Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023) vs HP Omen 16 RTX 4070 (2023)
What Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023) does better (14) and where Omen 16 RTX 4070 (2023) wins (10) — every spec side by side.
vs
4.2Graphics8.7
6.5Overall performance7.6
7.1Display5.6
8.0Memory & storage3.6
9.2Battery & portability7.7
8.8Features & cooling5.4
Dimensions
Size comparison
Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023)Omen 16 RTX 4070 (2023)
| Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023) | Omen 16 RTX 4070 (2023) | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Depth | 249.2 mm | 259 mm | −9.8 mm |
| Width | 356 mm | 369 mm | −13 mm |
| Thickness | 20.8 mm | 24 mm | −3.2 mm |
| Weight | 2 kg | 2.4 kg | −0.3 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 Omen 16 RTX 4070 (2023)?
- RAM (up to)64 GB vs 32 GB2×
- SSD (up to)4,096 GB vs 1,000 GB4.1×
- CPU cores16 vs 82×
- Thunderbolt or USB4Yes · Omen 16 RTX 4070 (2023): No
- Brightness400 nits vs 250 nits+60%
- Weight2.05 kg vs 2.36 kg+15%
- Refresh rate165 Hz vs 144 Hz+15%
- RAM typeLPDDR5X vs DDR5
- Liquid metal (CPU)Yes · Omen 16 RTX 4070 (2023): No
- Thickness20.8 mm vs 24 mm+15%
- Wi-Fi standardWi-Fi 6E vs Wi-Fi 6+8%
- RAM speed7,467 MHz vs 5,600 MHz+33%
Why is Omen 16 RTX 4070 (2023) better than Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023)?
- GPU compute (FP32)12.1 TFLOPS vs 21.8 TFLOPS+80%
- Video memory6 GB vs 32 GB5.3×
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light7,896 vs 13,065+65%
- GPU power (TGP)110 W vs 145 W+32%
- Resolution classFull HD (1080p/1200p) vs QHD (1440p/1600p)
- GPU shader cores2,560 vs 4,608+80%
- Battery capacity76 Wh vs 83 Wh+9%
- RAM (base)16 GB vs 32 GB2×
- Upgradable RAMNo · Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023): Yes
- SSD (base)512 GB vs 1,000 GB+95%
Specifications
Side by side
| Graphics | ||
| Graphics card | GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop | GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop |
| GPU maker | NVIDIA | NVIDIA |
| GPU power (TGP) | 110 W | 145 W |
| Video memory | 6 GB | 32 GB |
| Video memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| GPU shader cores | 2,560 | 4,608 |
| GPU compute (FP32) | 12.1 TFLOPS | 21.8 TFLOPS |
| 3DMark Steel Nomad Light | 7,896 | 13,065 |
| Processor | ||
| Processor | Core Ultra 7 155H | Core i7-13700HX |
| CPU maker | Intel | Intel |
| CPU cores | 16 | 8 |
| CPU threads | 22 | — |
| Max CPU clock | 4.8 GHz | 4.6 GHz |
| Processor options | Core Ultra 7 155H, Core Ultra 7 165H, Core Ultra 9 185H | Core i5-13420H, Core i5-13500H, Ryzen 5 7640HS, Core i7-13620H, Core i7-13700HX, Ryzen 7 7840HS, Core i9-13900HX, Ryzen 9 7940HS |
| Geekbench 6 multi-core | 12,581 | — |
| Geekbench 6 single-core | 2,465 | — |
| Cinebench 2024 multi-core | 979 | — |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 16″ | 16.1″ |
| Resolution | 1920 × 1080 | 2560 × 1600 |
| Resolution class | Full HD (1080p/1200p) | QHD (1440p/1600p) |
| Refresh rate | 165 Hz | 144 Hz |
| Panel type | IPS | IPS |
| Brightness | 400 nits | 250 nits |
| Response time | — | 7 ms |
| Pixel density | 138 ppi | 137 ppi |
| Aspect ratio | 16:10 | 16:9 |
| G-Sync / FreeSync | Yes | Yes |
| Advanced Optimus | Yes | Yes |
| MUX switch | Yes | Yes |
| HDR | No | No |
| Touchscreen | No | No |
| Memory & storage | ||
| RAM (up to) | 64 GB | 32 GB |
| RAM (base) | 16 GB | 32 GB |
| RAM type | LPDDR5X | DDR5 |
| RAM speed | 7,467 MHz | 5,600 MHz |
| Max. supported RAM | — | 32 GB |
| RAM slots | — | 2 |
| Upgradable RAM | No | Yes |
| SSD (up to) | 4,096 GB | 1,000 GB |
| SSD (base) | 512 GB | 1,000 GB |
| M.2 SSD slots | 2 | 2 |
| SSD interface | PCIe 4.0 x4 | PCIe 4.0 x4 |
| Battery & power | ||
| Battery capacity | 76 Wh | 83 Wh |
| Power adapter | 230 W | 230 W |
| USB-C charging (Power Delivery) | Yes | Yes |
| Design & cooling | ||
| Weight | 2.05 kg | 2.36 kg |
| Thickness | 20.8 mm | 24 mm |
| Width | 356 mm | 369 mm |
| Depth | 249.2 mm | 259 mm |
| Body material | Aluminium | Aluminium, Plastic |
| Colours | Silver | Black |
| Cooling fans | 2 | 2 |
| Vapor chamber cooling | No | No |
| Liquid metal (CPU) | Yes | No |
| Fan noise (max. load) | 51 dB | 58.3 dB |
| Ports & wireless | ||
| Thunderbolt / USB4 | Thunderbolt 4 | Thunderbolt 4 |
| Thunderbolt or USB4 | Yes | No |
| 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 | — | 1 Gbit/s |
| Ethernet port | No | Yes |
| SD card reader | Yes | Yes |
| 3.5 mm audio jack | Yes | Yes |
| Wi-Fi standard | Wi-Fi 6E | Wi-Fi 6 |
| Bluetooth | 5.3 | 5.3 |
| Keyboard & camera | ||
| Backlit keyboard | Yes | Yes |
| Numeric keypad | No | No |
| Key travel | 1.5 mm | — |
| Webcam | 1,080p | 1,080p |
| IR camera (face login) | No | — |
| Fingerprint reader | — | No |
| Audio | ||
| Speakers | 2.0 | 2 speakers |
| Dolby Atmos | No | No |
Related comparisons
vs
Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023)vsAsus ROG Strix G16 G614 RTX 4070 (2023)7.97.7vs
Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023)vsGigabyte Aero 16 OLED BSF RTX 4070 (2023)7.97.7vs
Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023)vsAsus TUF Gaming F15 TUF507 RTX 4070 (2023)7.97.7vs
Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2023)vsAcer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)7.96.6
vs
HP Omen 16 RTX 4070 (2023)vsHP Omen 16 RTX 2050 (2024)7.65.3vs
HP Omen 16 RTX 4070 (2023)vsHP Omen 16 RTX 4060 (2024)7.66.7