Dimensions
Size comparison
BT103BT50
| BT103 | BT50 | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Height | 49.5 mm | 51.2 mm | −1.7 mm |
| Width | 40 mm | 51.2 mm | −11.2 mm |
| Thickness | 10.9 mm | 13 mm | −2.1 mm |
| Weight | 100 g | 76 g | +24 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is BT103 better than BT50?
- Screen size1.91″ vs 1.43″+34%
- Thickness10.9 mm vs 13 mm+19%
Why is BT50 better than BT103?
- AMOLED / OLED displayNo · BT103: Yes
- Weight100 g vs 76 g+32%
- SpeakerNo · BT103: Yes
- Resolution (width)320 px vs 466 px+46%
- Battery capacity300 mAh vs 400 mAh+33%
- Pixel density260 ppi vs 326 ppi+25%
Specifications
Side by side
| Design & durability | ||
| Case size | 50 mm | 51 mm |
| Weight | 100 g | 76 g |
| Thickness | 10.9 mm | 13 mm |
| Height | 49.5 mm | 51.2 mm |
| Width | 40 mm | 51.2 mm |
| Lens / cover glass | Tempered glass | — |
| Water resistance | — | 1 ATM |
| Ingress protection | — | IP68 |
| Water resistance (IPx) | — | IPx8 |
| Colours | Black, White | Silver, Gray |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 1.91″ | 1.43″ |
| Display technology | LCD | AMOLED |
| Panel | TFT LCD | AMOLED |
| AMOLED / OLED display | No | Yes |
| Resolution (width) | 320 px | 466 px |
| Resolution (height) | 380 px | 466 px |
| Pixel density | 260 ppi | 326 ppi |
| Peak brightness | — | 600 nits |
| Refresh rate | 60 Hz | 60 Hz |
| Battery | ||
| Battery capacity | 300 mAh | 400 mAh |
| Battery type | — | Li-Po |
| Health sensors | ||
| Optical heart rate | Yes | Yes |
| Blood oxygen (SpO2) | Yes | Yes |
| Sensors | Accelerometer, heart rate, SpO2 | Accelerometer, heart rate, SpO2 |
| Sports & navigation | ||
| Built-in GPS | No | No |
| Connectivity | ||
| NFC payments | No | No |
| LTE (cellular) | No | No |
| eSIM | No | No |
| Bluetooth | 5.2 | 5.2 |
| Smart features | ||
| Speaker | No | Yes |
| Platform | ||
| Operating system | Proprietary OS | Proprietary OS |
| Platform | Proprietary | Proprietary |
