vs
7.7Display8.7
5.0Health tracking5.0
Why is Bip 6 better than Smart SQ 2.0 1.70?
- Weight27.9 g vs 160 g5.7×
- Screen size1.97″ vs 1.7″+16%
- Battery capacity340 mAh vs 210 mAh+62%
Why is Smart SQ 2.0 1.70 better than Bip 6?
Smart SQ 2.0 1.70 has no measurable advantages in this pair.
Specifications
Side by side
| Design & durability | ||
| Case size | 46 mm | — |
| Weight | 27.9 g | 160 g |
| Thickness | 10.4 mm | — |
| Height | 40.2 mm | — |
| Width | 46.3 mm | — |
| Case material | Aluminium | — |
| Lens / cover glass | Tempered glass + anti-fingerprint coating | — |
| Strap material | — | Edelstahl |
| Water resistance | 5 ATM | — |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 1.97″ | 1.7″ |
| Display technology | AMOLED | AMOLED |
| Panel | AMOLED | AMOLED |
| AMOLED / OLED display | Yes | Yes |
| Touchscreen | Yes | — |
| Resolution (width) | 390 px | — |
| Resolution (height) | 450 px | — |
| Pixel density | 302 ppi | — |
| Peak brightness | 2,000 nits | — |
| Battery | ||
| Battery life (smartwatch mode) | 14 days | — |
| Battery saver mode | 26 days | — |
| GPS battery life | 32 h | — |
| Battery capacity | 340 mAh | 210 mAh |
| Battery type | — | Li-Ion |
| Health sensors | ||
| Optical heart rate | Yes | Yes |
| Blood oxygen (SpO2) | Yes | Yes |
| Sleep tracking | Yes | — |
| Sensors | — | heart rate, SpO2 |
| Sports & navigation | ||
| Built-in GPS | Yes | — |
| Compass | Yes | — |
| Multisport / triathlon mode | — | Yes |
| Sport profiles | 140 | — |
| Connectivity | ||
| Bluetooth | 5.2 | — |
| Smart features | ||
| Calls from the wrist | Yes | — |
| Speaker | Yes | — |
| Microphone | Yes | — |
| Voice assistant | Yes | — |
| Music on the watch | Yes | — |
| Platform | ||
| Platform | Proprietary | — |
| Works with | Android, iOS | iOS, Android |
