Razer Blade 16 Core Ultra 9
RTX 5090 · Core Ultra 9 386H
Head-to-head
Razer Blade 16 Core Ultra 9 vs Acer Predator Triton Neo 16
Razer Blade 16 Core Ultra 9 is the faster machine, averaging 28% more frames across 6 games. Whether that's the one to buy depends on the £2,935 price gap.
Frame rates, side by side
| Game | Razer Blade 16 Core Ultra 9 | Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 | Diff |
|---|---|---|---|
| Baldur's Gate 3 | 196 | 95 | +101 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 149 | 80 | +69 |
| Dota 2 | 162 | 144 | +18 |
| Final Fantasy XV | 176 | 100 | +76 |
| GTA V | 156 | 166 | -10 |
| X-Plane 11 | 98 | 89 | +9 |
1920×1080, High preset, upscaling off. Source: Notebookcheck.
Specifications
| Razer Blade 16 Core Ultra 9 | Acer Predator Triton Neo 16 | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | £5,000 | £2,065 |
| GPU | RTX 5090 | RTX 4070 |
| GPU power | - | 110W |
| CPU | Core Ultra 9 386H | Core Ultra 9 185H |
| Memory | 32GB | 32GB |
| Display | 16in 2560x1600 | 16in 3200x2000 |
| Refresh | 240Hz | 165Hz |
| Weight | 2.124kg | 2.032kg |
| Score | 6.0 | 5.6 |
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
Acer Predator Triton Neo 16
RTX 4070 · 110W · Core Ultra 9 185H