Acer Predator Triton 500 SE PT516-52s-70KX review

Frame rates

1920×1080, High preset, upscaling off.

Measured on this machine. Source: Notebookcheck, 2022-06-11.

In use

The short version

The Acer Predator Triton 500 SE PT516-52s-70KX is a powerful but difficult-to-recommend gaming laptop at its listed UK price of £2,469. Its Core i7-12700H and RTX 3080 Ti combination produces strong 1080p High-preset results in Notebookcheck’s measurements, with a five-game scoring-suite average of 145fps. That is enough performance to make demanding games feel properly fast, and enough to make the 240Hz IPS display meaningful in lighter or better-optimised titles.

But the machine’s appeal is weakened by the mismatch between its price, its 2560x1600 screen, and the benchmark data available. The figures were recorded at 1920x1080 on the High preset with upscaling disabled. They show what the laptop can do in a common benchmark configuration, but they do not prove that the RTX 3080 Ti can maintain similarly high frame rates at the display’s native 2560x1600 resolution. That distinction matters. A 240Hz panel is a serious specification, yet only some of the measured games are already close enough to that refresh rate at 1080p to suggest that the panel will be fully exploited without compromises.

The fundamental problem is not that the Triton 500 SE is slow. It plainly is not. F1 2021 reaches 246fps, Strange Brigade reaches 189fps, The Witcher 3 reaches 187fps and GTA V reaches 176fps. Those are excellent figures. The problem is that the results fall away sharply in more demanding or differently limited games: Final Fantasy XV records 104fps and X-Plane 11 records 103fps. The broad spread tells you that this is not a laptop whose RTX 3080 Ti label guarantees a similar result in every game. It is fast when the game and benchmark configuration allow it to be fast, but the name on the GPU should not be mistaken for a promise of 240fps-class performance across the board.

There is also an important missing detail. The supplied specification identifies the GPU as an RTX 3080 Ti, but does not confirm its GPU power limit. That means there is no basis for stating whether Acer configured this particular RTX 3080 Ti for a lower, middle or higher power target, or for directly explaining its results through a stated wattage figure. The rival list demonstrates why that detail would matter: the MSI Raider GE77 HX is identified as using an RTX 3080 Ti at 175W and averages 25fps ahead across five shared games. That gap is real in the supplied comparison data, but without a confirmed power figure for the Acer, it would be speculation to assign a precise cause to it.

The best buyer is someone who specifically wants a 16in, 2560x1600, 240Hz IPS laptop with strong measured 1080p gaming performance and accepts that the premium is being paid for the complete specification rather than for exceptional value. It may also suit a buyer who values the relatively manageable 2.3kg weight more than the maximum performance available from a much larger machine.

Most buyers shopping primarily for frames per pound should be more cautious. The benchmark numbers are good, but the listed price is very high, and the comparison set includes a 175W RTX 3080 Ti machine that is materially faster in the shared games. The Triton 500 SE is a premium gaming laptop with capable results, not an obvious bargain or a machine whose specification alone settles the buying decision.

Performance

What the measured figures actually show

Notebookcheck’s results were recorded at 1920x1080, High preset, with upscaling off. That is an important starting point because it makes the figures directly comparable within the supplied data, while avoiding the ambiguity that comes from different resolutions, quality settings or upscaling modes. The results are also not a claim about every game, every setting or the laptop’s native 2560x1600 display resolution. They are a defined set of measurements from which it is possible to judge the machine’s gaming character.

Across the five scoring-suite games, the Acer averages 145fps. That is a strong average and indicates that the laptop has no difficulty delivering high-refresh-rate gameplay in a broad group of older, lighter or better-scaling titles at the stated 1080p High configuration. But an average is only the beginning of the story. It can be useful as a general indication of gaming speed, yet it cannot tell a buyer whether their own games will behave more like F1 2021 at 246fps or more like X-Plane 11 at 103fps.

The individual results make that spread clear. F1 2021 is the standout at 246fps, putting it above the screen’s 240Hz refresh rate in this benchmark configuration. In that game, the display’s refresh ceiling rather than raw rendering speed becomes the practical limit. It is the clearest example in the data of the Triton 500 SE being able to feed the panel at its full refresh rate.

Strange Brigade follows at 189fps. That is not enough to match 240Hz, but it is still a very high result. It leaves considerable room for responsive play and makes the high-refresh panel more meaningful than it would be on a machine producing conventional sixty-frame-per-second-class results. The difference between 189fps and 240fps should not be dismissed, though. The panel can refresh more often than the benchmark result supplies new frames, so buyers should not interpret the presence of a 240Hz screen as proof that every game runs at 240fps.

The Witcher 3 records 187fps, almost level with Strange Brigade. Again, this is a strong result that should provide fast, smooth play at the measured settings, but it remains below the screen’s maximum refresh rate. GTA V reaches 176fps, another result comfortably into high-refresh territory without actually reaching the panel’s ceiling. Dota 2 reaches 151fps, which is still well above the kind of frame rate many buyers would regard as merely adequate, yet it is meaningfully below the fastest results in the set.

At the lower end of the listed results, Final Fantasy XV reaches 104fps and X-Plane 11 reaches 103fps. These are not poor figures. Both remain above 100fps at the measured setting, which is a solid outcome for demanding gaming. But they show why it would be wrong to buy this laptop on the assumption that its RTX 3080 Ti automatically means 200fps-plus performance. The difference from F1 2021’s 246fps is substantial. The same machine, same stated benchmark resolution and same stated preset can produce dramatically different results depending on the game.

The benchmark spread matters more than the headline GPU name

The most useful way to read this laptop’s results is as a range rather than as a single performance rating. On one side are F1 2021, Strange Brigade, The Witcher 3 and GTA V, where the Acer produces 176fps or more. On the other are Final Fantasy XV and X-Plane 11, where it produces just over 100fps. Dota 2 sits between those groups at 151fps. This is a wide enough spread to affect buying advice.

A buyer whose regular games resemble the faster end of the results should expect the Triton 500 SE to make practical use of its high-refresh display at 1080p High settings. They may not get 240fps in every title, but they are starting from a level of performance that supports a visibly responsive experience. A buyer focused on titles that behave more like Final Fantasy XV or X-Plane 11 should take a different lesson. The laptop is still capable, but its 240Hz screen is less likely to be the limiting factor. The game’s own performance characteristics will be more important than the panel’s maximum refresh rate.

The figures also underline why averages must be treated carefully. A 145fps five-game average sounds close enough to a 144Hz-class target to be reassuring, and it is certainly strong as a broad result. Yet the laptop does not produce a uniform 145fps in each game. It ranges from 103fps to 246fps in the supplied measurements. For a buyer choosing between a high-refresh screen and raw performance, that variation is more informative than the mean alone.

This does not mean the average is misleading. It simply answers a different question. The 145fps figure tells us that, across the scoring suite, the Acer is capable of high overall performance at the stated settings. The individual game figures tell us where that performance lands in practice. Both are needed. A machine that averages well through a handful of very high results can still fall short of its display refresh rate in demanding games, and that is exactly what this data shows.

It is also worth keeping the test configuration in view. These are 1080p High-preset figures with upscaling off. The Triton 500 SE’s screen is 2560x1600, not 1920x1080. There is no native-resolution benchmark data in the supplied sheet, so there is no defensible way to turn the 1080p frame rates into claimed 2560x1600 frame rates. Any precise prediction would be invented, and that is not useful to a buyer spending this much money.

The sensible conclusion is straightforward. At 1080p High settings, this Acer is fast enough to make high-refresh gaming credible in the measured games. At its native screen resolution, it will require a game-by-game and setting-by-setting approach because the supplied figures do not establish the outcome. Buyers who insist on running every title at 2560x1600, at high settings and near 240fps should not assume that this machine has demonstrated that ability. It has not, at least not in the benchmark data provided here.

The unanswered GPU power-limit question

The RTX 3080 Ti badge is useful only up to a point. In gaming laptops, the GPU name does not by itself identify every aspect of how a particular machine is configured. The supplied sheet gives no confirmed GPU power limit for the Predator Triton 500 SE PT516-52s-70KX. It would therefore be wrong to attach a wattage number to this Acer, to describe it as a particular power class, or to claim that a specific power target explains its performance.

That missing figure matters especially because the comparison machines include different GPU classes and explicit power information for some of them. The Razer Blade 15 Advanced is listed with an RTX 3080 at 105W. The MSI Prestige 15 is listed with an RTX 3050 Ti at 105W. The MSI Raider GE77 HX is listed with an RTX 3080 Ti at 175W. Those are meaningful pieces of context for those rivals, but they do not fill in the blank for the Acer.

What can be said from the shared-game comparisons is that the Predator Triton 500 SE does not automatically dominate all lower-named or lower-specified rivals, and it does not match the listed 175W RTX 3080 Ti Raider in the shared sample. It is level with the HP Omen 16-b0085ng, despite that machine being listed with an RTX 3070, and level with the Razer Blade 15 Advanced despite the Razer being listed with an RTX 3080 at 105W. Those results demonstrate that laptop gaming performance cannot be read from the GPU model name alone.

They also reinforce the value of measured results. A buyer looking only at the Acer’s RTX 3080 Ti label might expect a clear lead over an RTX 3070 laptop and an RTX 3080 laptop. The supplied shared-game data does not show that. Against the HP Omen 16-b0085ng, the average difference across four shared games is +0fps. Against the Razer Blade 15 Advanced, the average difference across five shared games is -0fps. In both cases, the useful reading is not that the Acer is secretly identical in all respects. It is that the shared 1080p sample produced no average separation.

The rival notes explain part of why near-zero differences can be real. At 1080p, lighter titles in the shared set can become CPU-bound and compress genuine GPU gaps. That means a faster GPU configuration may not show its full theoretical advantage in every shared game at this resolution. The result is not invalid. It is simply specific to the benchmark conditions. The right response is to recognise the limitation, not to pretend the GPU name settles the matter.

How close is it to the screen’s refresh rate?

The Acer has a 240Hz display. In the supplied 1080p High results, only F1 2021 reaches that refresh rate, at 246fps. That is a clear full-refresh result, at least in the stated benchmark configuration. Strange Brigade at 189fps, The Witcher 3 at 187fps and GTA V at 176fps are all below 240fps but still high enough to benefit substantially from a fast panel.

Dota 2 at 151fps is more distant from the refresh ceiling, though still far above the level where a high-refresh screen becomes irrelevant. Final Fantasy XV at 104fps and X-Plane 11 at 103fps show the other side of the machine’s behaviour. In those games, the display is capable of refreshing more often than the laptop is producing frames. The experience may still be fast, but the panel’s headline refresh rate is not being fully used.

This is not a criticism unique to the Acer. A 240Hz screen is an ambitious target for demanding games, particularly when a laptop is also paired with a higher-than-1080p native resolution. It is, however, a reason to assess the screen as a flexible feature rather than a promise. The display gives the machine the ability to show very high frame rates where the game and settings permit them. It does not guarantee that the RTX 3080 Ti will hit 240fps in every modern or demanding title.

For competitive players, the best fit is likely to be games that run nearer the top of this measured range or games where the buyer is willing to select settings aimed at frame rate rather than visual quality. The supplied data does not include alternative settings, so it cannot establish what such changes would achieve. Still, the measured 246fps in F1 2021 proves that the panel is not wasted in every case. It is just not consistently saturated across the listed games.

For single-player players who care more about image quality than a specific refresh target, the machine’s results are easier to view positively. A measured 103fps or 104fps is not a failure of the laptop. It is a high frame rate. The concern arises only if the buyer is paying for a 240Hz screen specifically because they expect every game to operate at or near 240fps. The evidence does not support that expectation.

The screen

The Predator Triton 500 SE uses a 16in 2560x1600 IPS display with a 240Hz refresh rate. On paper, that is one of the machine’s strongest features. The 16in size gives it more display area than a smaller gaming laptop, while the 2560x1600 resolution provides more pixels than the 1920x1080 benchmark configuration. The 240Hz refresh rate is clearly intended for fast gaming rather than casual use alone.

The key issue is not whether the screen specification is good. It is. The more useful question is whether the measured gaming performance aligns with it. The answer is mixed in a sensible rather than disastrous way. At 1080p High with upscaling off, the Acer reaches 246fps in F1 2021, which exceeds the panel’s refresh rate. It reaches 189fps in Strange Brigade, 187fps in The Witcher 3 and 176fps in GTA V, all of which are substantial frame rates for a 240Hz screen even if they do not fully match it.

At the same time, Final Fantasy XV and X-Plane 11 sit at 104fps and 103fps. Those figures are still strong, but they are much closer to a conventional high-frame-rate gaming experience than to the panel’s maximum capability. The display is therefore best understood as offering headroom. It can show very high frame rates when the game can provide them. It is not evidence that the laptop will always run at the screen’s maximum refresh rate.

The larger complication is resolution. The panel’s native 2560x1600 resolution is not the resolution at which the supplied benchmark figures were measured. There are no 2560x1600 numbers in the fact sheet. That means the proper conclusion is not “this laptop will do 240fps at native resolution” or “this laptop cannot handle native resolution”. Neither statement is supported. The available figures only establish performance at 1920x1080, High settings, with upscaling disabled.

That distinction should affect how buyers judge the value of the screen. Someone buying the Triton 500 SE mainly for its 2560x1600 workspace and high-refresh capability can reasonably see the panel as a premium part of the package. Someone buying it solely to run every game at native resolution and 240Hz should pause. The benchmark data cannot substantiate that use case.

The IPS panel type is also a practical positive for buyers who want the laptop to serve as more than a frame-rate machine. The fact sheet confirms the panel technology but does not provide brightness, colour coverage, contrast, response-time or HDR measurements. It would be wrong to invent an assessment of those properties. The safe conclusion is simply that this is an IPS panel with a high resolution and high refresh rate, rather than a basic 1080p display chosen only to inflate benchmark figures.

The screen also changes the nature of the laptop’s compromise. A 1080p screen would make the listed benchmark resolution a direct match for the display, simplifying the buying decision. Here, the 2560x1600 panel offers a more premium desktop experience, but it also creates a gap between the display’s native specification and the gaming numbers currently available. Buyers need to be comfortable making their own settings choices rather than expecting the hardware list to answer every question.

Build, size and portability

The confirmed portability figure is the weight: 2.3kg. That places the Predator Triton 500 SE in the category of substantial gaming laptop rather than ultra-light portable. It is not a machine to think of as weightless, and it will not disappear into a bag in the way a small everyday laptop might. But it is also not presented in the supplied specification as an enormous desktop-replacement machine with a much heavier chassis.

At 2.3kg, the Acer makes most sense for a buyer who wants the option to move a capable gaming system between home, work, study or occasional travel, rather than somebody who expects to carry it all day without noticing it. The 16in display reinforces that interpretation. This is a laptop designed to provide a larger, higher-resolution gaming and general-use screen than a compact model, and that comes with a corresponding physical presence.

No dimensions are supplied in the fact sheet, so there is no basis for describing the Triton 500 SE as thin, compact, deep, wide or particularly easy to fit into a specific bag. There is also no battery-life figure, noise figure or temperature measurement provided. Those are important ownership considerations, especially for a machine with this class of CPU, GPU and screen, but they cannot be responsibly filled in with assumptions.

That absence matters because weight alone does not tell the entire portability story. A 2.3kg laptop may be manageable for one buyer and too heavy for another depending on how often it is carried and what other equipment travels with it. Without dimensions and battery data, the most defensible advice is to treat the Acer as a transportable performance laptop rather than to market it as a commuter-first machine.

The Triton 500 SE’s practical attraction is therefore balance rather than extremity. It combines a 16in 2560x1600 display, 240Hz refresh rate, RTX 3080 Ti graphics and a Core i7-12700H in a 2.3kg package. That is a meaningful specification for someone who wants gaming performance without moving to the largest possible laptop class. The trade-off is that the price remains high and the fact sheet does not provide the extra measurements needed to make a stronger portability claim.

Buyers who mostly use the laptop in one place should focus on the performance and display evidence rather than giving too much weight to the 2.3kg figure. Buyers who carry it frequently should focus on that number much more closely. The machine is portable in the literal sense that it is a laptop, but it is not light enough for its weight to be irrelevant. It should be bought by someone who accepts a substantial 16in gaming machine as part of the deal.

How it compares

Against the MSI Prestige 15

Against the MSI Prestige 15 with an RTX 3050 Ti at 105W, the Predator Triton 500 SE averages 80fps ahead across four shared games. This is the largest advantage listed for the Acer and is the comparison that most clearly demonstrates the gap between the Triton’s performance tier and a lower-class GPU configuration.

The comparison should still be read carefully. The four-game shared result is not a universal statement about every game, but an 80fps average lead is large enough to establish that the Acer is in a materially different gaming category within the supplied data. Buyers considering the Triton 500 SE because they want consistently higher frame-rate potential than a lighter or lower-tier RTX 3050 Ti system have a clear performance argument here.

There is no confirmed UK price for the MSI Prestige 15 in the supplied information, so this cannot become a direct value comparison. It would be wrong to claim that the Acer is better value or worse value against a rival whose UK price is unknown. What can be said is that the Acer’s £2,469 price buys a substantial shared-game performance advantage over this particular RTX 3050 Ti machine.

Against the HP Omen 16-b0085ng

The comparison with the HP Omen 16-b0085ng is much more revealing. The HP is listed with an RTX 3070, yet the Predator Triton 500 SE averages +0fps across four shared games. That is a near-zero difference in the supplied data, and the rival notes explicitly state that a near-zero difference is a real result rather than an error to be ignored.

The explanation supplied with the comparison is important: at 1080p, lighter titles in the shared set can become CPU-bound and compress genuine GPU gaps. In plain terms, the RTX 3080 Ti label does not necessarily translate into a visible lead in every shared 1080p result. The game and test resolution can limit how much difference the GPU can show.

For a buyer, this is a warning against paying a premium purely for the badge on the Acer’s GPU. The Triton 500 SE may offer a more premium screen specification, with its 2560x1600 resolution and 240Hz refresh rate, but the benchmark comparison does not show an average frame-rate advantage over this particular RTX 3070 HP in the shared sample. There is no confirmed UK price for the Omen, so the financial comparison remains incomplete. The performance lesson, however, is clear: the Acer’s RTX 3080 Ti is not automatically ahead where the benchmark data says it is level.

Against the Razer Blade 15 Advanced

The Razer Blade 15 Advanced from Mid 2021 is listed with an RTX 3080 at 105W. Across five shared games, the Predator Triton 500 SE averages -0fps. Again, this is effectively a level result in the supplied data, despite the Acer carrying the newer RTX 3080 Ti name.

This is another example of why buyers should put more weight on attributable benchmark data than on simple GPU hierarchy assumptions. The Acer may have a stronger-looking GPU designation, but the shared 1080p set does not produce an average advantage. The specified 105W figure belongs to the Razer, not to the Acer, so it should not be used to infer a hidden Acer configuration. It does, however, illustrate that laptops with apparently different graphics specifications can converge in measured results.

The shared-game count is five, which gives this comparison a broader base than the four-game comparisons with the MSI Prestige 15 and HP Omen 16-b0085ng. It still does not establish every possible workload, but it is enough to make the central point firm: do not buy the Predator Triton 500 SE expecting it to pull clearly away from this Razer simply because it says RTX 3080 Ti on the specification sheet.

There is no confirmed UK price for the Razer, so once again there is no supported basis for a price-versus-performance conclusion. The Acer’s own price of £2,469 remains the number a buyer must judge, and the level shared-game outcome makes that price harder to justify if raw benchmark superiority over comparable premium laptops is the priority.

Against the MSI Raider GE77 HX

The MSI Raider GE77 HX is the comparison that most directly challenges the Triton 500 SE’s performance position. It is listed with an RTX 3080 Ti at 175W and averages 25fps ahead of the Acer across five shared games. This is the largest deficit in the rival set for the Predator Triton 500 SE.

The result should not be exaggerated into a claim that the Acer is weak. The Acer’s own results remain strong. But a 25fps average deficit across five shared games is meaningful, particularly when both machines are identified as RTX 3080 Ti systems. It shows that an RTX 3080 Ti laptop can deliver materially different gaming results depending on the machine around it and its configuration.

The Raider’s confirmed 175W specification provides relevant context for the Raider, while the Acer’s GPU power limit remains unconfirmed. The careful conclusion is therefore limited: the 175W Raider is faster by 25fps on average in the supplied five-game shared comparison. It would be reasonable to say that the Acer does not match that machine’s shared-game performance. It would not be responsible to state exactly how much of the gap is caused by GPU power because the corresponding Acer figure is not present.

The trade-off is portability. The Acer’s confirmed weight is 2.3kg, but no weight is supplied for the Raider, so there is no supported numerical portability comparison. A buyer should not assume that the fastest listed rival necessarily makes the same size, weight or use-case compromise, because those details are not provided here. The only firm performance conclusion is that the Raider wins the shared benchmark sample by a clear margin.

Who it’s for

The Acer Predator Triton 500 SE PT516-52s-70KX is for the buyer who wants a premium-specification 16in gaming laptop and is prepared to pay for the combination of a 2560x1600 IPS screen, 240Hz refresh rate, Core i7-12700H, RTX 3080 Ti and 2.3kg weight. It is especially suited to someone who values a larger, sharper display and wants strong 1080p gaming figures without moving to an obviously desktop-first machine.

It also suits a buyer whose games are likely to benefit from the faster end of the supplied benchmark spread. F1 2021 at 246fps demonstrates that the 240Hz panel can genuinely be used to its full refresh rate in favourable conditions. Strange Brigade at 189fps, The Witcher 3 at 187fps and GTA V at 176fps show that the machine can support very high frame rates in several other games. A player who values responsiveness and plays titles that perform in this range has a coherent reason to choose the display.

It can also make sense for someone who accepts that a high-resolution, high-refresh laptop screen is not merely about chasing a fixed frame-rate target. The 2560x1600 panel gives the laptop a more premium display specification than a basic 1080p gaming machine. The supplied data does not establish native-resolution gaming performance, but buyers who want the screen for its general workspace and gaming flexibility may still find the overall design appealing.

It is not the right choice for a buyer focused above all else on value. At £2,469, the Acer asks for a substantial outlay. The benchmark data confirms strong performance, but it also shows level shared-game outcomes against the RTX 3070 HP Omen 16-b0085ng and RTX 3080 Razer Blade 15 Advanced, while the RTX 3080 Ti MSI Raider GE77 HX is 25fps ahead across five shared games. With no confirmed UK prices for those rivals, there is no direct value calculation to make, but the Acer has not demonstrated the kind of clear benchmark dominance that makes its own price easy to defend on performance alone.

It is also not the right choice for someone who expects the RTX 3080 Ti name to guarantee 240fps in demanding games. Final Fantasy XV at 104fps and X-Plane 11 at 103fps are still good results, but they are nowhere near the display’s 240Hz ceiling. The laptop is fast, but its performance varies substantially by game. Buyers whose main goal is to see the panel fully utilised in every title should look elsewhere or be prepared to make settings decisions that are not documented in the supplied benchmark data.

Buyers who insist on native 2560x1600 benchmark proof should also wait for that evidence rather than treating the 1080p numbers as a substitute. Notebookcheck’s figures here are useful and attributable, but they are specifically 1920x1080 High-preset results with upscaling off. They do not answer every native-resolution question. A laptop at this price deserves scrutiny, and the screen resolution makes that scrutiny more important rather than less.

Finally, it is not the most straightforward choice for someone who wants maximum verified RTX 3080 Ti performance from the comparison list. The MSI Raider GE77 HX is ahead by 25fps across five shared games and is explicitly listed with a 175W RTX 3080 Ti. The Acer may appeal more to someone who values its 2.3kg weight and 16in 2560x1600 240Hz IPS specification, but the shared benchmark evidence does not put it at the top of this particular RTX 3080 Ti group.

The final judgement is therefore clear. The Predator Triton 500 SE PT516-52s-70KX is a strong-performing, premium-screen gaming laptop whose measured 1080p results are good enough to satisfy demanding players. But it is also expensive, its GPU power limit is not confirmed in the supplied specification, its native-resolution gaming performance is not established by the available figures, and a specific 175W RTX 3080 Ti rival is demonstrably faster. Buy it for the complete 16in high-refresh package and its strong attributed performance data, not because the RTX 3080 Ti label makes it an automatic value winner.

How it compares