vs
5.0Health tracking5.0
Dimensions
Size comparison
WATCH FIT 22.0
| WATCH FIT 2 | 2.0 | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case size | 46 mm | 46 mm | = |
| Thickness | 10.8 mm | 13 mm | −2.2 mm |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is WATCH FIT 2 better than 2.0?
- Battery life (smartwatch mode)10 days vs 7 days+43%
- Thickness10.8 mm vs 13 mm+20%
Why is 2.0 better than WATCH FIT 2?
2.0 has no measurable advantages in this pair.
Specifications
Side by side
| Design & durability | ||
| Case size | 46 mm | 46 mm |
| Weight | 26 g | — |
| Thickness | 10.8 mm | 13 mm |
| Case material | — | Ceramic |
| Lens / cover glass | 2.5D-Glas | Mineralglas |
| Strap material | — | Silikon |
| Water resistance | 5 ATM | — |
| Water rating (maker) | 50 m / 5 bar / 5 ATM | — |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 1.74″ | — |
| Display technology | AMOLED | — |
| Panel | AMOLED | — |
| AMOLED / OLED display | Yes | — |
| Always-on display | Yes | — |
| Touchscreen | Yes | — |
| Resolution (width) | 480 px | — |
| Resolution (height) | 336 px | — |
| Battery | ||
| Battery life (smartwatch mode) | 10 days | 7 days |
| Battery life (hours) | — | 168 h |
| Battery capacity | — | 300 mAh |
| Battery type | — | Li-Ion |
| Wireless charging | Yes | — |
| Charging | kabellos, magnetische Ladeschale | — |
| Health sensors | ||
| Optical heart rate | Yes | Yes |
| Blood oxygen (SpO2) | Yes | Yes |
| Sleep tracking | Yes | Yes |
| Sensors | heart rate, SpO2, accelerometer, ambient light | heart rate, SpO2, accelerometer |
| Sports & navigation | ||
| Built-in GPS | Yes | Yes |
| Satellite systems | GPS | GPS |
| Compass | Yes | — |
| Connectivity | ||
| Bluetooth | 5.2 | 5 |
| Smart features | ||
| Calls from the wrist | Yes | — |
| Voice assistant | Yes | — |
| Music on the watch | Yes | — |
| Storage | 4 GB | — |
| Platform | ||
| Operating system | Harmony OS | — |
| Platform | HarmonyOS | — |
| Works with | Android, iOS | iOS, Android |
