vs
2.0Display3.3
Why is SWC-342 better than 105 (2023)?
- Resolution (width)240 px vs 120 px2×
- Thickness11 mm vs 14.5 mm+32%
Why is 105 (2023) better than SWC-342?
- Screen size1.2″ vs 1.8″+50%
- Battery capacity180 mAh vs 1,000 mAh5.6×
Specifications
Side by side
| Design & durability | ||
| Weight | — | 78.7 g |
| Thickness | 11 mm | 14.5 mm |
| Height | — | 115.1 mm |
| Width | — | 49.4 mm |
| Case material | Plastic / polymer | — |
| Strap material | Kunststoff | — |
| Colours | — | Red Terracotta, Cyan, Charcoal |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 1.2″ | 1.8″ |
| Display technology | — | LCD |
| Panel | Farbdisplay | TFT LCD |
| AMOLED / OLED display | No | No |
| Resolution (width) | 240 px | 120 px |
| Resolution (height) | 240 px | 160 px |
| Pixel density | — | 111 ppi |
| Refresh rate | — | 60 Hz |
| Battery | ||
| Battery life (smartwatch mode) | 3 days | — |
| Battery capacity | 180 mAh | 1,000 mAh |
| Battery type | — | Li-Ion |
| Health sensors | ||
| Optical heart rate | Yes | — |
| ECG | Yes | — |
| Sleep tracking | Yes | — |
| Sensors | heart rate, accelerometer | — |
| Sports & navigation | ||
| Built-in GPS | — | No |
| Connectivity | ||
| NFC payments | — | No |
| LTE (cellular) | — | No |
| eSIM | — | No |
| Bluetooth | 3 | — |
| Smart features | ||
| Speaker | — | Yes |
| Platform | ||
| Works with | Android | — |
| Chipset | Realtek 8763C | — |
