vs
3.5Display3.8
Dimensions
Size comparison
Watch 4000102 4G
| Watch 4000 | 102 4G | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case size | 46 mm | 50.2 mm | −4.2 mm |
| Thickness | 11 mm | 14.3 mm | −3.3 mm |
| Weight | 39 g | 84 g | −45 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is Watch 4000 better than 102 4G?
- Built-in GPSYes · 102 4G: No
- Weight39 g vs 84.2 g2.2×
- Thickness11 mm vs 14.3 mm+30%
Why is 102 4G better than Watch 4000?
- Battery capacity300 mAh vs 1,000 mAh3.3×
- Screen size1.65″ vs 2″+21%
Specifications
Side by side
| Design & durability | ||
| Case size | 46 mm | — |
| Weight | 39 g | 84.2 g |
| Thickness | 11 mm | 14.3 mm |
| Height | — | 118.2 mm |
| Width | — | 50.2 mm |
| Case material | Stainless steel | — |
| Strap material | Kunststoff | — |
| Colours | Black | Dark Blue, Red, Purple |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 1.65″ | 2″ |
| Display technology | LCD | LCD |
| Panel | LCD | TFT |
| AMOLED / OLED display | No | No |
| Resolution (width) | — | 120 px |
| Resolution (height) | — | 160 px |
| Pixel density | — | 100 ppi |
| Refresh rate | — | 60 Hz |
| Battery | ||
| Battery life (smartwatch mode) | 6 days | — |
| Battery capacity | 300 mAh | 1,000 mAh |
| Battery type | Li-Po | Li-Ion |
| Health sensors | ||
| Optical heart rate | Yes | — |
| Blood oxygen (SpO2) | Yes | — |
| Sleep tracking | Yes | — |
| Sensors | heart rate, SpO2, accelerometer | — |
| Sports & navigation | ||
| Built-in GPS | Yes | No |
| Satellite systems | GPS | — |
| Connectivity | ||
| NFC payments | — | No |
| LTE (cellular) | — | Yes |
| eSIM | — | No |
| Bluetooth | 5.3 | 4.2 |
| Smart features | ||
| Speaker | — | Yes |
| Voice assistant | Yes | — |
| Platform | ||
| Works with | iOS, Android | — |
| Chipset | — | Unisoc 8910 FF-S |
