Apple Watch dimensions

Apple didn’t announce a lot of specs of the Apple Watch besides the 2 different face sizes. There’s a 42 mm one and a 38 mm one. Thickness or screen size are nowhere to be found in Apple’s marketing material.

Based on the 42 mm Watch and several images on Apple’s website I did some measurements to determine some of the specs we don’t know yet.

According to Apple this watch should be 42 mm high.

I checked the 42mm with this image of a Watch next to an iPhone 6 of which we know the height (138.1 mm). It’s not a 6 Plus, I checked that too. The Watch is indeed 42mm high (metal to metal).

Based on this information it’s trivial to get all the other measurements. Now the size of the sapphire is known and we have this handy image of the side of the Watch.

I checked to make sure this is the 42 mm watch as well by overlapping the first image in this post. The screen is also a mystery, but I tried to get a sense it by finding an image on which the content is bordered by the screen on all sides. I assume that is the case in this image:

Now we’re able to get all the dimensions of the 42 mm Apple Watch.

42 mm Apple Watch dimensions

The body including sensor: 36.2 mm x 42 mm (12.46 mm thick)
The body without sensor: 36.2 mm x 42 mm (10.6 mm thick)

The sapphire part: 33.0 mm x 39.1 mm

The screen: 24.3 mm x 30.5 mm (about 39 mm / 1.54 inch diagonally), that makes the aspect ratio about 4:5.

38 mm Apple Watch dimensions

The body including sensor: 32.9 mm x 38 mm (12.3 mm thick)

There was some discussion in the comments on the thickness of the 38 mm unit. Thanks to the commenters I found images of the 38 mm Apple Watch from the side. Based on those images the 38 mm Watch is a little thinner than the 42 mm Watch.

Click for a *larger* version

The Digital Crown and button on the side of the Watch are the same size as well:

About the screens

I’ve seen the number 1.5 and 1.7 inch been thrown around as screen sizes, but that just seems be a direct translation of the 38 mm and 42 mm numbers Apple gave us, which are the heights of the devices.

I’ve got no idea of pixels dimensions or ppi, maybe that can be calculated based on screenshots of the demo during the keynote. Based on some images on Apple’s website I would take an uneducated guess at 280 x 350 which would put it at around 290 ppi.

Dave Chap shared an image showing the relative thickness to the iPhone5/5S and iPhone 6:

Update 2:
I updated the thickness of the 42 mm Apple Watch from 12.6 to 12.46 mm and added dimensions for the 38 mm one as well. I also added a comparison image looking at both watches from the side, including a very high resolution image.

59 Responses to Apple Watch dimensions

  1. Mark says:

    Apple’s “Introducing Apple Watch” video, narrated by Jony Ive, says “the stainless steel link bracelet has a slim deployment clasp that is contained within a 2.6mm band.” Given that measurement, it’s fairly straight forward to measure the other dimensions from . My measurements, with sensor, were:
    38mm: 33 ×38×12.4mm (15.5mL)
    42mm: 36.4×42×13mm (19.9mL)

  2. Nice Mark! I think the 38 mm will be as thick as the 42 mm, maybe thicker even (to make up for some lost space).

    Do you think the band is just the outer part? Or including the inner part? It sticks out a little on the inside.

  3. Mark says:

    I went with the part that sticks out a bit; however, the gallery pictures probably offer a better way to measure thickness. First, get good height and width measurements from the hi-res press image ( ) then use the gallery pics to measure the thickness (e.g. )

  4. Pete Wilson says:

    I did some more extensive measurements – the crown is 7.1mm diameter, the button 10.7mm tall. The watch has a 4.2mm bezel around the display with a 1.32″ or 1.53″ diagonal 4:5 display. I would guess it is around 240×320 for a 388ppi or 333ppi display depending on watch size.

    The watch is 12.2mm thick with the back sensor, or 10.4mm thick without the protrusion, with a 1.2mm glass top. I didn’t verify both watches as the same thickness, but I assume they are.

    The button and crown are the same size on both watches.

  5. Nice work Pete. I tried to find images from both watch sizes from the side, but I think they only show the 42 mm one from that angle. That model doesn’t look as fat from tje side as the 38 mm does.

  6. Czar says:

    Years ago I had a bulky diving watch and hated its feel. It was stainless steel too – but it was designed for resisting pressure. I realize that it’s not the same however, it makes me pause (which is a good aspect).

    So, the sensor (heart rate) is detachable? Which is the lowest cost watch? I’m guessing the sports watch.

    And of course, I’d definitely want to get my hands on both prior to purchase. I’m gravitating to the smaller one as I haven’t worn a watch in years and as mentioned previously detest bulky things on my wrist.

    What do these weigh? Did I miss it? Thanks.

  7. The sensor is not detachable. I noted the height without the sensor because you don’t really see that part. Visually on your wrist you don’t notice the sensor. I guess it will dig a bit in your wrist.

    My guess would also be that the sports watch is the cheapest, but they could charge a bit more because it is “different” from the regular watch.

    Apple didn’t announce the weights of any model. Only that the Apple Watch Sport line is 30% lighter due to not using Sapphire and having an aluminium body.

    I think Apple didn’t announce the weight, dimensions and battery life because those specs aren’t final yet. Apple wants to maximize battery life and maybe they need to make the 38mm version a bit thicker to make that happen.

  8. Mr. Bee says:

    I would hope that the 38mm version is not any thicker. Clearly the biggest downside to the entire design is the thickness or bulkiness.

    This will no doubt be mitigated over time in normal Apple fashion, but for now, any thicker than this almost 13mm monstrosity will be a definite negative.

    There are also an absolutely huge percentage of regular watches that go much smaller than Apple’s 38mm “small” version. They need a 28-30mm size as well.

  9. says:

    since it is retina but you want minimum voltage
    for screen

    256 x 320 pixels @ 1.5 inches = 273 ppi

    512 x 640 pixels @ 1.5 inches = 546 ppi

    9 by 9 grid of images displayed
    do those images look like 27 x 34
    or 54 x 68 or even smaller

    40 by 32 pixels * 9 = 360 x 288 @ 1.5 = 259 ppi

  10. says:

    sorry I made error
    360 x 288 @ 1.5 = 307 ppi

  11. 307ppi would be nice. From the demo on stage it looks like the resolution is great since it was blown up on a huge screen and I haven’t heard anyone mentioning how low-res it looked.

  12. Carl Jonard says:

    You can find higher-resolution screenshots on Apple’s website if you append _2x to the end of the filenames. For instance:

    In that screenshot, the artwork takes up 476 x 591 pixels. If that is a 1:1 screenshot, then overall dimensions of 480 x 600 would make a lot of sense, matching the apparent 4:5 aspect ratio.

    Interestingly, that resolution would also translate to pretty much exactly 500 ppi on a 3.9 cm-diagonal screen.

  13. For the measurements I used the high-res images.

    As for the screen: 500ppi seems like a lot. Apple is known to use higher quality artwork on screenshots than the device can actually render so I wouldn’t completely rely on that.

  14. Rishio says:

    I would guess that the 38mm would have a smaller screen, thereby reducing power consumption and so it could have a smaller battery than the 42mm but with similar battery life.

  15. Pingback: Apple Watch Dimensions - Apple news aggregator

  16. Does the Apple Watch remind anyone else of the first generation iPhone? It looks quite thick and round like the phone. The second-generation will probably have a thinner design, hopefully.

  17. Aslam says:

    This is all very interesting. Are any one of you able to create a cut-out sheet so we can get a feel for how big one of these will look on our wrist? There have been a bunch of these sorts of sheets created for the iPhone 6 and 6 plus.

    I have a somewhat slimmer wrist and so I would really love to get a feel for whether the 42mm one would look way too big on my wrist or not.

    I know that I will probably have to wait until it is actually released to really be able to tell but I’m impatient. :)

  18. says:

    6 gen ipod nano was
    240 x 240 @ 1.55 inches = 220 ppi.

    so at minimum 240 x 300 @ 1.5 inches = 256 ppi

    I still say it would be multiple of 9.
    at max it could be 450 x 360 @ 1.5 = 384 ppi.

  19. Pingback: Apple Watch dimensions analyzed

  20. Chris J says:

    Hi guys. I’m not sure I get how you’re using screen shots for pixel accuracy. I mean, all the product shots are CG so they can be any resolution they want for the website. It doesn’t seem you can really count pixels in this case. Thoughts?

  21. Pingback: 大胆猜测 Apple Watch 规格参数估计 | 苹果应用评测兑换APP - 尽在应用钉子 | iPhone游戏 | iPad游戏 | APP评测

  22. Pingback: Apple Watch ist 12 Millimeter dick & mehr Sensoren in Planung - Apfelpage

  23. Pingback: Apple Watch ist 12 Millimeter dick & mehr Sensoren in Planung | Caddyrns Crew

  24. Pete Wilson says:

    The Gallery shows some side views of the Edition watches, which only come in 42mm or 38mm depending on colors.

    From what I can see there, it looks like the 38mm is 12.2mm thick, the 42mm may be 12.4mm thick.

  25. You’re right Chris. The screenshots on the website are usually CG. I tried to grab some screen caps from the demo during the keynote, in which the actual screens where displayed on the big screen, but I couldn’t get much from that.

    The only thing I can gather from it, is that the horizontal resolution is a lot less than 550px. Doesn’t look like 450px either. It’s a bit to fuzzy. But then again, these are screenshots from a 1080p video with compression, everything is probably fuzzy.

  26. I updated the post with some more precise measurements which put the 42 mm Watch at 12.45 mm and the 38 mm Watch at 12.3 mm. So it’s a bit thinner.

    I included a very high-res image of both watches from the sides and super-imposed over each other.

  27. Pingback: 「大胆猜测」Apple Watch 规格参数估计 | 热资讯

  28. Thanks for the analysis! I was trying to do the same and I got roughly the same results, even if at first I got 42mm as width not height. Whoops. :)

    For the actual screen size, I did a template in sketch trying to match it with a Moto 360 in order to have mockups as pixel-precise as possible:

    So I tried to get the actual size of the screen in “pt”. I noticed that the actual area is smaller than the black area. You can see “full screen” shots on this page:
    See the “Timelapse” or “Photo” screens. Interpolating in sketch side-by-side with the Moto 360 at the right size, came out that the screen in pts should be around:

    Screen size: 190 × 236 pt
    Which @2x would be: 380 × 472 px

    Which seems reasonable. Anyone has a different result?

  29. Wow Davide, nice templates on Dribbble!

    Unfortunately we don’t have anything to go on for the screen resolution. The best bet is to look at real-life photos of the watch, not press photos.

    Images like these might be able to tell us something:

    This is a great one as well. You can see the pixels in this one:

  30. Pingback: Meinung: die Apple Watch | mobileCTRL

  31. Pingback: Apple Watch, dudas resueltas | - Las noticias de tecnología a tu alcance.

  32. Pingback: Apple Watch, dudas resueltas | iPhone iPad iPod

  33. Pingback: Apple Watch, dudas resueltas - TechNoticias

  34. Pingback: Apple Watch, dudas resueltas - TechNoticias

  35. Pingback: Apple Watch screen resolution estimate | Is it happening?

  36. Pingback: Apple Watch ist 12 Millimeter dick & mehr Sensoren in Planung | OSXi

  37. Pingback: Známe tloušťku a velikost displeje Apple Watch

  38. says:

    38/1.25 = 30.4 mm

    42/1.25 = 33.6 mm

    sqrt (30.4^2 + 38^2) = 48.6637 mm = 4.86637 cm = 1.91 inches

    sqrt (42^2 + 33.6^2) = 53.7862 mm = 5.37862 cm = 2.12 inches

    so the diagonal number much bigger than your estimate.

    resolution is much harder thing to estimate.

  39. @Dr. No: you’re assuming that the screen is the entire size of the device with those numbers, which does not seem to be the case. If you look at photos of the Watch with backgrounds, maps or photos you see that there is a bezel around the screen, so the screen is much smaller than the entire device.

  40. Pingback: Apple Watch będzie... wyjątkowo gruby

  41. Pingback: Le dimensioni dell’Apple Watch | Bicycle Mind

  42. Michael Salmon says:

    I took a look at the Pebble and it’s dimensions are:
    46mm L x 34mm W x 10.5mm T.
    The strap mounts are quite different however so that the body is pretty close to the same size as the 42mm model except that it is 2 mm thinner.

    I have a pebble and the size is about right except that it is a bit thick, especially in winter when I have a coat and gloves on.

  43. Josh Worth says:

    Some nice detective work here. I’ve got a similar post going on my blog, but I made the same mistake of assuming the entire watch face could be used for display. I’ll post a revision in a bit, but feel free to chime in here:

  44. Gavin says:

    Got some infographic diagrams of the Apple Watch dimensions here:

  45. Johan says:


    I’ve read 2 different dimensions on thickness here. I’m not sure they are 100% right (meaning on the tenth of a mm)

    I get precisely 12.3 mm when I use the largest sideview image on (the one that is cropped, but you can use 2 of those, L & R, to build a complete view. Muy images is 1624 pixels wide for the 42 mm)

    I haven’t measured the width.

    Without the sensor dome I get 10.4 mm thick.

  46. @Johan, You’re right. I got 12.3 mm first, but later measured it again on even higher quality images and came to the 12.46mm number.

    Of course there is margin of error in all measurements because of perspective in the images.

  47. Pingback: Přesné rozměry Apple Watch - Apple novinky

  48. For anyone who’s interested, I’ve got more on the possible resolution of the Apple Watch.

  49. Pingback: 073: Če tapkneš na uro, te gor vrže | Bitni pogovori

  50. Pingback: Meinung: die Apple Watch

  51. Page says:

    Thanks, Paul – nice work. Bad news for me though – I came to this site to assess dimensions since I’m in the market for a new (women’s) watch for Xmas & was considering holding out for an Apple Watch in early 2015. My take: the 38mm is NOT a women’s size watch. It is a smaller scale men’s watch and far too large for most women. I believe it is a half-hearted attempt at not obviously excluding women, and I doubt it will sell well since it is in a few-persons-land size range. If you look at watch size charts, generally the women’s range is 20-34mm and mens 36-50. Average appears to be around 42-44mm for men and 26-28mm for women. Personally, a 33mm would be about a max and would look quite large on my wrist (my wrist is about 50mm across). Based on your very nice diagram, I’d estimate the 38mm’s strap attachment loops as jutting out to about 46mm prior to adding the strap’s thickness. Further, even my thick running watch is about one iPhone6 thick (nice comparison). Net, despite being an early adopter of Apple products, I will not be in the market for the Watch until gen 2 or 3 when the size is down to at most 33mm and one iPhone thick – an actual (still large) women’s size.

  52. Hi Page, I think that in your case waiting is definitely the best option. I think that if they could go smaller they would, unless the UI won’t work on a smaller screen anymore.

    I think that interface wise they just scale everything down (like they scaled down the iPad interface to the iPad mini) and not keeping the same size UI elements (like they do with the iPhones).32mm might be the smallest they can go in that case, which is an estimate based on nothing by the way 😉

  53. We now know the screen pixels from WatchKit: 38 mm: 272 x 340
    42 mm: 312 x 390 pixels

  54. With pixels dimensions of 312×390 (on the 42mm watch) and a screen size of 24.3 mm x 30.5 mm, that gives a 326 ppi which is identical to iPhone’s pixel density.

  55. Nathalie De Clercq says:

    Hi Paul! Thanks for making this page.
    Do you think you’d be able to determine the approximate size of the charger in the back?
    Your measurements are really helpful but I’m wondering what the size of the charger in the back is going to be…

  56. Michael Schoening says:

    Hi Paul, great work! Geweldig gedaan:)
    One thing very important for me and may be others
    as well. Do you have any idea of the exact diameter
    of the charger?

    Any help would be highly appretiated


  57. Pingback: Battery Capacity Difference between 42mm and 38mm Apple Watch Models |

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *