800W vs 1200W Fiber Engraving: Industrial Marking Differences
In most factories, fiber lasers are not used for “art engraving”, but for repeatable metal marking(If you need a quick refresher on what “laser etching” actually means compared with deeper engraving, we’ve broken down the basics here: Laser Etching Complete Guide ): logos, QR codes, serial numbers and safety information on stainless steel, carbon steel, aluminium and brass parts. When engineers compare 800 W and 1200 W fiber sources, the real question is not “which one is stronger”, but:
- How stable is the process window at very shallow depth (≈0.05 mm)?
- How sensitive is the marking result to small changes in focus, nozzle height and part surface?
- How well can it handle highly reflective materials like aluminium and brass?
The following data comes from GWEIKE M-Series 800 W / 1200 W fiber marking tests, using a target engraving depth of 0.05 mm at high production speed.
Test Parameters and Measurement Setup
For a fair comparison, both 800 W and 1200 W systems used the same mechanical setup:
- Engraving depth: 0.05 mm target
- Nozzle height: 5 mm
- Focus offset: −1 mm (slight negative focus to increase surface energy density)
- Shielding gas pressure: 5–6 bar
- Scanning speed: 800 mm/s (high speed) / 400 mm/s (best stability)
Only the laser power percentage was adjusted to achieve a stable 0.05 mm depth on different materials.
| Material | Depth | 800 W Fiber | 1200 W Fiber | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power % | Nozzle | Speed | Power % | Nozzle | Speed | ||
| Stainless steel | 0.05 mm | 16–33 % | 5 mm / −1 mm / 5–6 bar | 800 / 400 mm/s | 14–23 % | 5 mm / −1 mm / 5–6 bar | 800 / 400 mm/s |
| Carbon steel | 0.05 mm | 16–33 % | 5 mm / −1 mm / 5–6 bar | 800 / 400 mm/s | 14–23 % | 5 mm / −1 mm / 5–6 bar | 800 / 400 mm/s |
| Aluminium | 0.05 mm | 33–43 % | 5 mm / −1 mm / 5–6 bar | 800 / 400 mm/s | 20–33 % | 5 mm / −1 mm / 5–6 bar | 800 / 400 mm/s |
| Brass | 0.05 mm | 33–43 % | 5 mm / −1 mm / 5–6 bar | 800 / 400 mm/s | 20–33 % | 5 mm / −1 mm / 5–6 bar | 800 / 400 mm/s |
What the Numbers Really Mean
Stainless & Carbon Steel: Lower Percent, Higher Stability
On stainless and carbon steel, both 800 W and 1200 W can easily reach 0.05 mm depth. The key difference is the power range:
- 800 W: 16–33 %
- 1200 W: 14–23 %
In other words, the 1200 W source achieves the same depth in a lower percentage zone. This has two practical benefits:
- More headroom: there is still a lot of unused power for deeper marking or thicker line width when needed.
- Better linearity at low power: small adjustments of 1–2 % result in predictable changes in depth, which is important for QR code readability and consistent serial number marking.
Aluminium & Brass: Dealing with High Reflectivity
Aluminium and brass are both highly reflective and conduct heat quickly. This is clearly reflected in the data:
- 800 W: needs 33–43 % power for 0.05 mm depth.
- 1200 W: only 20–33 % power is needed to reach the same depth.
In practice, this means:
- 800 W works, but runs close to the upper half of its power curve.
- 1200 W has clear energy margin for deeper, darker marking or for compensating surface oxidation, anodising or plating layers.
If aluminium plates and tags are a big part of your workload, this practical guide shows more real-world aluminium engraving samples and surface effects: Laser Engraving Aluminium .
Process Window: Not Just “Can It Mark?”
From a process engineer’s point of view, the main question is not “Can this laser make a mark?”, but “How wide is my stable window?”
For stainless steel at 0.05 mm depth:
- 800 W window: 16–33 % → width 17 %
- 1200 W window: 14–23 % → width 9 %
The 800 W unit offers a wider range, which makes it forgiving for manual operators. However, the upper part of that window is closer to the limit where burning and surface roughness start to appear.
On automated lines, engineers tend to prefer the 1200 W profile:
- The working zone sits lower on the power curve, where the beam quality is very stable.
- It is easier to keep markings consistent over many hours of operation.
- There is enough power reserve to compensate for minor contamination of the protective window or lens.
Speed: 800 mm/s vs 400 mm/s in Real Production
Both systems share the same recommended scanning speeds: 800 mm/s for high-throughput marking and 400 mm/s as a “best quality” setting.
In most 0.05 mm marking applications, increasing laser power alone will not double the productivity. Marking time is driven more by:
- Scan path length (logo or code size)
- Number of passes required to reach the desired depth
- Allowed cycle time in the production line
Where the 1200 W model makes a difference is in reducing the number of passes on high-reflectivity materials. A process that needs three passes on an 800 W machine may be reduced to two passes on a 1200 W unit, while maintaining the same visual quality.
Typical Use Cases for 800 W vs 1200 W
When 800 W Is the Right Choice
- General logo and text marking on stainless and carbon steel plates
- Low to medium batch sizes, manual loading
- Occasional marking jobs, where the laser is not the main production bottleneck
- Price-sensitive projects where investment cost is the key factor
In these cases, the 800 W source already delivers a comfortable process window and is very easy to tune for different products.
When 1200 W Brings Clear Advantages
- High-contrast QR or DataMatrix codes that must be read at high speed
- Large volumes of aluminium and brass components
- Multi-shift operation where the machine runs continuously for many hours
- Production lines that require deep, durable marks for harsh environments
Here the extra power is not only about speed, but about:
- More stable low-power operation for consistent dot size inside QR cells;
- Enough reserve to compensate for batch-to-batch variation in surface treatment;
- Reduced risk of “fading” marks after bead blasting, painting or anodising.
For smaller shops that work mainly with stainless steel parts and are still choosing their first dedicated marking system, this guide walks through different machine options: Choosing the Best Laser Engraving Machine for Stainless Steel .
Integration with the GWEIKE M-Series Workstation
Both 800 W and 1200 W sources are available on the GWEIKE M-Series 6-in-1 workstation Cut / Weld / Clean / Mark. This platform combines:
- Handheld cutting and welding
- Rust and paint removal
- Metal surface engraving and marking
- Optional CO₂ and UV modules for non-metal materials. The M-Series can also be configured with optional CO₂ and UV modules for non-metal materials. If you are new to CO₂ platforms, this article gives a clear overview of how a CO₂ laser cutter works: How Does a CO₂ Laser Cutter Work .
With one setup, factories can handle cutting, welding and marking tasks on the same station, using the same process database. The parameter ranges listed above are part of the default M-Series application library and can be called up directly on the controller.
For handheld cutting and welding tasks on the same platform, make sure the safety parameters and gas settings are configured correctly. We’ve summarised the key points here: Handheld Laser Cutting Safety Parameters .
How to Choose Between 800 W and 1200 W
Both 800 W and 1200 W fiber lasers can deliver high-quality 0.05 mm metal markings on stainless steel and carbon steel at 800/400 mm/s. The main difference lies in:
- Where on the power curve the process window sits;
- How much headroom you have for reflective materials and future upgrades;
- How strict your consistency and cycle-time requirements are.
If your main workload is general logo marking on steel plates, an 800 W M-Series system will already cover most needs with a comfortable budget. If you run automatic lines with aluminium or brass components, or if QR readability and long-term stability are critical, the 1200 W option offers a safer and more future-proof choice.
To discuss your parts, required cycle time and marking depth, you can contact our application engineers or request a free sample test on the GWEIKE M-Series fiber workstation.
