Where they differ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Weight | 830 g | 620 g | EPOMAKER LUMA100 |
| Switch type | Epomaker MagneX Switch | Epomaker Low Profile Mint | Depends |
The record
Grouped and collapsible · Tap a group to fold
Design4▾
| EPOMAKER HE80 | EPOMAKER LUMA100 | |
|---|---|---|
| Layout | ANSI (United States) | ANSI (United States) |
| Hot-swappable | ✓ | ✓ |
| Per-key RGB | ✓ | ✓ |
| Weight | 830 g | 620 g |
Feel1▾
| EPOMAKER HE80 | EPOMAKER LUMA100 | |
|---|---|---|
| Switch type | Epomaker MagneX Switch | Epomaker Low Profile Mint |
FAQ
Which is better, EPOMAKER HE80 or EPOMAKER LUMA100?
EPOMAKER LUMA100 edges ahead 68 to 68 and leads in Design.
What are the main differences?
The main differences: Weight (830 g vs 620 g) · Switch type (Epomaker MagneX Switch vs Epomaker Low Profile Mint).
How are the scores calculated?
We normalize 5 public spec attributes within the category and weight them by group into a 0–100 score; missing values are inherited from spec-identical twins or imputed at the category median, so a sparse spec sheet never earns an advantage. The methodology is public.