- pan.tf
- Compare
- Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4070 (2023) vs ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023)
Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4070 (2023) vs Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023)
What Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4070 (2023) does better (10) and where ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023) wins (21) — every spec side by side.
vs
6.9Graphics9.7
7.8Overall performance9.4
7.1Display9.3
8.0Memory & storage5.3
9.2Battery & portability3.6
8.8Features & cooling6.4
Dimensions
Size comparison
Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4070 (2023)ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023)
| Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4070 (2023) | ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023) | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Depth | 249.2 mm | 266 mm | −16.8 mm |
| Width | 356 mm | 355 mm | +1 mm |
| Thickness | 20.8 mm | 30 mm | −9.2 mm |
| Weight | 2 kg | 2.7 kg | −0.6 kg |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4070 (2023) better than ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023)?
- RAM (up to)64 GB vs 32 GB2×
- SSD (up to)4,096 GB vs 2,000 GB2×
- Thunderbolt or USB4Yes · ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023): No
- Weight2.05 kg vs 2.67 kg+30%
- Thickness20.8 mm vs 30 mm+44%
- Advanced OptimusYes · ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023): No
- RAM typeLPDDR5X vs DDR5
- Wi-Fi standardWi-Fi 6E vs Wi-Fi 6+8%
- RAM speed7,467 MHz vs 4,800 MHz+56%
- Fan noise (max. load)51 dB vs 56 dB+10%
Why is ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023) better than Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4070 (2023)?
- GPU compute (FP32)18.2 TFLOPS vs 45.2 TFLOPS2.5×
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light12,420 vs 26,4242.1×
- GPU power (TGP)110 W vs 175 W+59%
- Brightness400 nits vs 1,100 nits2.8×
- GPU shader cores4,608 vs 9,7282.1×
- Geekbench 6 multi-core12,581 vs 19,038+51%
- Cinebench 2024 multi-core979 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%
- Battery capacity76 Wh vs 90 Wh+18%
- 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) | 110 W | 175 W |
| Video memory | 8 GB | 16 GB |
| Video memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| GPU shader cores | 4,608 | 9,728 |
| GPU compute (FP32) | 18.2 TFLOPS | 45.2 TFLOPS |
| 3DMark Steel Nomad Light | 12,420 | 26,424 |
| Processor | ||
| Processor | Core Ultra 7 155H | Ryzen 9 7945HX |
| CPU maker | Intel | AMD |
| CPU cores | 16 | 16 |
| CPU threads | 22 | 32 |
| Max CPU clock | 4.8 GHz | 5.4 GHz |
| Processor options | Core Ultra 7 155H, Core Ultra 7 165H, Core Ultra 9 185H | Ryzen 9 7945HX |
| Geekbench 6 multi-core | 12,581 | 19,038 |
| Geekbench 6 single-core | 2,465 | 3,105 |
| Cinebench 2024 multi-core | 979 | 1,961 |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 16″ | 16″ |
| Resolution | 1920 × 1080 | 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% |
| Response time | — | 3 ms |
| DCI-P3 coverage | — | 99% |
| Pixel density | 138 ppi | 189 ppi |
| Aspect ratio | 16:10 | 16:10 |
| G-Sync / FreeSync | Yes | Yes |
| Advanced Optimus | Yes | No |
| MUX switch | Yes | Yes |
| HDR | No | Yes |
| 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 | 4,800 MHz |
| Max. supported RAM | — | 64 GB |
| RAM slots | — | 2 |
| Upgradable RAM | No | Yes |
| SSD (up to) | 4,096 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 | 76 Wh | 90 Wh |
| Power adapter | 230 W | 330 W |
| USB-C charging (Power Delivery) | Yes | Yes |
| Design & cooling | ||
| Weight | 2.05 kg | 2.67 kg |
| Thickness | 20.8 mm | 30 mm |
| Width | 356 mm | 355 mm |
| Depth | 249.2 mm | 266 mm |
| Body material | Aluminium | Aluminium |
| Colours | Silver | Black |
| Cooling fans | 2 | 2 |
| Vapor chamber cooling | No | No |
| Liquid metal (CPU) | Yes | Yes |
| Fan noise (max. load) | 51 dB | 56 dB |
| Ports & wireless | ||
| Thunderbolt / USB4 | 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 | — | 5 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 | 5.2 |
| Keyboard & camera | ||
| Backlit keyboard | Yes | Yes |
| Numeric keypad | No | Yes |
| Key travel | 1.5 mm | 1.7 mm |
| Webcam | 1,080p | 1,080p |
| IR camera (face login) | No | No |
| Fingerprint reader | — | Yes |
| Audio | ||
| Speakers | 2.0 | 6 speakers |
| Dolby Atmos | No | Yes |
Related comparisons
vs
Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4070 (2023)vsGigabyte Aorus 17 RTX 4070 (2023)8.78.3vs
Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4070 (2023)vsAcer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4050 (2024)8.76.6vs
Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4070 (2023)vsGigabyte Aorus 15X RTX 4060 (2023)8.78.7vs
Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4070 (2023)vsAsus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 RTX 4060 (2023)8.78.7vs
Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 PTN16-51 RTX 4070 (2023)vsGigabyte Aorus 17 RTX 4080 (2023)8.78.6
vs
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650 RTX 4090 (2023)vsRazer Blade 16 RTX 4060 (2023)8.99.2