Acer Predator Triton Neo 16
RTX 4070 · 110W · Core Ultra 9 185H
Head-to-head
Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 vs MSI GF65 Thin
Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 is the faster machine, averaging 28% more frames across 4 games. Whether that's the one to buy depends on the £320 price gap.
Frame rates, side by side
| Game | Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 | MSI GF65 Thin | Diff |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dota 2 | 144 | 109 | +35 |
| Final Fantasy XV | 100 | 70 | +30 |
| GTA V | 166 | 120 | +46 |
| X-Plane 11 | 89 | 62 | +27 |
1920×1080, High preset, upscaling off. Source: Notebookcheck.
Specifications
| Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 | MSI GF65 Thin | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | £2,065 | £1,745 |
| GPU | RTX 4070 | RTX 3060 |
| GPU power | 110W | 130W |
| CPU | Core Ultra 9 185H | Core i7-10750H |
| Memory | 32GB | 32GB |
| Display | 16in 3200x2000 | 15.6in 1920x1080 |
| Refresh | 165Hz | 144Hz |
| Weight | 2.032kg | 1.938kg |
| Score | 5.6 | 5.0 |
How these numbers were produced
Frame rates here are not measured by us, and we label how each one was arrived at. A figure marked measured comes from a published run on that exact machine. A figure marked representative is derived from the GPU and its power limit (TGP) and cross-referenced against published reviews - a sound estimate of what that configuration delivers, but not a measurement of that specific laptop. Unless stated otherwise, numbers are 1920x1080, High preset, upscaling off. Where a laptop ships in several power configurations we use the wattage of the exact SKU listed, because a 140W RTX 5070 and a 115W one are not the same product.
Read the full reviews
MSI GF65 Thin
RTX 3060 · 130W · Core i7-10750H