6% cheaper ≈ $1,200
- Thunderbolt or USB4
- Weight 2.1 kg vs 2.48 kg
- Thickness 23 mm vs 26 mm
- Cinebench 2024 multi-core 760 vs 1,743
- CPU cores 8 vs 16
- pan.tf
- Gaming laptops
- HP Omen 16 RTX 5060 (2026)
- Alternatives
Alternatives to HP Omen 16 RTX 5060 (2026)
10 gaming laptops at a similar price that compete with the Omen 16 RTX 5060 (2026) — what each does better, what it gives up and how the price compares.
Alternatives to the Omen 16 RTX 5060 (2026)
7% pricier ≈ $1,350
- Weight 1.58 kg vs 2.48 kg
- Brightness 500 nits vs 400 nits
- Thickness 21 mm vs 26 mm
- Wi-Fi standard Wi-Fi 6 vs Wi-Fi 7
7% cheaper ≈ $1,200
- RAM (up to) 24 GB vs 16 GB
- Weight 2.42 kg vs 2.48 kg
- Thickness 24 mm vs 26 mm
- Panel type IPS vs OLED
- Refresh rate 165 Hz vs 240 Hz
15% pricier ≈ $1,450
- RAM (up to) 128 GB vs 16 GB
- Thunderbolt or USB4
- Battery capacity 76 Wh vs 70 Wh
- GPU power (TGP) 95 W vs 115 W
- CPU cores 8 vs 16
19% pricier ≈ $1,500
- RAM (up to) 32 GB vs 16 GB
- Thunderbolt or USB4
- Battery capacity 80 Wh vs 70 Wh
- CPU cores 8 vs 16
- Panel type IPS vs OLED
53% pricier ≈ $1,950
- RAM (up to) 96 GB vs 16 GB
- SSD (up to) 4,096 GB vs 1,000 GB
- Thunderbolt or USB4
- Panel type IPS vs OLED
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light 10,244 vs 13,371
108% pricier ≈ $2,600
- GPU compute (FP32) 26.2 TFLOPS vs 18.4 TFLOPS
- Battery capacity 80 Wh vs 70 Wh
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light 15,208 vs 13,371
- Panel type IPS vs OLED
- Response time 3 ms vs 1 ms
36% pricier ≈ $1,750
- Battery capacity 90 Wh vs 70 Wh
- Thunderbolt or USB4
- GPU compute (FP32) 26.2 TFLOPS vs 18.4 TFLOPS
- CPU cores 8 vs 16
- Panel type IPS vs OLED
38% pricier ≈ $1,750
- GPU compute (FP32) 26.2 TFLOPS vs 18.4 TFLOPS
- 3DMark Steel Nomad Light 14,978 vs 13,371
- GPU shader cores 4,608 vs 3,328
- CPU cores 8 vs 16
- Resolution class Full HD (1080p/1200p) vs QHD (1440p/1600p)
15% cheaper ≈ $1,100
- RAM (up to) 96 GB vs 16 GB
- SSD (up to) 8,000 GB vs 1,000 GB
- Battery capacity 76 Wh vs 70 Wh
- Resolution class Full HD (1080p/1200p) vs QHD (1440p/1600p)
- Refresh rate 165 Hz vs 240 Hz