Dimensions
Size comparison
T-Rex 3NC92E
| T-Rex 3 | NC92E | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case size | 48.5 mm | 15 mm | +33.5 mm |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is T-Rex 3 better than NC92E?
- AMOLED / OLED displayYes · NC92E: No
- Resolution (width)480 px vs 170 px2.8×
- Screen size1.5″ vs 1.47″+2%
- Battery capacity700 mAh vs 500 mAh+40%
Why is NC92E better than T-Rex 3?
NC92E has no measurable advantages in this pair.
Specifications
Side by side
| Design & durability | ||
| Case size | 48 mm | 15 mm |
| Weight | 68.3 g | — |
| Thickness | 13.8 mm | — |
| Height | 48.5 mm | — |
| Width | 48.5 mm | — |
| Case material | Stainless steel | Plastic / polymer |
| Lens / cover glass | Gorilla Glass | — |
| Strap material | — | Silikon |
| Water resistance | 10 ATM | — |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 1.5″ | 1.47″ |
| Display technology | AMOLED | — |
| Panel | AMOLED | IPS |
| AMOLED / OLED display | Yes | No |
| Touchscreen | Yes | — |
| Resolution (width) | 480 px | 170 px |
| Resolution (height) | 480 px | 320 px |
| Pixel density | 322 ppi | — |
| Battery | ||
| Battery life (smartwatch mode) | 27 days | — |
| Battery saver mode | 40 days | — |
| Battery capacity | 700 mAh | 500 mAh |
| Charging | Magnetic charging base | — |
| Health sensors | ||
| Optical heart rate | Yes | — |
| Blood oxygen (SpO2) | Yes | — |
| Temperature sensor | Yes | — |
| Sleep tracking | Yes | — |
| Sensors | — | accelerometer |
| Sports & navigation | ||
| Built-in GPS | Yes | Yes |
| Dual-band GPS | Yes | — |
| Satellite systems | — | GPS |
| Offline maps | Yes | — |
| Barometric altimeter | Yes | — |
| Compass | Yes | — |
| Sport profiles | 177 | — |
| Connectivity | ||
| LTE (cellular) | — | Yes |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi 4 | — |
| Bluetooth | 5.2 | — |
| Smart features | ||
| Microphone | Yes | — |
| Voice assistant | Yes | — |
| Music on the watch | Yes | — |
| Platform | ||
| Platform | Proprietary | — |
| Works with | iOS, Android | — |
