Product comparison · 2 kvm extenders

ATEN CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver vs Lindy 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver

20specifications compared
12differ
8identical
35known for one product only

Key differences

The Lindy 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver has 4,850 m more maximum transfer distance than the ATEN CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver (5000 m vs 150 m). The ATEN CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver has 256 x 2160 pixels more maximum digital resolution than the Lindy 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver (4096 x 2160 pixels vs 3840 x 2160 pixels). The ATEN CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver has 3.8 cm more transmitter width than the Lindy 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver (18.2 cm vs 14.4 cm). LED indicators: Link, Power, Video on the ATEN CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver, Yes on the Lindy 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver. Transmitter weight: 630 g on the ATEN CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver, 1.2 kg on the Lindy 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver.

Maximum transfer distance
- CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:150 m
- 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:5000 m
Maximum digital resolution
- CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:4096 x 2160 pixels
- 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:3840 x 2160 pixels
LED indicators
- CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:Link, Power, Video
- 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:Yes
Transmitter width
- CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:18.2 cm
- 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:14.4 cm
Transmitter depth
- CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:12.2 cm
- 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:7.8 cm
Transmitter height
- CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:2.87 cm
- 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:2.3 cm
Transmitter weight
- CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:630 g
- 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:1.2 kg
Receiver width
- CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:18.2 cm
- 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver:14.4 cm

Side by side

Differences highlightedShow differences only

Comparison of CE820-ATA-E, 39366
55 specifications	A ATEN CE820-ATA-E KVM extender Transmitter & receiver Model CE820-ATA-E View product	B Lindy 39366 KVM extender Transmitter & receiver Model 39366 View product
Features3 differ
Maximum transfer distanceDiffers	150 m	5000 m
Maximum digital resolutionDiffers	4096 x 2160 pixels	3840 x 2160 pixels
Maximum refresh rateKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	60 Hz
Colour depthKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	8 bit
High Dynamic Range (HDR) supportedKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Yes
LED indicatorsDiffers	Link, Power, Video	Yes
Cable types supportedKnown for one	Cat5e, Cat6, Cat6a	Unknown — not stated by the source
Rack mountingKnown for one	Yes	Unknown — not stated by the source
Transmitteridentical
Transmitter USB Type-B ports quantityKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	1
Transmitter local video portKnown for one	Yes	Unknown — not stated by the source
Transmitter local video port typeKnown for one	HDMI	Unknown — not stated by the source
Transmitter local keyboard/mouse port typeKnown for one	USB	Unknown — not stated by the source
RJ-45 ports quantity (transmitter)Known for one	1	Unknown — not stated by the source
Receiveridentical
Receiver USB Type-A ports quantityKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	3
RJ-45 ports quantity (receiver)Known for one	1	Unknown — not stated by the source
Receiver local keyboard/mouse port typeKnown for one	USB	Unknown — not stated by the source
Ports & interfacesidentical
USB port typeKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	USB Type-C
RS-232 portsKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	1
Remote (IR) inputKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	2
Remote (IR) outputKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	2
USB 2.0 ports quantityKnown for one	4	Unknown — not stated by the source
PC Audio inKnown for one	Yes	Unknown — not stated by the source
PC Audio outKnown for one	Yes	Unknown — not stated by the source
Poweridentical
DC-in jackKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Yes
AC adapter output voltageKnown for one	5 V	Unknown — not stated by the source
Power consumption (transmitter) (max)Known for one	2.87 W	Unknown — not stated by the source
Power consumption (receiver) (max)Known for one	5.37 W	Unknown — not stated by the source
Weight & dimensions8 differ
Transmitter widthDiffers	18.2 cm	14.4 cm
Transmitter depthDiffers	12.2 cm	7.8 cm
Transmitter heightDiffers	2.87 cm	2.3 cm
Transmitter weightDiffers	630 g	1.2 kg
Receiver widthDiffers	18.2 cm	14.4 cm
Receiver depthDiffers	12.2 cm	7.8 cm
Receiver heightDiffers	2.87 cm	2.3 cm
Receiver weightDiffers	650 g	1.2 kg
Packaging dataidentical
Package weightKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	1.47 kg
Packaging contentidentical
AC adapter includedKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Yes
Cables includedKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	USB Type-A to USB Type-B, IR
ManualKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Yes
Operational conditions1 differ
Operating relative humidity (H-H)Differs	0 - 80%	10 - 90%
Other featuresidentical
HDCPKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Yes
HDCP versionKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	2.2
Extended display identification data (EDID)Known for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Yes
Mean time between failures (MTBF)Known for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	30000 h
BandwidthKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	18 Gbit/s
Compliance certificatesKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	CE, UKCA, Federal Communications Commission (FCC), REACH, RoHS
Warranty periodKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	2 year(s)

A dash means the value is not stated by the source. Unknown values are never counted for or against a product, and there is no overall score.

More kvm extender comparisons

All kvm extender comparisons