- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light 14,628 vs 7,983
- Brightness 1,000 nits vs 300 nits
- GPU compute (FP32) 21.8 TFLOPS vs 13 TFLOPS
- SSD (up to) 4,096 GB vs 8,192 GB
- Response time 38 ms vs 3 ms
Alternatives to Alienware m16 R2 RTX 4050 (2024)
10 gaming laptops at a similar price that compete with the m16 R2 RTX 4050 (2024) — what each does better, what it gives up and how the price compares.
Alternatives to the m16 R2 RTX 4050 (2024)
- Brightness 1,000 nits vs 300 nits
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light 12,350 vs 7,983
- Panel type Mini-LED vs IPS
- SSD (up to) 4,096 GB vs 8,192 GB
- Response time 38 ms vs 3 ms
≈ $4,100
- GPU compute (FP32) 42 TFLOPS vs 13 TFLOPS
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light 26,935 vs 7,983
- Video memory 16 GB vs 6 GB
- SSD (up to) 2,000 GB vs 8,192 GB
- Weight 2.72 kg vs 2.6 kg
≈ $4,900
- GPU compute (FP32) 51.4 TFLOPS vs 13 TFLOPS
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light 29,079 vs 7,983
- Video memory 24 GB vs 6 GB
- SSD (up to) 1,000 GB vs 8,192 GB
- Weight 2.8 kg vs 2.6 kg
≈ $4,300
- GPU compute (FP32) 51.4 TFLOPS vs 13 TFLOPS
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light 31,120 vs 7,983
- Video memory 24 GB vs 6 GB
- SSD (up to) 1,000 GB vs 8,192 GB
- Battery capacity 83 Wh vs 90 Wh
- GPU compute (FP32) 45.2 TFLOPS vs 13 TFLOPS
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light 24,991 vs 7,983
- Video memory 16 GB vs 6 GB
- Thickness 30.4 mm vs 23.5 mm
- SD card reader
- GPU compute (FP32) 37.6 TFLOPS vs 13 TFLOPS
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light 21,370 vs 7,983
- GPU shader cores 7,424 vs 2,560
- Thickness 30.4 mm vs 23.5 mm
- SD card reader
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light 14,124 vs 7,983
- GPU compute (FP32) 21.8 TFLOPS vs 13 TFLOPS
- Battery capacity 99 Wh vs 90 Wh
- SSD (up to) 4,096 GB vs 8,192 GB
- Weight 2.8 kg vs 2.6 kg
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light 11,400 vs 7,983
- Battery capacity 99 Wh vs 90 Wh
- GPU power (TGP) 140 W vs 135 W
- SSD (up to) 4,096 GB vs 8,192 GB
- Weight 2.8 kg vs 2.6 kg
- GPU compute (FP32) 37.6 TFLOPS vs 13 TFLOPS
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light 22,154 vs 7,983
- GPU shader cores 7,424 vs 2,560
- SSD (up to) 4,096 GB vs 8,192 GB
- Response time 38 ms vs 3 ms