⁦Compare Xprinter Thermal Printer Xprinter Q80B vs Thermal Printer Xprinter Xp-C260M⁩

A full comparison of Xprinter printers on price, سرعة الطباعة, Input Buffer, Column Capacity, Character Set, and technical specs.

Specifications

Specification ⁦Thermal Printer Xprinter Q80B⁩ ⁦Thermal Printer Xprinter Xp-C260M⁩
Price $35.00 $60.00
Printer Specifications
تقنية الطباعة Direct Thermal Direct Thermal
Media Handling
Media Width ⁦79.5±0.5 mm⁩ ⁦79.5±0.5 mm⁩
Paper Type Thermal Receipt Paper Thermal Receipt Paper
Print Width ⁦72 mm⁩ ⁦72 mm⁩
Printer Emulation ESC/POS ESC/POS
سرعة الطباعة ⁦230 mm/s⁩ ⁦260 / 300 mm/s⁩
Input Buffer ⁦96 KB⁩ ⁦128 KB⁩
Printing
Column Capacity ⁦576 or 512 dots/line⁩ ⁦576 dots/line⁩
Line Spacing ⁦3.75 mm⁩ ⁦3.75 mm⁩
Adjustable Line Spacing Yes Yes
Column Number ⁦Font A: 42/48, Font B: 56/64, Chinese: 21/24⁩ ⁦Font A: 42/48, Font B: 56/64, Chinese: 21/24⁩
Memory
NV Flash Memory ⁦256 KB⁩ ⁦256 KB⁩
Fonts
Font A Size ⁦1.5 × 3.0 mm (12 × 24 dots)⁩ ⁦1.5 × 3.0 mm (12 × 24 dots)⁩
Font B Size ⁦1.1 × 2.1 mm (9 × 17 dots)⁩ ⁦1.1 × 2.1 mm (9 × 17 dots)⁩
Chinese Font Size ⁦3.0 × 3.0 mm (24 × 24 dots)⁩ ⁦3.0 × 3.0 mm (24 × 24 dots)⁩
Character Set ⁦PC437, Katakana, PC850, PC860, PC863, PC865, West Europe, Greek, Hebrew, East Europe, Iran, WPC1252, PC866, PC852, PC858, IranII, Latvian, Arabic, PT151 (1251)⁩ ⁦PC347, Katakana, PC850, PC860, PC863, PC865, West Europe, Greek, Hebrew, East Europe, Iran, WPC1252, PC866, PC852, PC858, Iran II, Latvian, Arabic, PT151 (1251)⁩
Barcode Support
Supported 1D Barcodes ⁦UPC-A, UPC-E, EAN13, EAN8, CODE39, ITF, CODABAR, CODE93, CODE128⁩ ⁦UPC-A, UPC-E, EAN13, EAN8, CODE39, ITF, CODABAR, CODE93, CODE128⁩
Supported 2D Barcodes ⁦QR Code, PDF417⁩ ⁦QR Code, PDF417⁩
Power
Power Adapter Input ⁦AC 100–240V, 50–60Hz⁩ ⁦AC 100–240 V, 50–60 Hz⁩
Power Adapter Output ⁦DC 24V / 2.5A⁩ ⁦DC 24V / 2.5A⁩
Printer Input ⁦DC 24V / 2.5A⁩ ⁦DC 24V / 2.5A⁩
Cash Drawer Output ⁦DC 24V / 1A⁩ ⁦DC 24V / 1A⁩
Physical
Dimensions ⁦180x145x130 mm⁩ ⁦192 × 140 × 140 mm⁩
Weight ⁦0.8 kg⁩ ⁦1.1 kg⁩
Environment
Operating Temperature ⁦0–45 °C⁩ ⁦0–45 °C⁩
Operating Humidity 10–80 % 10–80 %
Storage Temperature ⁦-10–60 °C⁩ ⁦-10–60 °C⁩
Storage Humidity 10–90 % 10–90 %
Reliability
Auto Cutter Partial Cut Partial Cut
Cutter Life ⁦1500000 cuts⁩ ⁦1500000 cuts⁩
Printhead Life ⁦150 km⁩ ⁦150 km⁩
Connectivity
Supported OS Windows, Linux, macOS, Android Windows
Interface USB USB + LAN
Certifications
Certifications CCC, CB, CE, FCC, RoHS CCC, CB, CE, FCC, RoHS
Software
OPOS Support Yes
Features
Error Alarm Support Yes Yes
QR Code Printing Yes

Summary: Which Printer Should You Choose?

Choose Xprinter Q80B if you need:

  • Compatibility with Windows, Linux, macOS, or Android rather than Windows alone.
  • A lighter printer weighing 0.8 kg instead of 1.12 kg.
  • A straightforward USB connection when wired network access is unnecessary.

Choose Xprinter Xp-C260M if you need:

  • Higher printing speed of 260/300 mm/s compared with 230 mm/s.
  • Both USB and LAN connectivity for connecting the printer to a network.
  • OPOS support and a larger 128 KB input buffer instead of 96 KB.

Decision: The Xp-C260M is the overall winner due to its higher speed, LAN connection, OPOS support, and larger input memory. The Q80B may be more suitable when broader operating-system compatibility or lower weight matters more than network connectivity and higher throughput.

What Is the Difference Between Thermal Printer Xprinter Q80B - 80mm and Thermal Printer Xprinter Xp-C260M?

Both printers use Direct Thermal technology and accept 79.5±0.5 mm thermal receipt paper with a 72 mm printing width. They also share ESC/POS emulation, a 150 km printhead life, a Partial Cut cutter rated for 1,500,000 cuts, and a DC 24V / 1A cash-drawer output.

The main differences concern speed, connectivity, compatibility, and memory. The Q80B prints at 230 mm/s, while the C260M is rated at 260/300 mm/s. The Q80B provides USB only, whereas the C260M adds LAN alongside USB. In contrast, the Q80B lists Windows, Linux, macOS, and Android support, while the C260M lists Windows only. The C260M also has a 128 KB input buffer compared with 96 KB and explicitly supports OPOS, while the Q80B OPOS field is set to zero. The Q80B is lighter at 0.8 kg compared with 1.12 kg.

The Q80B benefits users who need broader operating-system compatibility or lower weight. The C260M is better suited to users prioritizing higher speed, LAN access, and OPOS integration, giving it the overall advantage.

Frequently asked questions