- pan.tf
- Compare
- Predator Helios Neo 16 PHN16-71 RTX 4070 (2023) vs ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023)
Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 PHN16-71 RTX 4070 (2023) vs Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023)
What Predator Helios Neo 16 PHN16-71 RTX 4070 (2023) does better (5) and where ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023) wins (24) — every spec side by side.
vs
8.0Graphics9.7
7.7Overall performance9.4
7.6Display9.3
4.9Memory & storage5.3
3.4Battery & portability3.6
6.2Features & cooling6.4
Dimensions
Size comparison
Predator Helios Neo 16 PHN16-71 RTX 4070 (2023)ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023)
| Predator Helios Neo 16 PHN16-71 RTX 4070 (2023) | ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023) | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Depth | 279.9 mm | 266 mm | +13.9 mm |
| Width | 360.1 mm | 355 mm | +5.1 mm |
| Thickness | 28.2 mm | 30 mm | −1.8 mm |
| Weight | 2.8 kg | 2.7 kg | +0.1 kg |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is Predator Helios Neo 16 PHN16-71 RTX 4070 (2023) better than ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023)?
- Thunderbolt or USB4Yes · ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023): No
- Thickness28.2 mm vs 30 mm+6%
- SSD (up to)2,048 GB vs 2,000 GB+2%
- USB-A ports3 vs 2+50%
- Key travel1.8 mm vs 1.7 mm+6%
Why is ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023) better than Predator Helios Neo 16 PHN16-71 RTX 4070 (2023)?
- GPU compute (FP32)21.8 TFLOPS vs 45.2 TFLOPS2.1×
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light13,600 vs 26,424+94%
- Brightness400 nits vs 1,100 nits2.8×
- Geekbench 6 multi-core11,540 vs 19,038+65%
- GPU shader cores4,608 vs 9,7282.1×
- GPU power (TGP)140 W vs 175 W+25%
- Cinebench 2024 multi-core970 vs 1,9612×
- Video memory8 GB vs 16 GB2×
- Resolution classFull HD (1080p/1200p) vs QHD (1440p/1600p)
- Refresh rate165 Hz vs 240 Hz+45%
- RAM (base)8 GB vs 32 GB4×
- SSD (base)512 GB vs 2,000 GB3.9×
Specifications
Side by side
| Graphics | ||
| Graphics card | GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop | GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop |
| GPU maker | NVIDIA | NVIDIA |
| GPU power (TGP) | 140 W | 175 W |
| Video memory | 8 GB | 16 GB |
| Video memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| GPU shader cores | 4,608 | 9,728 |
| GPU compute (FP32) | 21.8 TFLOPS | 45.2 TFLOPS |
| 3DMark Steel Nomad Light | 13,600 | 26,424 |
| Processor | ||
| Processor | Core i5-13500HX | Ryzen 9 7945HX |
| CPU maker | Intel | AMD |
| CPU cores | 14 | 16 |
| CPU threads | 20 | 32 |
| Max CPU clock | 4.7 GHz | 5.4 GHz |
| Processor options | Core i5-13500HX, Core i7-13700HX, Core i9-13900HX | Ryzen 9 7945HX |
| Geekbench 6 multi-core | 11,540 | 19,038 |
| Geekbench 6 single-core | 2,522 | 3,105 |
| Cinebench 2024 multi-core | 970 | 1,961 |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 16″ | 16″ |
| Resolution | 1920 × 1200 | 2560 × 1600 |
| Resolution class | Full HD (1080p/1200p) | QHD (1440p/1600p) |
| Refresh rate | 165 Hz | 240 Hz |
| Panel type | IPS | IPS |
| Brightness | 400 nits | 1,100 nits |
| sRGB coverage | 100% | 100% |
| Response time | 4 ms | 3 ms |
| DCI-P3 coverage | 80% | 99% |
| Pixel density | 142 ppi | 189 ppi |
| Aspect ratio | 16:10 | 16:10 |
| G-Sync / FreeSync | Yes | Yes |
| Advanced Optimus | No | No |
| MUX switch | Yes | Yes |
| HDR | No | Yes |
| Touchscreen | No | No |
| Memory & storage | ||
| RAM (up to) | 32 GB | 32 GB |
| RAM (base) | 8 GB | 32 GB |
| RAM type | DDR5 | DDR5 |
| RAM speed | 4,800 MHz | 4,800 MHz |
| Max. supported RAM | 32 GB | 64 GB |
| RAM slots | 2 | 2 |
| Upgradable RAM | Yes | Yes |
| SSD (up to) | 2,048 GB | 2,000 GB |
| SSD (base) | 512 GB | 2,000 GB |
| M.2 SSD slots | 2 | 2 |
| SSD interface | PCIe 4.0 x4 | PCIe 4.0 x4 |
| Battery & power | ||
| Battery capacity | 90 Wh | 90 Wh |
| Power adapter | 330 W | 330 W |
| USB-C charging (Power Delivery) | Yes | Yes |
| Design & cooling | ||
| Weight | 2.8 kg | 2.67 kg |
| Thickness | 28.2 mm | 30 mm |
| Width | 360.1 mm | 355 mm |
| Depth | 279.9 mm | 266 mm |
| Body material | Plastic | Aluminium |
| Colours | Black, Gray | Black |
| Cooling fans | 2 | 2 |
| Vapor chamber cooling | No | No |
| Liquid metal (CPU) | Yes | Yes |
| Fan noise (max. load) | 62.7 dB | 56 dB |
| Ports & wireless | ||
| Thunderbolt / USB4 | Thunderbolt 4 | — |
| Thunderbolt or USB4 | Yes | No |
| USB-C ports | 2 | 2 |
| USB-A ports | 3 | 2 |
| HDMI | HDMI 2.1 | HDMI 2.1 |
| HDMI 2.1 | Yes | Yes |
| (Mini) DisplayPort | No | No |
| Ethernet | — | 5 Gbit/s |
| Ethernet port | Yes | Yes |
| SD card reader | Yes | Yes |
| 3.5 mm audio jack | Yes | Yes |
| Wi-Fi standard | Wi-Fi 6 | Wi-Fi 6 |
| Bluetooth | 5.2 | 5.2 |
| Keyboard & camera | ||
| Backlit keyboard | Yes | Yes |
| Numeric keypad | Yes | Yes |
| Key travel | 1.8 mm | 1.7 mm |
| Webcam | 1,080p | 1,080p |
| IR camera (face login) | No | No |
| Fingerprint reader | No | Yes |
| Audio | ||
| Speakers | 2.0 | 6 speakers |
| Dolby Atmos | No | Yes |
Related comparisons
vs
Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 PHN16-71 RTX 4070 (2023)vsAsus ROG Strix G16 G614 RTX 4070 (2023)7.67.7vs
Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 PHN16-71 RTX 4070 (2023)vsGigabyte Aero 16 OLED BSF RTX 4070 (2023)7.67.7vs
Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 PHN16-71 RTX 4070 (2023)vsHP Omen 16 RTX 4070 (2023)7.67.6vs
Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 PHN16-71 RTX 4070 (2023)vsAsus TUF Gaming F15 TUF507 RTX 4070 (2023)7.67.7
vsAcer Predator Helios Neo 14 PHN14-51 RTX 4070 (2024)vsAcer Predator Helios Neo 16 PHN16-71 RTX 4070 (2023)8.27.6vs
Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 PHN16-71 RTX 4070 (2023)vsAcer Predator Helios Neo 16 PHN16-72 RTX 4050 (2024)7.67.4