Compare NuPhy Air75 V3 vs Epomaker RT100

P1 NuPhy Air75 V3
P2 Epomaker RT100

Comparison Takeaways

NuPhy Air75 V3

Where It Has the Edge

  • key stability is 4.6 vs 2.5. Switch stability received positive evidence from one reviewer, who reported minimal wobble and no spring ping.
  • reliability is 4.1 vs 2.8. Reliability was generally positive, with comments about less glitchy firmware and out-of-box usability, but one long-term reviewer noted...
  • software quality is 4.4 vs 3.4. Software quality was broadly praised for NuPhy.io’s clean web-based interface, though one reviewer found the console merely fine...
  • key responsiveness is 4.8 vs 3.9. One reviewer strongly praised responsiveness, saying individual keystrokes were easy to feel and control.

Epomaker RT100

Where It Has the Edge

  • per-key lighting control is 4.0 vs 2.3. Per-key lighting control appears as a modern feature reviewers valued, though it is limited by opaque keycaps.
  • noise level is 4.8 vs 3.3. Noise level is a consistent strength for the Sea Salt Silent version, which reviewers found extremely quiet and...
  • key spacing is 4.3 vs 3.0. Key spacing is praised as roomy enough to avoid crowding while still compact enough to navigate efficiently.
  • switch options is 4.4 vs 3.4. Switch choice is a recurring strength: reviewers praised the range of stock options and the ability to choose...
Average score
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.1
Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.0
acoustics
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.6

Acoustics drew strong praise for creamy, muted, controlled low-profile sound, with only some disagreement about exact pitch character.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.8

Acoustics are a major strength, with reviewers praising deep thock, muted office-friendly sound, and strong stock sound profiles.

actuation consistency
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
No score yet
Product 2: Epomaker RT100
2.5

One reviewer raised a possible consistency concern, describing actuation as inconsistent across the keyboard despite otherwise liking the board.

backlight brightness
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
2.8

Backlight brightness had limited but negative evidence from one reviewer who noticed uneven brightness across rows.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
3.0

Backlight brightness received limited direct opinion, with one reviewer finding it not especially strong.

battery life
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.5

Battery life was a major positive, repeatedly described as amazing or phenomenal, though one reviewer’s extrapolated testing fell below the rated claim.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
3.8

Battery life is mixed: some reviewers saw only a couple days with RGB or screen use, while others reported a week or more with lighter settings.

build quality
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.6

Build quality was consistently strong, with reviewers calling the board solid, premium-feeling, and resistant to flex.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.3

Build quality is mostly praised as sturdy, well constructed, and high quality for plastic, with a few caveats about knob or screen details.

cable quality
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
3.6

Cable quality had limited evidence and was described as decent, with a caveat that a braided cable might last longer.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.6

Cable quality is a surprisingly consistent strength, with reviewers praising the thick, themed, premium-feeling included cable.

compatibility
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.6

Compatibility was a major strength, especially for Mac users, Windows toggling, iPad use, and Magic Keyboard-like layout familiarity.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.5

Compatibility is positive where discussed, especially dual OS support and broad wired/Bluetooth/2.4GHz device support.

connectivity
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.2

Connectivity was mostly praised for physical toggles and dongle storage, but some reviewers reported dongle or general connection issues.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.2

Connectivity is a consistent strength across wired, Bluetooth, and 2.4GHz, although one reviewer had cable-specific wired finickiness.

customization options
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.4

Customization options were strong across key remapping, knob actions, lighting, and software functions, despite one reviewer calling advanced options limited.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
3.7

Customization is a central appeal, especially with screen images, RGB, keys, and switches, but the mini TV layout and metrics are not customizable enough for several reviewers.

design aesthetics
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.6

Design aesthetics were strongly praised, with reviewers describing the board as gorgeous, Apple-like, clean, premium, and exceptionally aesthetic.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.6

Design aesthetics are a major consensus strength: reviewers liked the retro-futuristic styling, colorways, and distinctive mini-TV personality.

desk space efficiency
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.3

Desk-space efficiency was positive because the compact 75% layout kept useful keys without becoming too wide.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.5

Desk space efficiency is a strong point for users who want numpad functionality without a sprawling full-size footprint.

durability
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
3.4

Durability was mixed: reviewers cited PBT and long-term build confidence, but also scratch-prone surfaces and disassembly damage risk.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
3.5

Durability evidence is mostly positive for keycaps, but one reviewer worried the protruding mini screen could be vulnerable to impact.

ease of switch replacement
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
No score yet
Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.4

Switch replacement is usually easy, though one internal-access review found pulling and installing switches harder because of plate flexibility.

ergonomics
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.5

Ergonomics scored well through finger-guiding keycaps, adjustable typing angles, and low-profile comfort for faster typing.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.4

Ergonomics are generally positive due to soft mounting, comfortable key profiles, typing angle choices, and carpal-tunnel-friendly spacing in one review.

extra gaming features
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.1

Extra gaming features were positively noted through SOCD and key toggles, with one reviewer confirming SOCD worked in testing.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.0

Extra gaming features have limited evidence, but NKRO was appreciated as useful for macros and gamers.

frame rigidity
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.6

Frame rigidity scored well thanks to comments about sturdiness, a thicker metal frame, and minimal flex.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
3.7

Frame rigidity is mixed: some reviewers found the chassis firm with no flex, while others noted flex or a gasket system that did not behave as expected.

gaming performance
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
3.9

Gaming performance was considered capable for casual or secondary gaming, while reviewers still framed the board as productivity-first.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.0

Gaming performance is good for casual and light competitive play, but intense FPS use can suffer with the soft Sea Salt switches.

hot-swappable switches
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.1

Hot-swappable switch support was useful and positive, giving reviewers flexibility to change switches later.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.6

Hot-swappable switch support is a clear strength, repeatedly praised for repairability, flexibility, and broad 3-/5-pin compatibility.

keycap quality
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.3

Keycap quality was mostly praised for PBT material, durability, and feel, with one longer-term reviewer seeing slight shine begin to appear.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.3

Keycap quality is widely praised for thick PBT construction, feel, texture, and styling, though a few reviewers disliked the height or printing choices.

key responsiveness
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.8

One reviewer strongly praised responsiveness, saying individual keystrokes were easy to feel and control.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
3.9

Key responsiveness is generally strong, especially on wireless and lighter gaming, though some silent-switch users reported false inputs or double spaces.

key spacing
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
3.0

Key spacing had one mixed note: a reviewer’s speed and accuracy dipped briefly before adjustment.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.3

Key spacing is praised as roomy enough to avoid crowding while still compact enough to navigate efficiently.

key stability
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.6

Switch stability received positive evidence from one reviewer, who reported minimal wobble and no spring ping.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
2.5

A spacebar rebound issue in one review hurt perceived key stability by creating accidental double spaces.

latency
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
3.7

Latency evidence was generally positive for wired and dongle use, but one advanced software feature introduced input latency in testing.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.7

Latency evidence is mostly positive, with several reviewers reporting no discernible lag over 2.4GHz and acceptable wireless responsiveness.

layout options
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.5

Layout options were praised, especially ISO and JIS support, and reviewers generally liked the practical 75% layout.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.0

Layout options are praised mainly through the compact full-size/number-pad layout, which suits office work and number-heavy use.

legend visibility
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
2.8

Legend visibility was a drawback in one review because the RGB backlight did not shine through the installed keycaps.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
2.5

Legend visibility is mixed: large legends are easy to see, but cluttered number-row legends and non-shine-through caps hurt usability in some contexts.

macro customization
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
No score yet
Product 2: Epomaker RT100
3.8

Macro customization is useful but split: reviewers acknowledged macro support, while software friction made it less intuitive in some cases.

materials quality
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.2

Materials quality was mostly praised for aluminum, PBT, and non-cheap plastic, though one reviewer questioned whether aluminum was overrated for portability and price.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
3.7

Materials quality is generally solid for the price, especially PBT keycaps and thicker plastic, but the plastic volume knob drew criticism.

media controls
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.1

Media controls had limited but positive evidence around the programmable knob’s tactile twist and press.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
3.9

Media controls are useful overall, though the knob design and feel range from excellent tactile feedback to cheap-looking plastic.

noise level
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
3.3

Noise level was mixed: one reviewer liked the muted sound, while others warned it is not the quietest mechanical option.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.8

Noise level is a consistent strength for the Sea Salt Silent version, which reviewers found extremely quiet and office-friendly.

per-key lighting control
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
2.3

Per-key lighting control was a weakness because one reviewer explicitly found its absence disappointing.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.0

Per-key lighting control appears as a modern feature reviewers valued, though it is limited by opaque keycaps.

polling rate
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
3.9

The 1000Hz wired and 2.4GHz polling was treated as good enough for casual or some gaming, not as a competitive-gaming strength.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
No score yet
portability
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.2

Portability was positive overall because the keyboard is slim and compact, but heavier weight, MacBook fit, and the tall knob created caveats.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
3.3

Portability is mixed: the plastic build and moderate weight help, but the protruding screen and near-full layout make travel less friendly.

profile management
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
No score yet
Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.5

Profile management was directly praised in one review as intuitive inside the Epomaker driver workflow.

rapid trigger support
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
No score yet
Product 2: Epomaker RT100
2.0

Rapid-trigger style play was a weak point in one review because the Sea Salt switches made fast, precise FPS inputs harder.

reliability
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.1

Reliability was generally positive, with comments about less glitchy firmware and out-of-box usability, but one long-term reviewer noted small annoyances.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
2.8

Reliability is mixed, with strong connections in some reviews but repeated concerns about screen setup, app crashes, missing readings, and unstable mini-TV behavior.

RGB customization
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.4

RGB customization was positively covered through software-based control of backlighting and effects.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.3

RGB customization is considered useful and reasonably flexible through the driver, with both per-key control and effect customization mentioned positively.

RGB lighting quality
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.0

Lighting quality was generally liked for smooth effects and soft visuals, though one reviewer noticed uneven brightness and another treated lighting as preference-based.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.0

RGB lighting quality is generally liked for visible, vibrant effects, although some reviewers noted subdued underglow or non-shine-through keycaps limiting usefulness.

size and form factor
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.6

The size and form factor were viewed very positively as compact, low-profile, and suitable for work/play setups.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.4

Size and form factor are widely liked because the RT100 keeps a numpad while remaining more compact than a traditional full-size board.

software quality
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.4

Software quality was broadly praised for NuPhy.io’s clean web-based interface, though one reviewer found the console merely fine and another hit beta recognition trouble.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
3.4

Software quality is mixed: some reviewers found it stable or straightforward, while others found it clunky, finicky, slow, or unreliable for screen features.

sound dampening
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.6

Sound dampening was a major strength, with gasket, foam, and silicone changes repeatedly credited for reducing hollowness.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.6

Sound dampening is widely praised; foam, gasket-style structure, and case design reduce hollowness, pinging, and harshness.

stabilizer quality
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.1

Stabilizer quality was mostly positive and rattle-free, although one reviewer still considered the stabilizers merely average rather than best-in-class.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.2

Stabilizers are mostly good out of the box, with multiple reviewers hearing little rattle, though one noted ticks needing light tuning.

switch feel
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.4

Reviewers mostly praised the switch feel as smooth, tactile, buttery, or standard-profile-like, though one reviewer noted some scratchiness.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.4

Reviewers broadly liked the switch feel, especially Wisteria, Flamingo, and Sea Salt options, but silent Sea Salts divided users who disliked their mushy or overly soft bottom-out.

switch options
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
3.4

Switch choice was mixed: reviewers appreciated having linear, tactile, and silent options, but several found the lineup limited or less adventurous than before.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.4

Switch choice is a recurring strength: reviewers praised the range of stock options and the ability to choose quieter, tactile, or more conventional linear switches.

typing comfort
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.6

Typing comfort was a repeated strength for long sessions, with reviewers describing it as comfortable and pleasant to use.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.3

Typing comfort is highly praised when users like the switch profile, but tall MDA caps and light switches are uncomfortable for some reviewers.

typing feel
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
4.6

Typing feel was one of the clearest strengths, with reviewers describing it as premium, cushioned, softened, and acoustically pleasing.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.3

Typing feel is one of the strongest themes: most reviewers found the RT100 smooth, soft, satisfying, and enjoyable, with only switch-profile caveats.

value for money
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
3.9

Value for money was mixed: reviewers often found the quality and features worth the price, while others called it expensive or a nice-to-have.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.6

Value for money is one of the clearest strengths, with reviewers repeatedly calling the RT100 feature-rich, reasonably priced, or hard to beat near $100-$120.

volume control
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
3.1

Volume control was the most mixed feature: reviewers liked the knob’s usefulness and click feel, but repeatedly criticized wobble, looseness, and gimmicky behavior.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
3.8

Volume control is useful and often tactile, but the knob’s plasticky look and out-of-place design are repeated complaints.

wireless performance
Product 1: NuPhy Air75 V3
3.8

Wireless performance was mixed: some reviewers found Bluetooth and 2.4GHz stable, while others saw Bluetooth issues, dongle errors, or sporadic disconnections.

Product 2: Epomaker RT100
4.4

Wireless performance is generally strong, especially over 2.4GHz, with reviewers reporting no obvious lag and easy device switching.