Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024) vs Gigabyte Gaming A16 RTX 5070 Ti (2025)
What Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024) does better (3) and where Gaming A16 RTX 5070 Ti (2025) wins (8) — every spec side by side.
vs
2.3Memory & storage3.8
9.3Battery & portability8.6
8.4Features & cooling4.7
Dimensions
Size comparison
Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)Gaming A16 RTX 5070 Ti (2025)
| Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024) | Gaming A16 RTX 5070 Ti (2025) | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Depth | 250 mm | 263 mm | −13 mm |
| Width | 356 mm | 358 mm | −2 mm |
| Thickness | 21 mm | 23 mm | −2 mm |
| Weight | 2.1 kg | 2.2 kg | −0.1 kg |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024) better than Gaming A16 RTX 5070 Ti (2025)?
- Thunderbolt or USB4Yes · Gaming A16 RTX 5070 Ti (2025): No
- Weight2.1 kg vs 2.2 kg+5%
- Thickness21 mm vs 23 mm+10%
Why is Gaming A16 RTX 5070 Ti (2025) better than Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)?
- RAM (up to)16 GB vs 32 GB2×
- GPU shader cores2,560 vs 5,8882.3×
- Video memory6 GB vs 12 GB2×
- Resolution classHD (768p/900p) vs QHD (1440p/1600p)
- SSD (up to)512 GB vs 1,000 GB+95%
- RAM (base)16 GB vs 32 GB2×
- RAM typeDDR5 vs LPDDR5X
- SSD (base)512 GB vs 1,000 GB+95%
Specifications
Side by side
| Graphics | ||
| Graphics card | GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop | GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Laptop |
| GPU maker | NVIDIA | NVIDIA |
| Video memory | 6 GB | 12 GB |
| Video memory type | GDDR6 | — |
| GPU shader cores | 2,560 | 5,888 |
| Processor | ||
| Processor | Core Ultra 5 125H | Core 7 240H |
| CPU maker | Intel | Intel |
| CPU cores | 14 | — |
| Max CPU clock | 4.5 GHz | — |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 16″ | 16″ |
| Resolution | 1600 × 900 | 2560 × 1600 |
| Resolution class | HD (768p/900p) | QHD (1440p/1600p) |
| Refresh rate | — | 165 Hz |
| Brightness | — | 300 nits |
| Response time | — | 3 ms |
| Aspect ratio | 16:10 | 16:10 |
| Memory & storage | ||
| RAM (up to) | 16 GB | 32 GB |
| RAM (base) | 16 GB | 32 GB |
| RAM type | DDR5 | LPDDR5X |
| SSD (up to) | 512 GB | 1,000 GB |
| SSD (base) | 512 GB | 1,000 GB |
| Battery & power | ||
| Battery capacity | 76 Wh | 76 Wh |
| Power adapter | 230 W | 150 W |
| USB-C charging (Power Delivery) | — | Yes |
| Design & cooling | ||
| Weight | 2.1 kg | 2.2 kg |
| Thickness | 21 mm | 23 mm |
| Width | 356 mm | 358 mm |
| Depth | 250 mm | 263 mm |
| Colours | — | Black |
| Ports & wireless | ||
| Thunderbolt / USB4 | Thunderbolt 4 | — |
| Thunderbolt or USB4 | Yes | No |
| HDMI | HDMI 2.1 | HDMI 2.1 |
| HDMI 2.1 | Yes | Yes |
| (Mini) DisplayPort | Yes | — |
| Ethernet | — | 1 Gbit/s |
| Ethernet port | Yes | Yes |
| SD card reader | Yes | — |
| 3.5 mm audio jack | Yes | Yes |
| Wi-Fi standard | Wi-Fi 6 | Wi-Fi 6 |
| Bluetooth | 5.3 | 5.2 |
| Keyboard & camera | ||
| Webcam | 1,080p | 1,080p |
| Audio | ||
| Speakers | 2 speakers | 2 speakers |
| Dolby Atmos | — | Yes |
Related comparisons
vs
MSI Sword 17 HX RTX 4050 (2024)vsAcer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)6.56.6
vsGigabyte G5 RTX 4060 (2024)vsAcer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)6.76.6
vsLenovo LOQ 15AHP9 RTX 4060 (2024)vsAcer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)6.46.6
vsGigabyte G6X RTX 4060 (2024)vsAcer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)6.56.6
vsGigabyte G6 RTX 4060 (2024)vsAcer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)6.66.6
vsMSI Cyborg 15 AI RTX 4060 (2024)vsAcer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)6.56.6