Machine Comparison
EOS M 290 vs EOS M 300-4
EOS vs EOS · Metal Additive Manufacturing
Summary
The EOS M 290 and EOS M 300-4 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 4 x 400 W). These machines are closely matched across most specifications, making the decision more about specific feature priorities, dealer support, and your existing shop ecosystem than raw spec advantages. Both machines are proven performers in production environments and represent solid investments for shops in the market for a metal additive manufacturing.
Specifications Comparison
| Specification | EOS M 290 | EOS M 300-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Laser Power | 400 W ▲ | 4 x 400 W |
| Build Volume | 250 x 250 x 325 mm (9.85 x 9.85 x 12.8 in) | 300 x 300 x 400 mm (11.8 x 11.8 x 15.7 in) ▲ |
| Control | EOS proprietary | EOS proprietary |
| Laser Type | Yb-fiber laser | Yb-fiber laser |
| Number Of Lasers | 1 | 4 (full-overlap architecture) ▲ |
| Scan Speed | Up to 7.0 m/s | Up to 7.0 m/s |
| Focus Diameter | ~100 µm | ~100 µm |
| Layer Thickness | 20 - 100 µm (material dependent) | 20 - 100 µm (material dependent) |
| Build Rate | Up to 10.6 cm³/h (material dependent) | Up to 40+ cm³/h (material and geometry dependent) ▲ |
| Technology | Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS) | Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS) |
| Materials | Aluminum, Cobalt Chrome, Copper, Inconel, Steel, Titanium, Tungsten | Titanium, Inconel, Aluminum, Cobalt Chrome, Stainless Steel, Maraging Steel, Tool Steels |
| Inert Gas | Argon or Nitrogen | Argon or Nitrogen |
| Machine Dimensions | 2,500 x 1,300 x 2,190 mm (98.4 x 51.2 x 86.2 in) | 4,181 x 1,613 x 2,355 mm (164.6 x 63.5 x 92.7 in) ▲ |
| Software | EOSPRINT, EOSTATE monitoring | EOSPRINT 2, Siemens NX integration |
| Price Range | $800,000 - $1,000,000 ▲ | $1,200,000 - $1,600,000 |
Advantages
EOS M 290
- Superior laser power at 400 W vs 4 x 400 W
- More competitive pricing at $800,000 - $1,000,000 compared to $1,200,000 - $1,600,000
- Backed by EOS's dealer and service network for parts and support
- Aerospace production parts requiring AS9100 traceability and qualified material parameters
EOS M 300-4
- Superior build volume at 300 x 300 x 400 mm (11.8 x 11.8 x 15.7 in) vs 250 x 250 x 325 mm (9.85 x 9.85 x 12.8 in)
- Superior number of lasers at 4 (full-overlap architecture) vs 1
- Superior build rate at Up to 40+ cm³/h (material and geometry dependent) vs Up to 10.6 cm³/h (material dependent)
- Superior machine dimensions at 4,181 x 1,613 x 2,355 mm (164.6 x 63.5 x 92.7 in) vs 2,500 x 1,300 x 2,190 mm (98.4 x 51.2 x 86.2 in)
Verdict
This is a close matchup. The EOS M 290 and EOS M 300-4 trade advantages across different specifications, making neither a clear winner on paper alone. Your decision should come down to practical factors: which dealer is closer, which control system your operators already know, what tooling ecosystem you're invested in, and which machine's specific strengths match your highest-volume work. Get quotes on both, run test cuts with your actual parts if possible, and factor in long-term service and support costs.