JMGO N1S 4K Projector Review: A Lot of 4K for a Little

CNET

07-07-2025

8.0
/ 10
SCORE JMGO N1S 4K $999 at Amazon Pros Excellent price for 4K
Great diminutive size
Reasonably bright Cons Colors aren't impressive
Not particularly bright
No zoom
JMGO N1S 4K
8.0/10 CNET Score
$999 at Amazon
When I first saw images of the N1S 4K, I assumed it was a slight variation on JMGO's N1S Pro and Ultra, which I reviewed over the past two years. There's no denying the family resemblance, but the N1S 4K is significantly smaller and definitely the baby brother. Inside the N1S 4K is a triple laser light engine, a 4K DLP chip, quiet cooling and Google TV. Perhaps most impressive, it has all that for a list price of $1,300. It's one of the smallest and least expensive 4K projectors I've reviewed.
There are a few compromises, however. The color isn't great, nor is it particularly bright. Overall, though, it's quite good. Making things even more interesting, I've seen the N1S for around $1,000, making it one of the cheapest 4K projectors, full stop. So is acceptable, but not stellar, performance a worthy trade-off for a low price and compact package? Yeah, probably.
Specs and such
Geoffrey Morrison/CNET
Resolution: 4K
HDR-compatible: Yes
Lumens spec: 1,100
Zoom: No
Lens shift: Gimbal
Laser life: 30,000 hours
I am here for the slow but steady decrease in the price of 4K projectors. While its list is $1,299, I've seen the N1S for $999. Either way, that's a great price for 4K. The JMGO has what I'm going to call a gimbal-like stand. It doesn't rotate as easily as some gimbaled projectors, but it does pivot up and down. While I'm typically not a fan of gimbaled projectors, since they're usually too expensive for their performance, price isn't an issue here.
Neither is size, which is another positive for the N1S. It's only 6.5 inches wide, 7.5 inches tall and 7.3 in length. That makes it one of the smallest home projectors I've reviewed. To put that in perspective, that's the same footprint as the Apple Mac Mini (2023), and roughly 2 inches smaller in every dimension compared to the N1S Pro. That might not seem like a lot but it makes the N1S far more "grab-and-go" than the Pro, a feeling aided by a convenient handle on the base.
A rating of 1,100 lumens isn't a lot. Previous JMGO projectors overstated their rated lumens by a significant amount, something that did not go unnoticed. In its most accurate mode, I measured 575, which is pretty low but still plenty for a dark room. In the brighter Ultra Brightness mode, which is noticeably green, the N1S was capable of 972, which is acceptably close to spec and roughly average for projectors I've reviewed. There are plenty of brighter projectors on the market, but none have the N1S's size and price.
Note the power plug. Like most small projectors the N1S has a separate power brick, which gets surprisingly hot.
Geoffrey Morrison/CNET
Its contrast ratio was difficult to measure. Typically, I use a full black image (0 IRE) to measure black level, and the JMGO, after a split second, would dim its lasers. This improves the dynamic contrast ratio but isn't the native contrast ratio we're looking to measure. It's essentially "cheating" this test. While not something you'd really notice or be bothered by in the real world, it does mean the 2,562:1 that I measured is not comparable to the contrast ratios of other projectors I've measured. Tricking the projector with an active part of the screen (the input identifier) so that it didn't dim yielded 1,196:1. While this likely isn't as accurate a measurement as I'd prefer, it's probably far closer to how it looks. Which is all to say, the contrast ratio is quite decent and a little better than average.
As expected for a projector of this size and cost, there's no zoom or lens shift other than pivoting the entire projector on its stand. Doing this too much would require keystone correction, which we don't recommend.
Connections
Geoffrey Morrison/CNET
HDMI inputs: 1
USB port: 1
Audio output: eARC
Internet: Wi-Fi
Remote: Not backlit
Given that the N1S is on the budget side for a 4K projector, not to mention its size, it's probably not surprising there's only one input. One's better than none, of course, since I imagine most people will want to connect a game console to their projector. If you want to connect a streaming stick instead of using the built-in Google TV, there's a USB connection as well that should be able to power it.
Two 5-watt speakers are somehow squeezed into the tiny case. These sound OK, but not great. They're fairly tinny and don't play very loudly. Given the size of the projector and the low power, they're "fine," but don't expect amazing, room-filling sound. The audio feels more budget than the image.
The base doubles as a carrying handle.
Geoffrey Morrison/CNET
The remote is the same one that most modern projectors have, and also, like so many of them, there's no input button. Insisting remotes have an input button is absolutely the hill I'll die on, but it's not a hill I'm on, it's more like the edge of a void that I'm screaming into. "But Geoff," you say, "Don't projectors auto-detect when there's a source and switch to it?" Sometimes they do, and sometimes that feature actually works! But usually it doesn't. If only there was a way to switch inputs, without having to remember what unrelated button on the remote pulls up a menu that you can click through to select the input you want. Whatever. (This isn't specifically a JMGO issue. I cast a wide net in my annoyance.)
Picture quality comparisons
BenQ HT2060
Epson Home Cinema 2350
The N1S 4K is right in the price range of two of our favorite projectors. The BenQ HT2060 is 1080p, but looks fantastic with a great contrast ratio and accurate color. The Epson HC2350 is 4K and very bright. Both are on our best projectors list and should be significant competition to the JMGO. They are both, however, much larger than the JMGO. I connected them to a distribution amplifier (aka, a "splitter") and viewed them side-by-side on a 1.0-gain screen.
Sometimes when I do these comparisons, the three projectors are really different, and it's easy to pick a winner. Other times, the contenders are impressively close. In this case, they're quite different, but each has strengths that illustrate another's weakness. It was really interesting.
You can tilt the N1S vertical for some movies on the ceiling.
Geoffrey Morrison/CNET
Take brightness and contrast. The Epson was by far the brightest. I measured 2,075 lumens, more than twice that of the BenQ, and which itself was twice as bright as the JMGO. That's a big spread. The eye was naturally drawn to the Epson as it was just so bright. Neither the BenQ nor the JMGO was dim, but there's a lot more flexibility for image size and room lights with the Epson. That brightness somewhat masks its biggest shortcoming, however: a mediocre contrast ratio of 348:1. Compared to the other two, it looked significantly more washed out. Letterbox bars were noticeably gray, whereas on the other two, they were barely noticeable. The BenQ and JMGO looked fairly similar in terms of contrast.
Detail flipped things around. Despite using a pixel shift tech that is more accurately described as "1080p*2," the Epson seemed just as sharp as the JMGO. That brightness does a lot of favors. Lines, wrinkles, and textures on clothing and walls were all more detailed on both compared to the 1080p BenQ. That said, while resolution always gets a lot of hype, the reality is that 1080p is plenty if the rest of the image is good. So yes, side-by-side, the BenQ isn't as sharp, but this is just one aspect of image quality and, honestly, not nearly as important as it seems.
Color was probably the one aspect where they were all fairly close. The BenQ is the most accurate of the three. No surprise there, it's one of the most accurate modern projectors. The Epson is slightly worse, though close enough that, unless you were viewing them side-by-side, you probably wouldn't notice. The BenQ is just slightly more lifelike, especially in skin tones. The JMGO, at least in its Movie mode, isn't terrible but definitely not as accurate as the other two. Again, skin tones are the giveaway here and they don't look as realistic as the BenQ.
In the JMGO's other modes, well, yikes. Out of the box, this projector has some of the worst color I've seen in a mainstream projector. Wildly oversaturated colors; distracting, overly vibrant reds; alien greens and overall just a wild ride. It was bad enough that it made me disappointed that 99.9% of people who buy an N1S will watch it like this, having never switched modes.
Geoffrey Morrison/CNET
The potential for these intense, oversaturated colors does help the JMGO with HDR content. With the right content, it's capable of somewhat richer, deeper colors than the BenQ. I couldn't get HDR working on the Epson, but since it's a lamp-based LCD projector, it likely wouldn't have improved on the color potential of the JMGO's lasers or BenQ's LEDs.
Speaking of lasers, that's worth discussing. Nearly all modern projectors use either LEDs, lasers, a combination of both, and/or occasionally with a phosphor. Going forward, that's likely all we'll see, and for the most part, that's fine. With the right implementation, any version of these technologies can look great, and often, they can result in smaller, quieter projectors. Lasers have some unique characteristics, though, that were on full display in this head-to-head, given that each projector here has a different tech. Lasers create an image that can be a little sparkly. As in, there's a sort of texture to the image due to how the lasers create light. Some laser-based projectors have this effect to greater or lesser extents, so to be clear, I'm not picking on JMGO here. It's not unpleasant per se, but it is a little different if you're used to one of the other techs. The other aspect is only applicable for certain people with glasses. The way the narrow wavelengths of light get bent in some glasses can result in a diffraction artifact that color-shifts the light. This is most noticeable with three-laser projectors and with white objects like credits, street lights, lamps, etc, where one side of the white object will look like it has a blue ghost or shadow, the other side a red ghost/shadow. Again, this isn't a JMGO-specific issue; it just bothers me enough as a glasses-wearer that I wouldn't buy a laser projector, but I also know that the vast majority of people won't have this issue, so it doesn't affect my reviews.
Baby bro brings beams
Geoffrey Morrison/CNET
So where does this leave us? All three of these projectors end up being quite close, despite being good in very different ways. If it were my money, I'd probably buy the BenQ. Great contrast, fairly bright, excellent color. The Epson's brightness is a wonder, and for certain setups, it'd be ideal. It looks great, though if you look beyond the brightness, the image isn't as good as the BenQ's. So where does that leave the JMGO? Its contrast is good, it's bright "enough," and its color (at least in Movie mode) is decent. Where it excels is that it's by far the smallest, quietest and easiest to set up, assuming you don't mind the gimbal design. So, while it doesn't beat two of the best projectors you can get for around $1,000, it might be the better choice for someone looking for something good but tiny, quiet, and highly portable. It even has a handle!