EPOMAKER LUMA40 vs EPOMAKER Magcore 87
The short answer
EPOMAKER LUMA40 wins this comparison with a score of 64/100, ahead of EPOMAKER Magcore 87 (58).
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
Best price now
Cheap alternatives
Logitech MX Keys S
Razer BlackWidow V4 Pro
Aula F99
MCHOSE G75 Pro
Lofree -68
B.FRIENDit K23
The record
Grouped and collapsible · Tap a group to fold
Design3▾
| EPOMAKER LUMA40 | EPOMAKER Magcore 87 | |
|---|---|---|
| Layout | — | QWERTY |
| Hot-swappable | — | — |
| Key count | — | 87 |
Connect1▾
| EPOMAKER LUMA40 | EPOMAKER Magcore 87 | |
|---|---|---|
| Wired | — | ✓ |
Feel1▾
| EPOMAKER LUMA40 | EPOMAKER Magcore 87 | |
|---|---|---|
| Switch type | — | Mechanical |
Data sources: Amazon
FAQ
Which is better, EPOMAKER LUMA40 or EPOMAKER Magcore 87?
EPOMAKER LUMA40 has the higher overall score (64 vs 58).
What are the main differences?
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.
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.