Notebookcheck

Acer Predator Triton 500 Laptop Review: A Lot of Gaming Performance Despite the Slim Case

Florian Glaser, 👁 Florian Glaser (translated by Todor Gerganov), 08/16/2019

New CPU, new luck. The ultra-flat Predator Triton 500 gaming notebook from Acer is now available with Intel's latest 9000 series processors. Learn how well the updated version performs in our test update.

Acer Predator Triton 500

In order to have a suitable model for (almost) every wallet, Acer offers the Triton 500 in several component variants, which differ primarily with regard to the graphics card. The 15-inch laptop can thus be purchased with a GeForce RTX 2060, RTX 2070 or RTX 2080. But beware: The latter GPUs are not installed as a standard, but as a Max-Q edition (focus on energy efficiency). Unfortunately, this is not mentioned in many online shops and even on the manufacturer's homepage there is little information about it.

For our test, we chose the mid-priced model PT515-51-71PZ, which costs about 2200 Euros (~$2438). Apart from the GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, the laptop comes with a Core i7-9750H, 16 GB of DDR4 RAM (2x 8 GB in dual-channel) and a 512 GB PCIe SSD.

As Acer has not made any changes to the case since the last generation, in this article we will not go into the case, interfaces, and input devices. You will find the corresponding categories in the test report of the predecessor.

The competitors of the Triton 500 include other 15-inch representatives of our Thin & Light Top 10, such as the Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA, the Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW, the MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG and the 2019 edition of the Razer Blade 15.

Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ (Predator Triton Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q - 8192 MB, Core: 885 MHz, Memory: 1530 MHz, GDDR6, ForceWare 417.59, Optimus
Memory
16384 MB 
, 2x 8 GB SO-DIMM DDR4-2666, Dual-Channel, all slots occupied
Display
15.6 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 141 PPI, NV156FHM-N4K (BOE082A), IPS, 144 Hz, Full HD, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Cannon Lake HM370
Storage
WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-512G, 512 GB 
, PCIe SSD M.2 Type 2280
Soundcard
Realtek Unknown @ Intel Cannon Point PCH
Connections
3 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: 1 headphone jack, 1 microphone jack
Networking
Killer E3000 2.5 Gigabit Ethernet Controller (10/100/1000/2500/5000MBit/s), Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW) (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 18 x 359 x 255 ( = 0.71 x 14.13 x 10.04 in)
Battery
5400 mAh Lithium-Polymer, 4 Cells
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Additional features
Speakers: 2.0, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, 180 Watt Power Adapter, Quick Start Guide, Setup Guide, Predator Sense, 24 Months Warranty
Weight
2.144 kg ( = 75.63 oz / 4.73 pounds), Power Supply: 502 g ( = 17.71 oz / 1.11 pounds)
Price
2200 EUR
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Especially English native speakers welcome!

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Acer Predator Triton 500
Acer Predator Triton 500
Acer Predator Triton 500
Acer Predator Triton 500
Acer Predator Triton 500
Acer Predator Triton 500
Acer Predator Triton 500
Acer Predator Triton 500
Acer Predator Triton 500
Acer Predator Triton 500
Acer Predator Triton 500

Size Comparison

360 mm / 14.2 inch 252 mm / 9.92 inch 19 mm / 0.748 inch 2.1 kg4.55 lbs359 mm / 14.1 inch 255 mm / 10 inch 18 mm / 0.709 inch 2.1 kg4.73 lbs358 mm / 14.1 inch 248 mm / 9.76 inch 18 mm / 0.709 inch 2 kg4.35 lbs356 mm / 14 inch 250 mm / 9.84 inch 19 mm / 0.748 inch 2.1 kg4.68 lbs355 mm / 14 inch 235 mm / 9.25 inch 17.8 mm / 0.701 inch 2.2 kg4.87 lbs
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
Killer Wireless-AC 1550i Wireless Network Adapter (9560NGW)
696 MBit/s ∼100% 0%
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)
694 MBit/s ∼100%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
688 MBit/s ∼99% -1%
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
680 MBit/s ∼98% -2%
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
659 MBit/s ∼95% -5%
Average of class Gaming
  (141 - 702, n=273)
605 MBit/s ∼87% -13%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
718 MBit/s ∼100% +30%
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
683 MBit/s ∼95% +23%
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
Killer Wireless-AC 1550i Wireless Network Adapter (9560NGW)
678 MBit/s ∼94% +22%
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
620 MBit/s ∼86% +12%
Average of class Gaming
  (144 - 749, n=273)
558 MBit/s ∼78% +1%
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)
554 MBit/s ∼77%

Display

While the case remains unchanged, another panel takes care of the image representation in the new Predator (BOE instead of AU Optronics). Due to the very similar measurements, you can neither speak of a downgrade nor an upgrade. Both 144 Hz displays offer a color space coverage of 93% sRGB and 60% AdobeRGB, which is quite respectable for a gaming notebook and is based on the results of the competition.

271
cd/m²
260
cd/m²
267
cd/m²
261
cd/m²
288
cd/m²
261
cd/m²
243
cd/m²
273
cd/m²
257
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
NV156FHM-N4K (BOE082A)
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 288 cd/m² Average: 264.6 cd/m² Minimum: 22 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 84 %
Center on Battery: 288 cd/m²
Contrast: 1309:1 (Black: 0.22 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.22 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6, calibrated: 1.5
ΔE Greyscale 3.43 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
93% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 60% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.41
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
NV156FHM-N4K (BOE082A), IPS, 1920x1080
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
Sharp LQ156M1JW03 (SHP14C5), IGZO, 1920x1080
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
AU Optronics B156HAN08.2 (AUO82ED), IPS, 1920x1080
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
Sharp LQ156M1JW03 (SHP14C5), IPS, 1920x1080
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Sharp LQ156M1JW03 (SHP14C5), IPS, 1920x1080
Response Times
-96%
-9%
-85%
-70%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
5.2 (2.6, 2.6)
15.2 (7.6, 7.6)
-192%
7.2 (3.8, 3.4)
-38%
13.6 (8, 5.6)
-162%
12.8 (6.8, 6)
-146%
Response Time Black / White *
11.2 (6.8, 4.4)
11.2 (6.8, 4.4)
-0%
8.8 (4.4, 4.4)
21%
12 (7.6, 4.4)
-7%
10.4 (6, 4.4)
7%
PWM Frequency
23580 (24)
23260 (19)
23810 (10)
Screen
-2%
-5%
13%
10%
Brightness middle
288
266
-8%
286
-1%
282.3
-2%
293
2%
Brightness
265
248
-6%
275
4%
269
2%
270
2%
Brightness Distribution
84
89
6%
90
7%
90
7%
87
4%
Black Level *
0.22
0.31
-41%
0.37
-68%
0.32
-45%
0.29
-32%
Contrast
1309
858
-34%
773
-41%
882
-33%
1010
-23%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
3.22
2.78
14%
2.19
32%
1.17
64%
1.69
48%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
6.26
5.96
5%
4.4
30%
3.29
47%
3.37
46%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
1.5
0.91
39%
2.27
-51%
1.06
29%
1.24
17%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
3.43
3.58
-4%
2.2
36%
1.3
62%
2.3
33%
Gamma
2.41 91%
2.46 89%
2.41 91%
2.2 100%
2.3 96%
CCT
7290 89%
7186 90%
6405 101%
6643 98%
6758 96%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
60
62
3%
59
-2%
63.8
6%
63
5%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
93
96
3%
91
-2%
97.5
5%
98.5
6%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-49% / -17%
-7% / -6%
-36% / -2%
-30% / -2%

* ... smaller is better

Despite a slight blue cast, there is little to complain about color accuracy. With a DeltaE deviation of 3.43 (Grayscale) and 3.22 (Color), the Triton 500 is almost ideal. By calibration (our ICC file is available for download above) you can even push the values below 1 and respectively 2.

CalMAN: Grayscale
CalMAN: Grayscale
CalMAN: Color Saturation
CalMAN: Color Saturation
CalMAN: Color Accuracy
CalMAN: Color Accuracy
CalMAN: Grayscale (calibrated)
CalMAN: Grayscale (calibrated)
CalMAN: Color Saturation (calibrated)
CalMAN: Color Saturation (calibrated)
CalMAN: Color Accuracy (calibrated)
CalMAN: Color Accuracy (calibrated)

Thanks to the rather low black value of 0.22 cd / m², the 15-inch model easily breaks the 1000 mark in terms of contrast. The best value in the test field is about 1,300:1. However, the brightness values are not that generous. Although none of the competitors reaches more than 300 cd / m², an average of 265 cd / m² is still a bit low - especially in the outdoor sector (keyword sun).

Acer Triton 500 vs. sRGB (93 %)
Acer Triton 500 vs. sRGB (93 %)
Pixel grid
Pixel grid
Acer Triton 500 vs. AdobeRGB (60 %)
Acer Triton 500 vs. AdobeRGB (60 %)

The 15-inch screen scores with a short reaction time, which should satisfy most gamers. In addition, there is a good viewing angle stability, which can be expected from the IPS technology.

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
11.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 6.8 ms rise
↘ 4.4 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 11 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
5.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 2.6 ms rise
↘ 2.6 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 3 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.7 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9361 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Test Conditions

The preinstalled Predator Sense tool not only helps with system monitoring (temperature, clock speeds, fan speed, ...), but also offers the possibility to adjust various settings. All of our tests are based on the fan speed "Auto" and the GPU overclocking "Normal". A really nice fact: In contrast to the last test device, the graphics switch Optimus was already active and did not have to be turned on in the BIOS first. By using the GPU integrated in the processor, Optimus ensures significantly better battery life for undemanding tasks (office, web, video, etc.).

Predator Sense
Predator Sense
Predator Sense
Predator Sense
Predator Sense
Predator Sense

Performance

No matter which configuration option you choose, the Predator Triton 500 is part of the high-end segment. In the test configuration, the mix of 6-core CPU, 16 GB of RAM and PCIe SSD promises a lot of future security. Furthermore, the Nvidia GPU is not likely to reach its limits in the coming years unless you connect an external QHD or UHD display.

CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
HWiNFO
GPU-Z
AS SSD Benchmark
CrystalDiskMark
LatencyMon

Processor

Intel's Core i7-9750H is the new standard processor for powerful gaming notebooks. The hexa-core model from the Coffee Lake series is manufactured in the 14 nm process and is equipped with 12 MB L3 cache (45 watts TDP).

Singlecore rendering
Singlecore rendering
Multicore rendering
Multicore rendering
GPU load
GPU load

The base frequency is 2.6 GHz, whereas with turbo boost technology (= automatic overclocking) up to 4.5 GHz can be reached. However, this value applies only to single-core load. As common for most laptops, the CPU can only partially unfold its high clock-speed potential when under a longer multi-core load.

010203040506070809010011012013014015016017018019020021022023024025026027028029030031032033034035036037038039040041042043044045046047048049050051052053054055056057058059060061062063064065066067068069070071072073074075076077078079080081082083084085086087088089090091092093094095096097098099010001010102010301040105010601070108010901100111011201130114011501160117011801190Tooltip
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ Intel Core i7-9750H, Intel Core i7-9750H: Ø1066 (1053.71-1188.07)
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA Intel Core i7-9750H, Intel Core i7-9750H: Ø1007 (976.09-1115.02)
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW Intel Core i7-9750H, Intel Core i7-9750H: Ø1040 (1017.76-1182)
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG Intel Core i7-9750H, Intel Core i7-9750H: Ø1110 (975.73-1185.01)
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q Intel Core i7-9750H, Intel Core i7-9750H: Ø1056 (1046.13-1175)
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
189 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1188 Points
Help

In our Cinebench loop, the speed of the Core i7-9750H dropped by about 10% from the second round on (3.2 GHz on average). However, as already indicated, this fact concerns also the competition. Thus, Acer cannot be blamed. On the contrary: According to the Cinebench R15, the Triton 500 takes the lead after a cold start.

Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
Intel Core i7-9750H
189 Points ∼100%
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
Intel Core i7-9750H
177 Points ∼94% -6%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Intel Core i7-9750H
175 Points ∼93% -7%
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
Intel Core i7-9750H
175 Points ∼93% -7%
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
Intel Core i7-9750H
174 Points ∼92% -8%
Average of class Gaming
  (77 - 212, n=520)
157 Points ∼83% -17%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
Intel Core i7-9750H
1188 Points ∼100%
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
Intel Core i7-9750H
1182 Points ∼99% -1%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Intel Core i7-9750H
1175 Points ∼99% -1%
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
Intel Core i7-9750H
1126 Points ∼95% -5%
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
Intel Core i7-9750H
1115 Points ∼94% -6%
Average of class Gaming
  (196 - 2022, n=523)
830 Points ∼70% -30%

System Performance

Similarly good is the general system performance. When it comes to the PCMark 10, the Predator takes second place among the comparison devices. Subjectively, there were no abnormalities. The system boots pleasantly fast and reacts as one would expect from a current high-end laptop.

PCMark 10 - Score
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5839 Points ∼100% +2%
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-512G
5746 Points ∼98%
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5725 Points ∼98% 0%
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW512G8
5697 Points ∼98% -1%
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9750H, 2x Intel SSD 660p SSDPEKNW512G8 (RAID 0)
5654 Points ∼97% -2%
Average of class Gaming
  (2603 - 7171, n=216)
5222 Points ∼89% -9%

» No benchmarks for this notebook found!

Storage Devices

In terms of SSD performance, there are also no unpleasant surprises. The built-in 512 GB model of Western Digital (PC SN720), which is in M.2 format, convinces both in reading and writing with a very good speed. The competition is at a comparable level (see table).

Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-512G
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW512G8
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
2x Intel SSD 660p SSDPEKNW512G8 (RAID 0)
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
0%
-7%
-9%
2%
Write 4K
108.8
115.5
6%
97.04
-11%
91.32
-16%
137.2
26%
Read 4K
40.31
57.97
44%
49.58
23%
40.73
1%
46.82
16%
Write Seq
2488
1555
-37%
1838
-26%
1915
-23%
1221
-51%
Read Seq
1916
2590
35%
2421
26%
2051
7%
1217
-36%
Write 4K Q32T1
382.4
369.3
-3%
326.9
-15%
308.3
-19%
526.6
38%
Read 4K Q32T1
421.8
441.7
5%
372.9
-12%
417.4
-1%
614
46%
Write Seq Q32T1
2542
1547
-39%
1894
-25%
1922
-24%
1986
-22%
Read Seq Q32T1
3320
2969
-11%
2828
-15%
3395
2%
3234
-3%
WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-512G
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3320 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 2542 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 421.8 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 382.4 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1916 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 2488 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 40.31 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 108.8 MB/s

GPU Performance

The GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q is designed for passionate gamers who prefer a lightweight, slim and compact laptop. The DirectX 12 model is from the Turing generation and offers 2,304 shaders and 8 GB of GDDR6 memory (256-bit interface).

3DMark 11 Performance
18996 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
37505 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
16017 points
3DMark Time Spy Score
6709 points
Help

The main difference to the "normal" version is the lower core-clock frequency. Instead of 1215 MHz, the Max-Q version only runs at 885 MHz by default. Following Intel's Turbo Boost, however, the Nvidia GPUs can also overclock automatically. In the render test with the GPU-Z tool, values of up to 1785 MHz could be reached. In the gaming everyday life, however, one should expect around 1300 to 1400 MHz, which represents a relatively good value for the RTX 2070 Max-Q.

The proper clock behavior is also reflected in the benchmarks. Often the Triton 500 is a few percent faster than the Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA with the same GPU. However, the performance level of the "full-fledged" RTX 2070 is still higher, as shown by the Zephyrus S GX502GW. The competition from Asus is at least 5% faster in most cases.

3DMark
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q
7840 Points ∼100% +16%
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
7277 Points ∼93% +8%
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q
7266 Points ∼93% +8%
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
6748 Points ∼86%
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
6716 Points ∼86% 0%
Average of class Gaming
  (368 - 13013, n=159)
5716 Points ∼73% -15%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q
20718 Points ∼100% +15%
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
19123 Points ∼92% +6%
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q
18962 Points ∼92% +5%
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
18060 Points ∼87%
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
17335 Points ∼84% -4%
Average of class Gaming
  (385 - 40636, n=547)
11401 Points ∼55% -37%
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q
27762 Points ∼100% +22%
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q
24926 Points ∼90% +10%
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
24267 Points ∼87% +7%
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
22749 Points ∼82%
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
22005 Points ∼79% -3%
Average of class Gaming
  (513 - 50983, n=622)
13475 Points ∼49% -41%

Whether the Acer notebook can keep its GPU clock speed for a longer period, we checked by playing "The Witcher 3" role game for almost 60 minutes at a resolution of 1,920x1,080 and maximum settings. Result: Apart from minor FPS fluctuations, which are common in the course of the test (changing times of day, etc.), the performance remains largely consistent.

051015202530354045505560657075Tooltip
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-512G: Ø65.5 (59-70)

Gaming Performance

When using the native resolution, the GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q has no problems even with computation-intensive games. At high to maximum details, it usually runs smoothly. At 60 FPS, however, this is more an exception than a rule, which is compensated by the adequate 144 Hz technique.

The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
78.3 fps ∼100% +22%
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9750H
70.2 (min: 58) fps ∼90% +9%
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
66.9 fps ∼85% +4%
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
64.4 (min: 54) fps ∼82%
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
64.1 fps ∼82% 0%
Average of class Gaming
  (12.6 - 115, n=316)
49.8 fps ∼64% -23%
low med. high ultra
The Witcher 3 (2015) 11664.4fps
Apex Legends (2019) 122122fps
Far Cry New Dawn (2019) 9382fps
Metro Exodus (2019) 58.947.6fps
Anthem (2019) 81.375.7fps
Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019) 12979.1fps
The Division 2 (2019) 8864fps
Anno 1800 (2019) 70.640fps
Rage 2 (2019) 77.774.9fps
F1 2019 (2019) 135103fps

Emissions

System Noise

The noise development leaves us with mixed feelings. In idle mode, the Triton 500 is often quiet as a mouse, but every now and then the fans turn up unnecessarily (in 40 dB direction). Especially in supposedly harmless actions such as Windows Updates, they come up to speed. As an average, our meter read a decent noise level of 33 dB at idle.

Noise level - idle
Noise level - idle
Noise level - load
Noise level - load
Noise level - speaker
Noise level - speaker

Under load, the situation is not unambiguous. Compared to other RTX-2070 laptops, 45 to 51 dB is not that much (the Gigabyte Aero 15 gets louder, for example), but sensitive gamers still have to use a headset while gaming.

Noise Level

Idle
30 / 33 / 39 dB(A)
Load
45 / 51 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm distance)   environment noise: 30 dB(A)
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9750H
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
Average of class Gaming
 
Noise
-3%
-4%
7%
13%
4%
off / environment *
30
30
-0%
30
-0%
28.3
6%
28.3
6%
29.3 (27.7 - 32, n=320)
2%
Idle Minimum *
30
31
-3%
31
-3%
30.4
-1%
28.8
4%
31.4 (28 - 41.7, n=743)
-5%
Idle Average *
33
34
-3%
33
-0%
30.5
8%
28.8
13%
32.6 (28 - 46.6, n=743)
1%
Idle Maximum *
39
39
-0%
38
3%
30.6
22%
29
26%
34.6 (28 - 51, n=743)
11%
Load Average *
45
46
-2%
50
-11%
37.6
16%
33.5
26%
40.7 (30.1 - 58, n=744)
10%
Witcher 3 ultra *
49
53
-8%
53
-8%
46
6%
45
8%
Load Maximum *
51
55
-8%
56
-10%
55.1
-8%
45.2
11%
48.1 (38.9 - 64.1, n=744)
6%

* ... smaller is better

Temperature

In addition to the volume, the temperatures are also in the midfield. While the top of the case got hot in the stress test (FurMark & Prime95), reaching up to 49 °C (120.2 °F), we were able to measure up to 59 °C (138.2 °F) on the bottom. The device is thus not suitable for gaming sessions on the lap. In the more practical "Witcher 3" test, the values were only slightly lower.

"The Witcher 3"
"The Witcher 3"
Stress test
Stress test
Full load (top)
Full load (top)
Full load (bottom)
Full load (bottom)

Good: Throttling of the components does not occur even at full load, although the CPU and GPU approach their base clock frequency and hardly use the turbo. At the end of the stress test, the Core i7-9750H and the GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q made themselves comfortable at around 80 °C (176 °F).

Max. Load
 44 °C
111 F
49 °C
120 F
47 °C
117 F
 
 45 °C
113 F
49 °C
120 F
47 °C
117 F
 
 42 °C
108 F
41 °C
106 F
43 °C
109 F
 
Maximum: 49 °C = 120 F
Average: 45.2 °C = 113 F
59 °C
138 F
59 °C
138 F
42 °C
108 F
56 °C
133 F
59 °C
138 F
45 °C
113 F
44 °C
111 F
44 °C
111 F
43 °C
109 F
Maximum: 59 °C = 138 F
Average: 50.1 °C = 122 F
Power Supply (max.)  46 °C = 115 F | Room Temperature 23 °C = 73 F | Voltcraft IR-900
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 45.2 °C / 113 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Gaming.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 49 °C / 120 F, compared to the average of 39.6 °C / 103 F, ranging from 21.6 to 68.8 °C for the class Gaming.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 59 °C / 138 F, compared to the average of 42.2 °C / 108 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.7 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 33.2 °C / 92 F.
(-) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 43.2 °C / 110 F, compared to the device average of 33.2 °C / 92 F.
(-) The palmrests and touchpad can get very hot to the touch with a maximum of 43 °C / 109.4 F.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.8 °C / 83.8 F (-14.2 °C / -25.6 F).
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9750H
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
Average of class Gaming
 
Heat
-10%
-6%
0%
3%
1%
Maximum Upper Side *
49
58
-18%
54
-10%
45.6
7%
47
4%
45.8 (28 - 68.8, n=708)
7%
Maximum Bottom *
59
64
-8%
47
20%
53.8
9%
49.2
17%
49.6 (25.9 - 78, n=706)
16%
Idle Upper Side *
28
30
-7%
33
-18%
28.6
-2%
28.6
-2%
30.8 (21.6 - 46.8, n=659)
-10%
Idle Bottom *
29
31
-7%
34
-17%
33.2
-14%
31.4
-8%
31.8 (21.1 - 50.3, n=657)
-10%

* ... smaller is better

Speakers

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2031.734.22533.737313032.94036.637.15034.2356327.634.3802833.410024.63812523.847.116023.952.820021.550.725022.160.331521.664.440020.56750019.5626301868.280017.970.5100018.369.7125020.869.6160018.769.7200017.469.9250017.769.3315017.668.5400017.267.4500017.464.1630017.363.2800017.364.41000017.162.21250017.258.51600017.254.4SPL30.580N1.448.9median 18median 64.4Delta1.76.543.345.539.640.632.434.934.435.527.228.829.332.327.732.226.832.523.434.222.74922.958.323.562.119.962.219.762.419.260.217.967.51871.917.87118.975.217.871.617.470.117.768.517.770.917.869.317.562.417.564.617.467.717.366.717.367.617.362.630.281.91.453.1median 17.8median 66.71.54.7hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseAcer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZGigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 12.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.5% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 23% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 70% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 9% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 89% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (14.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 32% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 63% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 12% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 84% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Energy Management

Power Consumption

With activated graphics switching, the Triton 500 requires very little energy. 7 to 22 watts of idle consumption make you think of an office or multimedia laptop at first glance. When the Nvidia GPU goes on under load, the power requirement climbs to values between 86 and 177 watts. The included 180-watt power supply is thus sufficient.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.2 / 1.2 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 7 / 12 / 22 Watt
Load midlight 86 / 177 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9750H
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
Average of class Gaming
 
Power Consumption
-62%
-85%
-51%
-23%
-68%
Idle Minimum *
7
21
-200%
24
-243%
18.3
-161%
12.5
-79%
19.4 (3.4 - 113, n=703)
-177%
Idle Average *
12
23
-92%
27
-125%
22
-83%
15.3
-28%
24.9 (6.6 - 119, n=703)
-108%
Idle Maximum *
22
32
-45%
33
-50%
28.8
-31%
20.7
6%
30.1 (8.3 - 122, n=703)
-37%
Load Average *
86
97
-13%
129
-50%
93
-8%
90.2
-5%
104 (14.1 - 319, n=694)
-21%
Load Maximum *
177
213
-20%
216
-22%
215.9
-22%
209.3
-18%
171 (21.9 - 590, n=693)
3%
Witcher 3 ultra *
144
148
-3%
176
-22%
142.6
1%
162
-13%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The fact that not only the Antichrist, but also a good battery life can be behind the number 666 is proved by the Triton 500 in an impressive manner. Almost 11 hours idle runtime at minimal brightness (Battery Eater tool in "Reader's test" mode) is quite a lot for a gaming laptop. Only the Razer Blade 15 has a higher value (up to 16 hours). Even at medium brightness, respectively utilization, the battery life of the Acer laptop pleases. The device lasted about 8 hours in our WLAN test, which is also a good result. For comparison: The predecessor, which was tested without Optimus, only managed about 3 hours.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
11h 06min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
7h 58min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 36min
Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H,  Wh
Gigabyte Aero 15 Classic-XA
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, 94.24 Wh
Asus Zephyrus S GX502GW
GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9750H, 76 Wh
MSI GS65 Stealth 9SG
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, 82 Wh
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, 80 Wh
Average of class Gaming
 
Battery Runtime
20%
-45%
-24%
10%
-37%
Reader / Idle
666
545
-18%
353
-47%
953
43%
347 (39 - 1174, n=667)
-48%
WiFi v1.3
478
421
-12%
220
-54%
362
-24%
393
-18%
258 (78 - 622, n=367)
-46%
Load
96
181
89%
62
-35%
102
6%
79 (18 - 202, n=634)
-18%
H.264
408
254 (88 - 506, n=145)

Pros

+ stylish case with small dimensions
+ compact power supply
+ good battery life
+ Thunderbolt 3
+ slim bezel
+ 144 Hz

Cons

- annoying boot sound (can be deactivated in the BIOS)
- limited maintenance
- moderate fan control
- no card reader

Verdict

In review: Acer Predator Triton 500. Test model provided by:
In review: Acer Predator Triton 500. Test model provided by:

With the Predator Triton 500 Acer sells an elegant and extremely flat gaming notebook without any major flaws.

In all rating categories, the 15-inch laptop earns at least 70%, which speaks for a balanced and well-thought-out system. Our criticisms, which are in the "Cons" list on the right, are rather insignificant.

To get a "very good" as an overall grade, Acer should have put more emphasis on the fan control, for example; this includes the sometimes annoying starts in idle. The maintenance options could also be better. In addition, we miss a card reader.

Acer Predator Triton 500 PT515-51-71PZ - 09/20/2019 v7
Florian Glaser

Chassis
78 / 98 → 79%
Keyboard
83%
Pointing Device
81%
Connectivity
62 / 80 → 77%
Weight
62 / 10-66 → 93%
Battery
80 / 95 → 84%
Display
85%
Games Performance
92%
Application Performance
92%
Temperature
76 / 95 → 79%
Noise
70 / 90 → 77%
Audio
84%
Average
79%
85%
Gaming - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 1 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Acer Predator Triton 500 Laptop Review: A Lot of Gaming Performance Despite the Slim Case
Florian Glaser, 2019-08-16 (Update: 2019-08-17)