OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Fitness trackers Methodology v3.0
Fitness trackers Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Fitness trackers Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Fitness trackers Methodology v3.0

Razer Nabu X review: 163 specs compared

Avg. price:~£45Battery life:6 daysScreen size:N/A inchHeart rate monitor:noGPS:noWaterproof depth rating:?

Razer Nabu X Review: Compare 163 technical specifications and 33 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Fitness trackers category and whether it is worth buying.

Razer Nabu X
6.3/10

Overall score

Score
6.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, best-of lists, expert reviews and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 35%, List score 30%, Reviews score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
Score components

35%

5.7

Technical score

30%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

5.7

Reviews score

10%

5.7

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 98% of fitness trackers
7.4

Value for money

Value for money
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the fitness tracker's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a fitness tracker with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
Score components

70%

6.3

Overall score

30%

10

Price

â–¼Worse than 98%
5.7

Technical score

Technical score
5.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 35% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components

20%

6.8

Sports

20%

4.5

Battery

18%

5.4

Health

18%

4.0

Display

8%

7.0

Smart functions

8%

7.7

Wellness

4%

7.3

Connectivity

4%

7.7

Design

â–¼Worse than 95%
5.7

Reviews score

Reviews score
5.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models

5.7

Mark 6.9 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

6.5

Average grade

20%

8.5

Popularity

Grades by review (33)
25 reviews: 16 with a printed score, 9 estimated from the review. 8 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 96%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 30% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • razer-nabu-x
  • razer-nabu-x
  • razer-nabu-x
  • razer-nabu-x
  • razer-nabu-x
razer-nabu-x
razer-nabu-x
razer-nabu-x
razer-nabu-x
razer-nabu-x
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Razer Nabu X

Based on 9 · 8

Reviewers find it comfortable, with solid battery life and great vibration alerts, but connection drops and poor sleep tracking let it down.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of fitness tracker Razer Nabu X

Technical score
Technical score
5.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 35% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components:

20%

6.8

Sports

20%

4.5

Battery

18%

5.4

Health

18%

4.0

Display

8%

7.0

Smart functions

8%

7.7

Wellness

4%

7.3

Connectivity

4%

7.7

Design

5.7
Reviews score
5.7
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the fitness tracker's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a fitness tracker with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
Score components:

70%

6.3

Overall score

30%

10

Price

7.4
Heart rate monitor
no
This fitness tracker does not support heart rate monitoring. 64.2% of fitness trackers support heart rate monitoring.
Resting heart rate
no
This fitness tracker does not support Resting heart rate. 53% of fitness trackers support Resting heart rate.
Fast/slow heart rate alerts
no
This fitness tracker does not support high and low heart rate alerts. 36.5% of fitness trackers support high and low heart rate alerts.
Irregular heart rate alerts
no
This fitness tracker does not support irregular heart rate alerts. 13.7% of fitness trackers support irregular heart rate alerts.
Blood oxygen sensor
no
This fitness tracker does not have a blood oxygen sensor. 32.2% of fitness trackers have a blood oxygen sensor.
Show more
What reviewers say
GPS
no
This fitness tracker does not have GPS. 12.7% of fitness trackers have GPS.
Satellite systems supported
no
This fitness tracker supports no satellite systems which is less versatile than that of 14.4% of fitness trackers and the same as that of 85.6% of fitness trackers.
GNSS bands supported
no
This fitness tracker does not support advanced GNSS bands. 8.4% of fitness trackers support advanced GNSS bands.
Galileo support
no
This fitness tracker does not support Galileo. 5.6% of fitness trackers support Galileo.
Acquires GPS faster
no
This fitness tracker does not support faster GPS acquisition. 8.1% of fitness trackers support faster GPS acquisition.
Show more
What reviewers say
Notifications
yes
This fitness tracker supports notifications. 27.8% of fitness trackers support notifications.
vibration-only alerts; no screen.
Vibrating alerts
yes
This fitness tracker supports vibration alerts. 14.3% of fitness trackers support vibration alerts.
Call control
no
This fitness tracker does not support call controls. 40.8% of fitness trackers support call controls.
Call answering
no
This fitness tracker does not support call answering. 0.9% of fitness trackers support call answering.
Calendar sync
no
This fitness tracker does not support calendar sync. 20.5% of fitness trackers support calendar sync.
Show more
What reviewers say
Activity reports
yes
This fitness tracker supports activity reports. 5% of fitness trackers support activity reports.
Goal setting
yes
This fitness tracker supports goal setting. 2.5% of fitness trackers support goal setting.
Achievements
?
Inactivity alerts
no
This fitness tracker does not support inactivity alerts. 79.1% of fitness trackers support inactivity alerts.
Coaching
no
This fitness tracker does not support coaching. 36.4% of fitness trackers support coaching.
Show more
What reviewers say
Bluetooth version
4
This fitness tracker supports Bluetooth 4 which is newer than in 4.6% of fitness trackers and equal to that in 47% of fitness trackers.
Maximum Bluetooth range
10 m
Market range: <9 m – >30 m
This fitness tracker offers a Bluetooth range of 10 m which is higher than that of 14.9% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 64.5% of fitness trackers.
NFC
no
This fitness tracker does not have NFC. 11.8% of fitness trackers have NFC.
Wi-Fi connectivity
?
Wi-Fi version
no
This fitness tracker does not support modern Wi-Fi. 0.9% of fitness trackers support modern Wi-Fi.
no Wi-Fi support.
Show more
What reviewers say
Battery life
6 days
Market range: <5 days – >180 days
This fitness tracker offers a battery life of 6 days which is shorter than that of 78.5% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 2.6% of fitness trackers.
source range 5-7 days.
Battery life with GPS on
N/A
Battery life in training mode
?
Power-saving battery life
?
Battery capacity
?
Show more
What reviewers say
Display
no
This fitness tracker does not have a display. 74.2% of fitness trackers have a display.
Screen size
N/A
Display type
N/A
Screen resolution
N/A
Pixel density
N/A
Show more
Form factor
wristband
Hybrid design
no
This fitness tracker does not support Hybrid design. 2.1% of fitness trackers support Hybrid design.
Designed for kids
no
This fitness tracker is not designed for kids. 3.3% of fitness trackers are designed for kids.
Replaceable watch band
no
This fitness tracker does not have a replaceable watch band. 77.1% of fitness trackers have a replaceable watch band.
Band width
15 mm
Show more
What reviewers say

Razer Nabu X vs the average fitness tracker

246810TotalHealthSportsBatteryDisplayConnectivitySmart functionsDesignWellness
  • Gesture control
    This fitness tracker supports gesture controls, while the average fitness tracker does not. 39.6% of fitness trackers support gesture controls.
    Handshake and shake-dismiss gestures.
  • 1 mm thinner design
    This fitness tracker is thinner than the average fitness tracker (10 mm vs 11 mm). The average fitness tracker has a thickness of 11 mm.
    10 mm vs 11 mm
  • Gesture control
    This fitness tracker supports gesture controls, while the average fitness tracker does not. 39.6% of fitness trackers support gesture controls.
    Handshake and shake-dismiss gestures.
  • 1 mm thinner design
    This fitness tracker is thinner than the average fitness tracker (10 mm vs 11 mm). The average fitness tracker has a thickness of 11 mm.
    10 mm vs 11 mm
  • No heart rate monitoring
    This fitness tracker does not support heart rate monitoring, while the average fitness tracker does. 63.9% of fitness trackers support heart rate monitoring.
  • No automatic activity detection
    This fitness tracker does not support automatic activity detection, while the average fitness tracker does. 56.4% of fitness trackers support automatic activity detection.
  • Higher resting heart rate
    This fitness tracker does not support Resting heart rate, while the average fitness tracker does. 52.7% of fitness trackers support Resting heart rate.
  • 4 days shorter battery life
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery life than the average fitness tracker (6 days vs 10 days). The average fitness tracker has 10 days of battery life.
    source range 5-7 days.
    6 days vs 10 days
  • No phone finder
    This fitness tracker does not support phone finding, while the average fitness tracker does. 50.9% of fitness trackers support phone finding.
  • 0.5 hours longer charging time
    This fitness tracker has a higher charging time than the average fitness tracker (2 hours vs 1.5 hours). The average fitness tracker needs 1.5 hours to charge.
    2 hours vs 1.5 hours
  • 21.9% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 96% of models

    5.7

    Mark 6.9 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    6.5

    Average grade

    20%

    8.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (33)
    25 reviews: 16 with a printed score, 9 estimated from the review. 8 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.7 vs 7.3
  • No weight tracking
    This fitness tracker does not support weight tracking, while the average fitness tracker does. 82.4% of fitness trackers support weight tracking.
  • 21.9% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 96% of models

    5.7

    Mark 6.9 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    6.5

    Average grade

    20%

    8.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (33)
    25 reviews: 16 with a printed score, 9 estimated from the review. 8 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.7 vs 7.3
  • 27.8% lower sentiment score
    5.7 vs 7.9
  • 9.3% worse value for money
    Razer Nabu X has a lower value-for-money score than the average fitness tracker (7.38 vs 8.1).
    7.38 vs 8.07
  • No heart rate monitoring
    This fitness tracker does not support heart rate monitoring, while the average fitness tracker does. 63.9% of fitness trackers support heart rate monitoring.
  • Higher resting heart rate
    This fitness tracker does not support Resting heart rate, while the average fitness tracker does. 52.7% of fitness trackers support Resting heart rate.
  • No automatic activity detection
    This fitness tracker does not support automatic activity detection, while the average fitness tracker does. 56.4% of fitness trackers support automatic activity detection.
  • No route tracker
    This fitness tracker does not support route tracking, while the average fitness tracker does. 52.3% of fitness trackers support route tracking.
  • 4 days shorter battery life
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery life than the average fitness tracker (6 days vs 10 days). The average fitness tracker has 10 days of battery life.
    source range 5-7 days.
    6 days vs 10 days
  • 0.5 hours longer charging time
    This fitness tracker has a higher charging time than the average fitness tracker (2 hours vs 1.5 hours). The average fitness tracker needs 1.5 hours to charge.
    2 hours vs 1.5 hours
  • No display
    This fitness tracker does not have a display, while the average fitness tracker does. 73.9% of fitness trackers have a display.
  • Old Bluetooth version
    This fitness tracker supports an older Bluetooth version than the average fitness tracker (4 vs 4.1). The average fitness tracker supports Bluetooth 4.1.
    4 vs 4.1
  • No phone finder
    This fitness tracker does not support phone finding, while the average fitness tracker does. 50.9% of fitness trackers support phone finding.
  • No stopwatch
    This fitness tracker does not have a stopwatch, while the average fitness tracker does. 60.5% of fitness trackers have a stopwatch.
  • Limited ip rating
    This fitness tracker has a lower IP rating than the average fitness tracker (IP67 vs IP68). The average fitness tracker has an IP rating of IP68.
    IP67 vs IP68
  • No replaceable watch band
    This fitness tracker does not have a replaceable watch band, while the average fitness tracker does. 76.8% of fitness trackers have a replaceable watch band.
  • 13.3% heavier
    This fitness tracker is heavier than the average fitness tracker (27.2 g vs 24 g). The average fitness tracker weighs 24 g.
    27.2 g vs 24 g
  • No weight tracking
    This fitness tracker does not support weight tracking, while the average fitness tracker does. 82.4% of fitness trackers support weight tracking.
  • No inactivity alerts
    This fitness tracker does not support inactivity alerts, while the average fitness tracker does. 78.7% of fitness trackers support inactivity alerts.
  • Not compatible with smart scales
    This fitness tracker is not compatible with smart scales, while the average fitness tracker is. 64.9% of fitness trackers are compatible with smart scales.
  • No BMI tracking
    This fitness tracker does not support BMI tracking, while the average fitness tracker does. 72.2% of fitness trackers support BMI tracking.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

7.0
Creative Burst Mode
≈ estimated
13/08/2016
Hands-on review · notifications, connection and value
Verdict
Razer Nabu X is recommended for budget buyers who want simple notifications and step tracking, not extra features.
4.0
EposVox
≈ estimated
09/11/2015
Hands-on review · pedometer, notifications and app
Verdict
Razer Nabu X has a working step counter, but weak notifications and a second fitness app make it hard to recommend.
9.5
PrismaTech
≈ estimated
03/07/2015
Hands-on review · battery, notifications and app
Verdict
Razer Nabu X is a very good smart band, with wrist notifications and minor build issues.
7.0
Capsule Computers
✓ explicit
08/05/2015
Hands-on review · battery, fit and app tests
Verdict
Razer Nabu X is a decent first attempt at a budget smart band, recommended if you can live with limited software.
Shop video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

5.0
wareable.com
≈ estimated
09/02/2015
Week-long test · Fitness band
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is a comfortable, discreet band with good battery life, but inaccurate step and sleep tracking and missing features make it feel unfinished.
6.2
theverge.com
✓ explicit
15/05/2015
Week-long test · Smartband
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is a comfortable band with about a week of battery life, but vague LED alerts and split iPhone apps make it hard to recommend.
6.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
14/05/2015
Hands-on review · Entry-level tracker
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is a comfortable, discreet tracker that is easy to forget on the wrist, but unreliable features, few apps and oversimplified alerts hold it back.
5.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
21/05/2015
Week-long test · Social wearable
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is a decent tracker for steps and battery life, but unresponsive taps, unclear lights and missing gaming features make it feel unfinished.
5.0
uk.pcmag.com
≈ estimated
21/05/2015
Hands-on review · Social wearable
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is a decent step tracker that is light on guidance and features, and its unclear lights and proprietary cable limit its appeal.
7.0
gizmodo.com
≈ estimated
11/05/2015
Week-long test · Fitness band
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is a decent fitness tracker with a long-lasting battery and a silent alarm, but its three-color alerts and inflated calorie totals hold it back.
4.0
memeburn.com
✓ explicit
12/11/2015
Week-long test · Social band
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is a long-lasting, waterproof band, but its complicated reset, scattered apps and unused social features make it hard to recommend over other bands.
4.0
digitaltrends.com
✓ explicit
23/08/2019
Hands-on test · Social fitness band
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is a light, comfortable band that counts steps well, but its unstable iPhone app and lack of coaching hold it back.
8.6
fitness-bands.net
✓ explicit
Not Dated
Long review · Stylish fitness band
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is a stylish, comfortable band with customizable light alerts, but unreliable data recording and short battery life hold it back.
6.0
gadfit.com
≈ estimated
20/02/2015
In-depth review · Social fitness band
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is a light, waterproof band whose customizable alert colors are its main draw, but its basic tracking and small app range hold it back.
4.5
laptops.co.uk
✓ explicit
08/02/2016
Hands-on review · Notification wristband
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is a notification wristband with some fitness features, best for glancing at alerts rather than tracking workouts.
6.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
14/05/2015
Hands-on review · Fitness band
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is a simple tracker whose step counts matched an Apple Watch closely, but its two-app setup and basic fitness tracking hold it back.
6.0
testedtechs.com
≈ estimated
06/05/2026
Hands-on test · Gamer wearable
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is comfortable and easy to clasp, but glitchy handshake alerts and sleep tracking make it a gadget that still needs work for gamers.
6.0
lesnumeriques.com
✓ explicit
29/08/2015
Ten-day test · LED tracker
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is a basic tracker whose vibrating alerts work well in meetings and on transit, but its loose clip and two-app setup hold it back.
6.4
01net.com
✓ explicit
02/07/2015
Hands-on test · Activity band
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is light, waterproof and lasts a week, but its step and calorie counts are imprecise and it needs daily syncing to keep your data.
4.0
frandroid.com
✓ explicit
17/05/2015
Hands-on test · Notification band
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X is a light, well-made band that vibrates for calls and messages and lasts about five days, but glitchy apps and uneven tracking let it down.
igen.fr
30/08/2015
Not graded yet
igen.fr
30/08/2015
Not graded yet
7.5
tuttoandroid.net
✓ explicit
15/04/2015
Hands-on review · Design-led band
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X has a stylish, adjustable design and a strong vibrating alarm, but its app loses data and sleep readings are often unreliable.
6.0
wired.it
✓ explicit
03/06/2015
Review · Multi-app notification band
Verdict
The Razer Nabu X gets about a week of battery, a strong vibrating alarm and LED step progress, but its calorie counts are rough and it needs three apps.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Razer Nabu X

  • Highly comfortable, lightweight, and unobtrusive for all-day wear
  • Very affordable entry-level price point
  • Solid battery life, typically lasting between 5 to 7 days
  • IP67 water resistance allows for use in showers or rain
  • Discrete design with customizable LED notification colors
  • Effective silent vibration alarm for waking up without disturbing others

What customers don't like about Razer Nabu X

  • Lack of a screen makes notifications difficult to differentiate at a glance
  • Rubber strap material is a magnet for dust, lint, and hair
  • Double-tap gesture for checking progress is often unresponsive or finicky
  • Requires multiple separate apps (Utility and Fitness) to operate fully
  • Step and sleep tracking can be inconsistent or inaccurate compared to rivals
  • Uses a proprietary charging cable rather than standard micro-USB
  • Promised 'social' and 'gaming' features were often buggy or under-delivered
  • Software support and official updates have long since been discontinued

Verdict

The Razer Nabu X is a screenless, budget-friendly fitness tracker that utilizes a three-LED notification system and a cylindrical vibration motor to alert users to incoming calls and app alerts. Built with a 3-axis accelerometer, it tracks steps, distance, calories burned, and sleep quality, featuring an IP67 water resistance rating and a battery life lasting between 5 to 7 days. Key advantages include its lightweight, comfortable silicone design, discreet profile, and a unique 'Hi-5' social feature for exchanging contact info with nearby users; however, it is held back by the lack of a real-time display, occasional unresponsiveness, and the requirement of a proprietary charging cable.

Compare Razer Nabu X with other products in the Fitness trackers category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Razer Nabu X and other products in the Fitness trackers category

No results found