NewGarmin MARQ Adventurer (Gen 3) added to the catalogSee specs →Advertise
idk.devsmartwatches & bands, compared
  1. idk.dev
  2. Compare
  3. 301 vs BTIONWATCHPRORK

Bea-Fon 301 vs Cellular Line BTIONWATCHPRORK

What 301 does better (2) and where BTIONWATCHPRORK wins (0) — every spec side by side.

Bea-Fon 301
Bea-Fon · 2025301
9.4Score
2 advantages≈ $45
Higher score
vs
Cellular Line BTIONWATCHPRORK
Cellular Line · 2025BTIONWATCHPRORK
4.0Score
0 advantages≈ $45
9.4Display3.2
4.9Health tracking4.9
Dimensions

Size comparison

301BTIONWATCHPRORK
41 × 4135 × 3534
301BTIONWATCHPRORKDifference
Case size41 mm35 mm+6 mm

Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).

Why is 301 better than BTIONWATCHPRORK?

  1. AMOLED / OLED displayYes · BTIONWATCHPRORK: No
  2. Screen size1.45″ vs 1.38″+5%

Why is BTIONWATCHPRORK better than 301?

BTIONWATCHPRORK has no measurable advantages in this pair.

Specifications

Side by side

To compare: 0up to 4 models
Compare