- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- W50 2.0 vs Marauder 3
Acebeam W50 2.0 vs Olight Marauder 3
What W50 2.0 does better (0) and where Marauder 3 wins (1) — every spec side by side.
vs
6.3Brightness & throw9.5
7.8Build & durability2.1
5.5Light quality5.5
Dimensions
Size comparison
W50 2.0Marauder 3
| W50 2.0 | Marauder 3 | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length / height | 216.4 mm | 152 mm | +64.4 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 84 mm | 75 mm | +9 mm |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is W50 2.0 better than Marauder 3?
W50 2.0 has no measurable advantages in this pair.
Why is Marauder 3 better than W50 2.0?
- Maximum output2,200 lm vs 25,000 lm11.4×
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 2,200 lm | 25,000 lm |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | — | 1,000 m |
| Light source | LEP (laser-excited phosphor) | LED |
| Adjustable focus (zoom) | Yes | Yes |
| LED & beam | ||
| LED emitter | — | Cree XHP70.2 |
| LED maker | — | Cree |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | 18650 Li-ion | 46950 Li-ion |
| Number of batteries | — | 1 |
| Battery capacity | — | 31,900 mAh |
| Maximum runtime | — | 430 h |
| Rechargeable | Yes | Yes |
| USB-C charging | Yes | Yes |
| Battery level indicator | — | Yes |
| Power bank function | — | Yes |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | IP68 | — |
| Water protection (IPx) | IPx8 | — |
| Body material | — | Aluminium |
| Size & weight | ||
| Length / height | 216.4 mm | 152 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 84 mm | 75 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 79 mm | — |
| Weight | — | 840 g |
| Modes & features | ||
| Strobe | Yes | — |
