Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024) vs XMG Pro 16 RTX 5060 (2025)
What Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024) does better (4) and where Pro 16 RTX 5060 (2025) wins (9) — every spec side by side.
vs
2.3Memory & storage3.5
9.3Battery & portability8.0
8.4Features & cooling8.0
Dimensions
Size comparison
Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)Pro 16 RTX 5060 (2025)
| Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024) | Pro 16 RTX 5060 (2025) | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Depth | 250 mm | 253 mm | −3 mm |
| Width | 356 mm | 357 mm | −1 mm |
| Thickness | 21 mm | 27 mm | −6 mm |
| Weight | 2.1 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 (2024) better than Pro 16 RTX 5060 (2025)?
- Thunderbolt or USB4Yes · Pro 16 RTX 5060 (2025): No
- Weight2.1 kg vs 2.4 kg+14%
- Thickness21 mm vs 27 mm+29%
- Bluetooth5.3 vs 5+6%
Why is Pro 16 RTX 5060 (2025) better than Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)?
- RAM (up to)16 GB vs 32 GB2×
- SSD (up to)512 GB vs 2,000 GB3.9×
- Battery capacity76 Wh vs 100 Wh+31%
- Resolution classHD (768p/900p) vs QHD (1440p/1600p)
- CPU cores14 vs 24+71%
- Video memory6 GB vs 8 GB+33%
- GPU shader cores2,560 vs 3,328+30%
- SSD (base)512 GB vs 1,000 GB+95%
- Max CPU clock4.5 GHz vs 5.6 GHz+24%
Specifications
Side by side
| Graphics | ||
| Graphics card | GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop | GeForce RTX 5060 Laptop |
| GPU maker | NVIDIA | NVIDIA |
| Video memory | 6 GB | 8 GB |
| Video memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR7 |
| GPU shader cores | 2,560 | 3,328 |
| Processor | ||
| Processor | Core Ultra 5 125H | Core i9-14900HX |
| CPU maker | Intel | Intel |
| CPU cores | 14 | 24 |
| Max CPU clock | 4.5 GHz | 5.6 GHz |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 16″ | 16″ |
| Resolution | 1600 × 900 | 2560 × 1600 |
| Resolution class | HD (768p/900p) | QHD (1440p/1600p) |
| Panel type | — | IPS |
| Brightness | — | 500 nits |
| Aspect ratio | 16:10 | 16:10 |
| Memory & storage | ||
| RAM (up to) | 16 GB | 32 GB |
| RAM (base) | 16 GB | 16 GB |
| RAM type | DDR5 | — |
| SSD (up to) | 512 GB | 2,000 GB |
| SSD (base) | 512 GB | 1,000 GB |
| Battery & power | ||
| Battery capacity | 76 Wh | 100 Wh |
| Power adapter | 230 W | 240 W |
| USB-C charging (Power Delivery) | — | Yes |
| Design & cooling | ||
| Weight | 2.1 kg | 2.4 kg |
| Thickness | 21 mm | 27 mm |
| Width | 356 mm | 357 mm |
| Depth | 250 mm | 253 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 | Yes |
| 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 | — |
| Bluetooth | 5.3 | 5 |
| Keyboard & camera | ||
| Webcam | 1,080p | 1,080p |
| Audio | ||
| Speakers | 2 speakers | 2 speakers |
Related comparisons
vs
Gigabyte G5 RTX 4050 (2024)vsAcer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)6.46.6
vsMSI Sword 16 HX RTX 4050 (2024)vsAcer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)6.86.6vsGigabyte G5 RTX 4060 (2024)vsAcer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)6.76.6
vsMSI Cyborg 15 AI RTX 4060 (2024)vsAcer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)6.56.6
vsMSI Katana A15 AI RTX 4060 (2024)vsAcer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)6.56.6
vsLenovo LOQ 15AHP9 RTX 4060 (2024)vsAcer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)6.46.6