vs
8.7Display6.5
5.0Health tracking5.0
Why is Smart SQ 2.0 1.70 better than Watch 5?
- Screen size1.7″ vs 1.43″+19%
Why is Watch 5 better than Smart SQ 2.0 1.70?
- Weight160 g vs 32 g5×
- Battery capacity210 mAh vs 505 mAh2.4×
Specifications
Side by side
| Design & durability | ||
| Case size | — | 45 mm |
| Weight | 160 g | 32 g |
| Thickness | — | 11.4 mm |
| Height | — | 45 mm |
| Width | — | 45 mm |
| Case material | — | Stainless steel |
| Strap material | Edelstahl | — |
| Water resistance | — | 5 ATM |
| Colours | — | Black, White, Stainless steel silver |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 1.7″ | 1.43″ |
| Display technology | AMOLED | AMOLED |
| Panel | AMOLED | AMOLED |
| AMOLED / OLED display | Yes | Yes |
| Resolution (width) | — | 466 px |
| Resolution (height) | — | 466 px |
| Pixel density | — | 326 ppi |
| Peak brightness | — | 1,500 nits |
| Refresh rate | — | 60 Hz |
| Battery | ||
| Battery capacity | 210 mAh | 505 mAh |
| Battery type | Li-Ion | — |
| Health sensors | ||
| Optical heart rate | Yes | Yes |
| Blood oxygen (SpO2) | Yes | Yes |
| Sensors | heart rate, SpO2 | Accelerometer, gyro, heart rate, compass, SpO2 |
| Sports & navigation | ||
| Built-in GPS | — | Yes |
| Satellite systems | — | GLONASS, GALILEO, BDS, QZSS |
| Compass | — | Yes |
| Multisport / triathlon mode | Yes | — |
| Connectivity | ||
| NFC payments | — | Yes |
| LTE (cellular) | — | Yes |
| eSIM | — | Yes |
| Bluetooth | — | 5.4 |
| Smart features | ||
| Speaker | — | No |
| Platform | ||
| Operating system | — | Blue OS 2 |
| Platform | — | Proprietary |
| Works with | iOS, Android | — |
Related comparisons
vs
Xiaomi Redmi Watch 6vsIce Watch Smart SQ 2.0 1.708.48.5
vsHonor Watch X5vsIce Watch Smart SQ 2.0 1.708.38.5vs
Ice Watch Smart SQ 2.0 1.70vsBea-Fon Watch 2018.59.2vs
Ice Watch Smart SQ 2.0 1.70vsXiaomi Smart Band 9 Pro8.58.8vs
Ice Watch Smart SQ 2.0 1.70vsXiaomi Smart Band 8 Pro8.59.0vs
Ice Watch Smart SQ 2.0 1.70vsRadley Series 32 W6LWP denim