Independent metal AM
EOS M 290 vs Xact XM300G
Start with the differences that could affect your part. Confirm the complete configuration with each supplier.
The big difference
- Xact XM300G has the larger published build-space volume.
- Both use Powder bed fusion · laser powder bed fusion (LPBF).
- These specifications alone cannot tell us which machine will make a given part faster or cheaper.
What this pairing comes down to
Both are Powder bed fusion · laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) platforms, so the practical comparison comes down to scale and productivity configuration. Xact XM300G offers the larger published build space (300 × 300 × 350 mm versus 250 × 250 × 325 mm) — more room for nesting several parts per build or for taller single parts. The spec sheet narrows the field; your volumes and quotes decide the buy case — the calculator computes the crossing for this pair.
Side by side
| Question | EOS M 290 | Xact XM300G |
|---|---|---|
| Quick description | LPBF machine; compare published build space and laser configuration below. | LPBF machine; compare published build space and laser configuration below. |
| Process | Powder bed fusion · laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) | Powder bed fusion · laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) |
| Build size | 250 x 250 x 325 mm (Z incl. build platform, application-dependent) | 300 x 300 x 350 mm (300 x 300 x 450 extended-feed option) |
| Energy / lasers | 1 × 400 W | See published specifications |
| Feedstock | Metal powder | Metal powder |
| Machine status | Manufacturer listing reviewed · confirm configuration | In development · review dated 2026-09-07 |
| Public price | FEDERAL · 2016–2024 $528,242 – $1,383,580 (dated public record, not a current quote) | Current quote required |
Published build-space comparison
EOS M 290250 × 250 × 325 mm
Xact XM300G300 × 300 × 350 mm
Proportional X and Z dimensions. Depth is listed in the numbers. Nominal envelopes are not usable part space; see configuration and platform caveats below.
Build size is the maximum published physical space. Energy or laser counts describe the machine configuration; they do not prove a throughput winner.
What do these differences actually mean?
A difference may matter when your part size, material, production plan or process qualification requires it. Confirm the exact application with both suppliers; this page does not declare a winner.
What public specs cannot tell you
Real throughputYour geometry, orientation, parameters and finishing route matter.
Actual yieldPublished specs do not tell you your accepted-part rejection rate.
Total installed priceInstallation, training, service, software and options require a current quote.
Finished-part costPrinting is only one part of the complete accepted-part route.
Service qualityLocal response, parts availability and support experience need supplier validation.
Qualified application fitPublic specs cannot approve your material, parameters, tolerances or inspection plan.
EOS M 290
| Capability | Source-backed detail |
|---|---|
| EOS M 290 build volume | 250 x 250 x 325 mm (Z incl. build platform, application-dependent)OEM ↗ · Source reviewed |
| EOS M 290 laser | Yb-fiber laser; 1 x 400 WOEM ↗ · Source reviewed |
More published specifications and source notes
| Published detail | Evidence |
|---|---|
| EOS M 290 power consumption | max 8.5 kW / typical 2.4 kW; supply 1 x 32 AOEM ↗ · Source reviewed |
| EOS M 290 machine footprint | 2500 x 1300 x 2190 mm; weight approx 1250 kgOEM ↗ · Source reviewed |
| EOS M 290 optics/scan | up to 7.0 m/s scan; focus approx 100 um; 1 F-theta lensOEM ↗ · Source reviewed |
| EOS M 290 machine-level layer-thickness range | not published as a single machine range; per-material layer values published (e.g. 316L 20/40/80 um)OEM ↗ · Source reviewed |
| EOS M 290 price | No public retail price found in the cited source during the research review.OEM ↗ · Source reviewed |
| Materials — OEM scope | OEM-listed examples: AlSi10Mg, 316L, 17-4PH, IN625, IN718 and Ti64. Confirm the exact material/parameter set; this is not a universal qualification claim.OEM ↗ · OEM source checked |
| Machine weight | Approximately 1250 kg.OEM ↗ · OEM source checked |
| Manufacturer positioning | EOS presents the M 290 as a mid-sized system for qualified metal parts.OEM ↗ · OEM source checked |
Xact XM300G
More published specifications and source notes
| Published detail | Evidence |
|---|---|
| Xact XM300G specs | 300 x 300 x 350 mm (300 x 300 x 450 extended-feed option); one/two/four 400 W Yb fiber; 700 W selectable; 100% overlapping zonesOEM ↗ · Source reviewed |
| Published build envelope | Development-stage specification: 300 x 300 x 350 mm; optional extended feed permits 300 x 300 x 450 mm.OEM ↗ · OEM source checked |
| Layer thickness | 20–100 µm; development-stage specification.OEM ↗ · OEM source checked |
| Machine dimensions / footprint | Approximately 2019 x 845 x 2390 mm (W x D x H); development-stage specification.OEM ↗ · OEM source checked |
| Machine weight | Development-stage variants: XM300G approximately 726 kg; XM300G2 approximately 816 kg; XM300G4 approximately 907 kg.OEM ↗ · OEM source checked |
| Manufacturer positioning | Xact Metal presents the XM300G as a mid-sized system under development; shipping availability is not confirmed.OEM ↗ · OEM source checked |
| Materials — OEM scope | OEM development-stage powder options include AlSi10Mg, 316L, 17-4PH, 718, 625, Ti64 and M300; parameter availability on request.OEM ↗ · OEM source checked |
| Published print speed / throughput — stated basis | OEM development-stage build speed: 11.5 cc/hr for the single-400 W configuration; not finished-part throughput.OEM ↗ · OEM source checked |
These public specifications cannot establish a throughput, finished-part quality, support or price winner. Confirm usable envelope, exact alloy and process parameters, effective build time, finishing and local service for both options.