Independent metal AM
EOSINT M 280 vs Renishaw AM250
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. 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 | Renishaw AM250 |
|---|---|---|
| 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) | Not verified from a live primary source during this review; confirm per unit with Renishaw documentation |
| Energy / lasers | 200 W and 400 W configurations per the OEM historical account | Fibre laser per the OEM-era brochure; exact per-unit configuration requires confirmation |
| Feedstock | Metal powder | Metal powder |
| Machine status | Legacy generation · confirm support | Legacy generation · confirm support |
| Public price | CLASS RECORD · 2016–2024 No public list price (dated public record, not a current quote) | CLASS RECORD · 2016–2024 No public list price (dated public record, not a current quote) |
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) |
Renishaw AM250
| Capability | Source-backed detail |
|---|---|
| Build envelope | Not verified from a live primary source during this review; confirm per unit with Renishaw documentationOEM ↗ · Source reviewed |
| Laser | Fibre laser per the OEM-era brochure; exact per-unit configuration requires confirmationOEM ↗ · Source reviewed |
More published specifications and source notes
| Published detail | Evidence |
|---|---|
| Generation | Predecessor of the AM400, which added revised gas flow, window protection and a 400 W optical system per the OEM 2016 reportOEM ↗ · Source reviewed |
| Used supply | Identifiable used machines are quote-only (a 2015 unit with condition/hours disclosure; a separate dealer record)THIRD-PARTY ↗ · Source reviewed |
| Historical quote context | A 2020 university cost study reports an approximate US$675,000 OEM quote; original quotation and scope not available — historical context, not a current priceTHIRD-PARTY ↗ · Source reviewed · Source link unavailable (checked 2026-09-30) |
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.