HKC HKC 神盾25Q360B vs HKC HKC 神盾27Q560
HKC HKC 神盾27Q560 — Pick the HKC HKC 神盾27Q560 — it leads these groups: Display 1 Ergonomics 1
Tap a group name to see the proof · The scoring method is public
The short answer
HKC HKC 神盾27Q560 wins this comparison with a score of 63/100, ahead of HKC HKC 神盾25Q360B (62).
The main differences: Screen size (24.5 in vs 27 in) · Weight (with stand) (5700 g vs 613.7 g).
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
| HKC HKC 神盾25Q360B | HKC HKC 神盾27Q560 | |
|---|---|---|
| Display | 46 | 44 |
| Ergonomics | 85 | 90 |
How to choose
Pick the HKC HKC 神盾27Q560 if you care about…
- Screen size 27 in +2.5 in vs 24.5 in
- Weight (with stand) 613.7 g +5086.3 g vs 5700 g
Best price now
Cheap alternatives
GIGABYTE M27Q
MSI Optix MAG274QRF
DELL UltraSharp U2723QE
DELL S2721QS
LG UltraFine 27UL500
BENQ EW3270U
Where they differ
2 · Only rows that actually differ, with a verdict per row
| HKC HKC 神盾25Q360B | HKC HKC 神盾27Q560 | Where they differ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Screen size | 24.5 in | 27 in | HKC HKC 神盾27Q560 |
| Weight (with stand) | 5700 g | 613.7 g | HKC HKC 神盾27Q560 |
The record
Grouped and collapsible · Tap a group to fold
Display4▾
| HKC HKC 神盾25Q360B | HKC HKC 神盾27Q560 | |
|---|---|---|
| Screen size | 24.5 in | 27 in |
| Resolution | 2560x1440 | 2560x1440 |
| Max refresh rate | 360 Hz | — |
| Panel type | Fast-IPS | Fast-IPS |
Ergonomics1▾
| HKC HKC 神盾25Q360B | HKC HKC 神盾27Q560 | |
|---|---|---|
| Weight (with stand) | 5700 g | 613.7 g |
Data sources: ZOL
FAQ
Which is better, HKC HKC 神盾25Q360B or HKC HKC 神盾27Q560?
HKC HKC 神盾27Q560 edges ahead 63 to 62 and leads in Display, Ergonomics.
What are the main differences?
The main differences: Screen size (24.5 in vs 27 in) · Weight (with stand) (5700 g vs 613.7 g).
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.