vs
4.2Display2.8
5.0Health tracking5.0
3.9Smart features2.5
Dimensions
Size comparison
C28Moto Watch 40
| C28 | Moto Watch 40 | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Height | 58.3 mm | 45.9 mm | +12.4 mm |
| Width | 46.1 mm | 30.8 mm | +15.3 mm |
| Thickness | 13.3 mm | 10.2 mm | +3.1 mm |
| Weight | 44 g | 26 g | +18 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is C28 better than Moto Watch 40?
- Screen size2.02″ vs 1.57″+29%
- SpeakerYes · Moto Watch 40: No
- Battery capacity410 mAh vs 240 mAh+71%
- Resolution (width)320 px vs 240 px+33%
- Pixel density250 ppi vs 235 ppi+6%
Why is Moto Watch 40 better than C28?
- Weight44.5 g vs 26 g+71%
- Thickness13.3 mm vs 10.2 mm+30%
Specifications
Side by side
| Design & durability | ||
| Case size | 58 mm | 46 mm |
| Weight | 44.5 g | 26 g |
| Thickness | 13.3 mm | 10.2 mm |
| Height | 58.3 mm | 45.9 mm |
| Width | 46.1 mm | 30.8 mm |
| Water resistance | 1 ATM | — |
| Ingress protection | — | IP67 |
| Water resistance (IPx) | — | IPx7 |
| Colours | Black, Green | Phantom Black, Black Rose Gold |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 2.02″ | 1.57″ |
| Display technology | LCD | LCD |
| Panel | TFT LCD | IPS LCD |
| AMOLED / OLED display | No | No |
| Resolution (width) | 320 px | 240 px |
| Resolution (height) | 390 px | 280 px |
| Pixel density | 250 ppi | 235 ppi |
| Refresh rate | 60 Hz | 60 Hz |
| Battery | ||
| Battery capacity | 410 mAh | 240 mAh |
| Wireless charging | — | No |
| Charged in 30 min | — | 120% |
| Health sensors | ||
| Optical heart rate | Yes | Yes |
| Blood oxygen (SpO2) | Yes | Yes |
| Sensors | Accelerometer, heart rate, SpO2, blood pressure | Accelerometer, heart rate, SpO2 |
| Sports & navigation | ||
| Built-in GPS | No | No |
| Connectivity | ||
| NFC payments | No | No |
| LTE (cellular) | No | No |
| eSIM | No | No |
| Bluetooth | — | 5 |
| Smart features | ||
| Speaker | Yes | No |
| Platform | ||
| Operating system | Proprietary OS | Moto Watch OS |
| Platform | Proprietary | Proprietary |
