vs
3.5Display3.8
Dimensions
Size comparison
Watch 4000105
| Watch 4000 | 105 | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case size | 46 mm | 49.5 mm | −3.5 mm |
| Thickness | 11 mm | 14 mm | −3 mm |
| Weight | 39 g | 78 g | −38 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is Watch 4000 better than 105?
- Built-in GPSYes · 105: No
- Weight39 g vs 77.5 g+99%
- Thickness11 mm vs 14 mm+27%
Why is 105 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 | 77.5 g |
| Thickness | 11 mm | 14 mm |
| Height | — | 115.5 mm |
| Width | — | 49.5 mm |
| Case material | Stainless steel | — |
| Strap material | Kunststoff | — |
| Ingress protection | — | IP54 |
| Water resistance (IPx) | — | IPx4 |
| Colours | Black | Black, Blue, Purple |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 1.65″ | 2″ |
| Display technology | LCD | LCD |
| Panel | LCD | TFT LCD |
| 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 | — |
| 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) | — | No |
| eSIM | — | No |
| Bluetooth | 5.3 | — |
| Smart features | ||
| Speaker | — | Yes |
| Voice assistant | Yes | — |
| RAM | — | 0.004 GB |
| Platform | ||
| Operating system | — | RTOS OS |
| Platform | — | Proprietary |
| Works with | iOS, Android | — |
