- pan.tf
- Compare
- Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023) vs VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023)
Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023) vs Asus VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023)
What Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023) does better (11) and where VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023) wins (20) — every spec side by side.
vs
4.2Graphics7.5
6.6Overall performance8.9
7.0Display9.1
8.1Memory & storage6.9
9.2Battery & portability9.6
8.8Features & cooling8.9
Dimensions
Size comparison
Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023)VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023)
| Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023) | VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023) | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Depth | 249.2 mm | 249 mm | +0.2 mm |
| Width | 356 mm | 355 mm | +1 mm |
| Thickness | 20.8 mm | 22.9 mm | −2.1 mm |
| Weight | 2 kg | 2 kg | = |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023) better than VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023)?
- SSD (up to)4,096 GB vs 2,048 GB2×
- G-Sync / FreeSyncYes · VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023): No
- Advanced OptimusYes · VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023): No
- RAM typeLPDDR5X vs DDR5
- M.2 SSD slots2 vs 12×
- Liquid metal (CPU)Yes · VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023): No
- Brightness400 nits vs 350 nits+14%
- Thickness20.8 mm vs 22.9 mm+10%
- RAM speed7,467 MHz vs 4,800 MHz+56%
- Fan noise (max. load)51 dB vs 56.9 dB+12%
- Key travel1.5 mm vs 1.4 mm+7%
Why is VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023) better than Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023)?
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light7,896 vs 13,926+76%
- GPU compute (FP32)12.1 TFLOPS vs 20 TFLOPS+65%
- Cinebench 2024 multi-core979 vs 2,1002.1×
- Resolution classFull HD (1080p/1200p) vs QHD (1440p/1600p)
- Panel typeIPS vs OLED
- Battery capacity76 Wh vs 90 Wh+18%
- Geekbench 6 multi-core12,581 vs 17,875+42%
- GPU power (TGP)110 W vs 125 W+14%
- GPU shader cores2,560 vs 4,608+80%
- CPU cores16 vs 24+50%
- Weight2.05 kg vs 2 kg+2%
- Video memory6 GB vs 8 GB+33%
Specifications
Side by side
| Graphics | ||
| Graphics card | GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop | GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop |
| GPU maker | NVIDIA | NVIDIA |
| GPU power (TGP) | 110 W | 125 W |
| Video memory | 6 GB | 8 GB |
| Video memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| GPU shader cores | 2,560 | 4,608 |
| GPU compute (FP32) | 12.1 TFLOPS | 20 TFLOPS |
| 3DMark Steel Nomad Light | 7,896 | 13,926 |
| Processor | ||
| Processor | Core Ultra 7 155H | Core i9-13980HX |
| CPU maker | Intel | Intel |
| CPU cores | 16 | 24 |
| CPU threads | 22 | 32 |
| Max CPU clock | 4.8 GHz | 5.6 GHz |
| Processor options | Core Ultra 7 155H, Core Ultra 7 165H, Core Ultra 9 185H | Core i9-13980HX |
| Geekbench 6 multi-core | 12,581 | 17,875 |
| Geekbench 6 single-core | 2,465 | 2,823 |
| Cinebench 2024 multi-core | 979 | 2,100 |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 16″ | 16″ |
| Resolution | 1920 × 1080 | 2560 × 1600 |
| Resolution class | Full HD (1080p/1200p) | QHD (1440p/1600p) |
| Refresh rate | 165 Hz | 165 Hz |
| Panel type | IPS | OLED |
| Brightness | 400 nits | 350 nits |
| sRGB coverage | — | 100% |
| Response time | — | 1 ms |
| Pixel density | 138 ppi | 189 ppi |
| Aspect ratio | 16:10 | 16:10 |
| G-Sync / FreeSync | Yes | No |
| Advanced Optimus | Yes | No |
| MUX switch | Yes | Yes |
| HDR | No | Yes |
| Touchscreen | No | No |
| Memory & storage | ||
| RAM (up to) | 64 GB | 64 GB |
| RAM (base) | 16 GB | 16 GB |
| RAM type | LPDDR5X | DDR5 |
| RAM speed | 7,467 MHz | 4,800 MHz |
| Max. supported RAM | — | 64 GB |
| RAM slots | — | 2 |
| Upgradable RAM | No | Yes |
| SSD (up to) | 4,096 GB | 2,048 GB |
| SSD (base) | 512 GB | 512 GB |
| M.2 SSD slots | 2 | 1 |
| SSD interface | PCIe 4.0 x4 | PCIe 4.0 x4 |
| Battery & power | ||
| Battery capacity | 76 Wh | 90 Wh |
| Power adapter | 230 W | 240 W |
| USB-C charging (Power Delivery) | Yes | Yes |
| Design & cooling | ||
| Weight | 2.05 kg | 2 kg |
| Thickness | 20.8 mm | 22.9 mm |
| Width | 356 mm | 355 mm |
| Depth | 249.2 mm | 249 mm |
| Body material | Aluminium | Plastic |
| Colours | Silver | Black, Silver |
| Cooling fans | 2 | 3 |
| Vapor chamber cooling | No | No |
| Liquid metal (CPU) | Yes | No |
| Fan noise (max. load) | 51 dB | 56.9 dB |
| Ports & wireless | ||
| Thunderbolt / USB4 | Thunderbolt 4 | Thunderbolt 4 |
| Thunderbolt or USB4 | Yes | Yes |
| USB-C ports | 2 | 2 |
| USB-A ports | 2 | 2 |
| HDMI | HDMI 2.1 | HDMI 2.1 |
| HDMI 2.1 | Yes | Yes |
| (Mini) DisplayPort | No | No |
| Ethernet port | No | Yes |
| SD card reader | Yes | Yes |
| 3.5 mm audio jack | Yes | Yes |
| Wi-Fi standard | Wi-Fi 6E | Wi-Fi 6E |
| Bluetooth | 5.3 | 5.3 |
| Keyboard & camera | ||
| Backlit keyboard | Yes | Yes |
| Numeric keypad | No | Yes |
| Key travel | 1.5 mm | 1.4 mm |
| Webcam | 1,080p | 1,080p |
| IR camera (face login) | No | No |
| Fingerprint reader | — | Yes |
| Audio | ||
| Speakers | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Dolby Atmos | No | Yes |
Related comparisons
vs
Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604 RTX 4080 (2023)vsAsus VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023)9.59.4vs
Asus VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023)vsAlienware m16 RTX 4080 (2023)9.49.3vs
Asus VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023)vsLenovo Legion Pro 7 Gen 8 AMD RTX 4090 (2023)9.49.3vs
Asus VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023)vsLenovo Legion Pro 7i Gen 8 Intel RTX 4080 (2023)9.49.4vsAsus VivoBook Pro 16X 3D OLED K6604 RTX 4070 (2023)vsAlienware m16 RTX 4090 (2023)9.49.4