Industrial CNC Machine Directory

Machine Comparison

EOS M 100 vs EOS M 290

EOS vs EOS · Metal Additive Manufacturing

01

Summary

The EOS M 100 and EOS M 290 are both from EOS's metal additive manufacturing lineup, making this a common upgrade or lineup decision for shops already invested in the EOS ecosystem. The EOS M 290 leads in laser power (400 W vs 200 W). The EOS M 290 shows specification advantages in 5 categories, though the EOS M 100 may still be the better choice depending on your shop's specific needs and the type of work you run. Both machines are proven performers in production environments and represent solid investments for shops in the market for a metal additive manufacturing.

02

Specifications Comparison

Specification EOS M 100 EOS M 290
Laser Power 200 W 400 W
Build Volume Ø 100 x 95 mm (Ø 3.94 x 3.74 in) 250 x 250 x 325 mm (9.85 x 9.85 x 12.8 in)
Control EOS proprietary EOS proprietary
Laser Type Yb-fiber laser Yb-fiber laser
Number Of Lasers 1 1
Focus Diameter ~40 µm ~100 µm
Layer Thickness 20 - 50 µm (material dependent) 20 - 100 µm (material dependent)
Scan Speed Up to 7.0 m/s Up to 7.0 m/s
Technology Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS) Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS)
Materials Cobalt Chrome, Titanium, Stainless Steel, Precious metals Aluminum, Cobalt Chrome, Copper, Inconel, Steel, Titanium, Tungsten
Inert Gas Nitrogen Argon or Nitrogen
Power Consumption Max 2.4 kW 8.5 kW
Machine Dimensions 800 x 950 x 2,250 mm (31.5 x 37.4 x 88.6 in) 2,500 x 1,300 x 2,190 mm (98.4 x 51.2 x 86.2 in)
Software EOSPRINT, EOSTATE monitoring (optional) EOSPRINT, EOSTATE monitoring
Price Range $250,000 - $350,000 $800,000 - $1,000,000
03

Advantages

EOS M 100

  • More competitive pricing at $250,000 - $350,000 compared to $800,000 - $1,000,000
  • Backed by EOS's dealer and service network for parts and support
  • Dental labs producing crowns, bridges, partial dentures, and custom abutments in cobalt chrome and titanium

EOS M 290

  • Superior laser power at 400 W vs 200 W
  • Superior build volume at 250 x 250 x 325 mm (9.85 x 9.85 x 12.8 in) vs Ø 100 x 95 mm (Ø 3.94 x 3.74 in)
  • Superior focus diameter at ~100 µm vs ~40 µm
  • Superior power consumption max at 8.5 kW vs 2.4 kW
  • Superior machine dimensions at 2,500 x 1,300 x 2,190 mm (98.4 x 51.2 x 86.2 in) vs 800 x 950 x 2,250 mm (31.5 x 37.4 x 88.6 in)
04

Verdict

The EOS M 290 edges ahead on specifications in this comparison, particularly in Laser Power and Build Volume. However, the EOS M 100 remains competitive and may be the better choice depending on price, dealer support in your area, or specific workholding and tooling considerations. Both are capable machines — the best decision comes from running your actual parts and evaluating total cost of ownership including tooling, training, and service.