Independent metal AM
EOSINT M 280 vs EOS M 290
Start with the differences that could affect your part. Confirm the complete configuration with each supplier.
The big difference
- 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. Published build volumes are closely matched, so envelope size is unlikely to decide this pairing. 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 | EOSINT M 280 | EOS M 290 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 (seller-reported in the 2026 auction record; confirm per-unit configuration) | 250 x 250 x 325 mm (Z incl. build platform, application-dependent) |
| Energy / lasers | 200 W and 400 W configurations per the OEM historical account | 1 × 400 W |
| Feedstock | Metal powder | Metal powder |
| Machine status | Legacy generation · confirm support | Availability unconfirmed |
| Public price | CLASS RECORD · 2016–2024 No public list price (dated public record, not a current quote) | FEDERAL · 2016–2024 $528,242 – $1,380,000 (dated public record, not a current quote) |
Published build-space comparison
EOSINT M 280250 × 250 × 325 mm
EOS M 290250 × 250 × 325 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.
EOSINT M 280
| Capability | Source-backed detail |
|---|---|
| Build volume | 250 x 250 x 325 mm (seller-reported in the 2026 auction record; confirm per-unit configuration)THIRD-PARTY ↗ · Source reviewed |
| Laser configurations | 200 W and 400 W configurations per the OEM historical accountOEM ↗ · Source reviewed |
More published specifications and source notes
| Published detail | Evidence |
|---|---|
| Generation | Predecessor of the current EOS M 290; distinct machine, not an aliasOEM ↗ · Source reviewed |
| Documented used unit | A 2014 machine with accessories was auctioned March–April 2026; last maintenance October 2025, laser source still ~400 W, <200 h since maintenance; no public winning priceTHIRD-PARTY ↗ · Source reviewed |
| Historical quote context | A 2020 university cost study reports an approximate US$900,000 OEM quote used in its model; original quotation and package scope not available — historical context, not a current priceTHIRD-PARTY ↗ · Source reviewed · Source link unavailable (checked 2026-09-30) |
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 |
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.