OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Smartwatches Methodology v2.0
Smartwatches Methodology v2.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontumo Smartwatches Methodology v2.0: technical specifications plus grades from 3,488 independent expert reviews and 5,037 video reviews, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Smartwatches Methodology v2.0

Fossil Gen 5E Review | 126 Data compared

Avg. price:~£200Screen size:1.19 inchBattery life:1 daysDisplay type:AMOLED

Fossil Gen 5E Review: Compare 126 technical specifications and 20 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Smartwatches category and whether it is worth buying.

6.4

Overall score

Score
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the smartwatch's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best smartwatches on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
Score components

70%

5.9

Technical score

30%

7.5

Review score ( 8 · 12)

Review score 30% · 7.5 · based on 20 independent reviews
Every model in this category gets the same split: reviews 30%, technical score 70%. This model has enough reviews, so its review score is the weighted average of their grades.
â–¼Worse than 59% of smartwatches
5.9

Technical score

Technical score
5.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the smartwatchx27s technical performance, covering seven key areas: health, fitness, display & design, hardware, battery, smart features and connectivity.
When it matters
When you want to compare smartwatches based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
Score components

24%

4.1

Health

21%

7.3

Fitness

16%

5.7

Battery

14%

6.9

Smart features

12%

5.4

Connectivity

9%

6.6

Display & Design

4%

6.1

Hardware

â–¼Worse than 59% of smartwatches
7.5

Review score

Review score
7.5/ 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.
Weighting: Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Share: Reviews are 30% of the overall score for every model in this category; each of the 5 needed reviews that is missing counts as 7/10.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 57% of models
Grades by review (20)
Text reviews 5
✓ explicit
3

7.5%

8.0

androidcentral.com

7.5%

8.0

indianexpress.com

7.5%

7.0

tech.hindustantimes.com

≈ estimated
2

7.5%

8.0

thehindubusinessline.com

7.5%

6.0

sypnotix.com

Video reviews 8

3.8%

9.0

Wearholic

3.8%

8.0

M20UBR

3.8%

8.0

Struggleville2

3.8%

8.0

TechCrackedWeekly

3.8%

6.0

Clueless Guy

1.9%

9.0

JDubb

1.9%

8.0

NDTV

1.9%

7.0

The Product Lab

estimated from the review
8 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 12 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Share in the overall score: 30%, the same for every model in this category.
Shop star ratings are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 57% of smartwatches
  • fossil-gen-5e
  • fossil-gen-5e
  • fossil-gen-5e
  • fossil-gen-5e
  • fossil-gen-5e
  • fossil-gen-5e
  • fossil-gen-5e
  • fossil-gen-5e
  • fossil-gen-5e
fossil-gen-5e
fossil-gen-5e
fossil-gen-5e
fossil-gen-5e
fossil-gen-5e
fossil-gen-5e
fossil-gen-5e
fossil-gen-5e
fossil-gen-5e

Best prices

*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.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of smartwatch Fossil Gen 5E

Technical score
Technical score
5.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the smartwatchx27s technical performance, covering seven key areas: health, fitness, display & design, hardware, battery, smart features and connectivity.
When it matters
When you want to compare smartwatches based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
Score components:

24%

4.1

Health

21%

7.3

Fitness

16%

5.7

Battery

14%

6.9

Smart features

12%

5.4

Connectivity

9%

6.6

Display & Design

4%

6.1

Hardware

5.9
Review score
Review score
7.5/ 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.
Weighting: Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Share: Reviews are 30% of the overall score for every model in this category; each of the 5 needed reviews that is missing counts as 7/10.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 57% of models
Grades by review (20)
Text reviews 5
✓ explicit
3

7.5%

8.0

androidcentral.com

7.5%

8.0

indianexpress.com

7.5%

7.0

tech.hindustantimes.com

≈ estimated
2

7.5%

8.0

thehindubusinessline.com

7.5%

6.0

sypnotix.com

Video reviews 8

3.8%

9.0

Wearholic

3.8%

8.0

M20UBR

3.8%

8.0

Struggleville2

3.8%

8.0

TechCrackedWeekly

3.8%

6.0

Clueless Guy

1.9%

9.0

JDubb

1.9%

8.0

NDTV

1.9%

7.0

The Product Lab

estimated from the review
8 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 12 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Share in the overall score: 30%, the same for every model in this category.
Shop star ratings are not part of this score.
7.5
Value for money
Value for money
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the smartwatch's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a smartwatch with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
Score components:

60%

6.4

Overall score

40%

9.5

Price

7.3
Brand name
Fossil
Heart rate monitor
yes
Heart rate monitor
yes
â–² Better than 11% of models
This smartwatch includes a heart rate monitor. 10.5% of smartwatches include a heart rate monitor.
Blood oxygen monitoring
no
Blood oxygen monitoring
no
â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
This smartwatch does not support blood oxygen monitoring. 66.8% of smartwatches support blood oxygen monitoring.
ECG
no
ECG
no
â–¼ Worse than 17% of models
This smartwatch does not support ECG. 16.6% of smartwatches support ECG.
Irregular heart rate warnings
no
Irregular heart rate warnings
no
â–¼ Worse than 48% of models
This smartwatch does not support irregular heart rate warnings. 48.2% of smartwatches support irregular heart rate warnings.
Show more
Accelerometer
yes
Accelerometer
yes
â–² Better than 1% of models
This smartwatch includes an accelerometer. 0.6% of smartwatches include an accelerometer.
Barometer
no
Barometer
no
â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
This smartwatch does not include a barometer. 49.6% of smartwatches include a barometer.
Gyroscope
yes
Gyroscope
yes
â–² Better than 30% of models
This smartwatch includes a gyroscope. 30.2% of smartwatches include a gyroscope.
Cadence sensor
yes
Cadence sensor
yes
â–² Better than 69% of models
This smartwatch includes a cadence sensor. 69% of smartwatches include a cadence sensor.
Distance tracking
yes
Distance tracking
yes
â–² Better than 4% of models
This smartwatch supports distance tracking. 4.1% of smartwatches support distance tracking.
Show more
Battery life
1 day
Battery life
1 days
â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
Market range: <1 days – >16 days
This smartwatch offers a battery life of 1 days which is shorter than that of 87.3% of smartwatches and equal to that of 8.6% of smartwatches.
Battery life in training mode
?
Battery life with GPS on
N/A
Battery power
300 mAh
Battery power
300 mAh
â–¼ Worse than 49% of models
Market range: <195 mAh – >475 mAh
This smartwatch has a battery capacity of 300 mAh which is larger than the batteries in 44.5% of smartwatches and equal to those in 6.7% of smartwatches.
Charge time
60 min
Charge time
60 min
â–² Better than 83% of models
Market range: <60 min – >150 min
This smartwatch charges in 60 min which is faster than 82.6% of smartwatches and equal to the charge time of 12.1% of smartwatches.
Show more
What reviewers say
Operating system
Wear OS
Operating system
Wear OS
â–² Better than 79% of models
This smartwatch runs Wear OS which is more advanced than the operating system in 79% of smartwatches and the same as that in 16.6% of smartwatches.
Software update frequency
ended
Software update frequency
ended
â–¼ Worse than 43% of models
This smartwatch has ended software update support which is less active than that of 42.6% of smartwatches and equal to that of 57.5% of smartwatches.
Third-party app support
yes
Third-party app support
yes
â–² Better than 52% of models
This smartwatch supports third-party apps. 52.4% of smartwatches support third-party apps.
Notifications
yes
Notifications
yes
Category Benchmark
This smartwatch supports notifications. 0.3% of smartwatches support notifications.
Voice assistant support
yes
Voice assistant support
yes
â–² Better than 32% of models
This smartwatch supports voice assistants. 32.4% of smartwatches support voice assistants.
Show more
What reviewers say
Cellular module
no
Cellular module
no
â–¼ Worse than 18% of models
This smartwatch does not include a cellular module. 18% of smartwatches include a cellular module.
SIM cards
1
SIM cards
1
â–² Better than 2% of models
Market range: <0 – >5
This smartwatch uses 1 for cellular connectivity which is more advanced than that of 2% of smartwatches and the same as that of 98% of smartwatches.
eSIM
GPS
no
GPS
no
â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
This smartwatch does not support GPS. 56.2% of smartwatches support GPS.
Galileo support
no
Galileo support
no
â–¼ Worse than 39% of models
This smartwatch does not support Galileo navigation. 38.5% of smartwatches support Galileo navigation.
Compass
no
Compass
no
â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
This smartwatch does not include a compass. 52.7% of smartwatches include a compass.
Show more
What reviewers say
Screen size
1.19 inch
Screen size
1.19 inch
â–¼ Worse than 94% of models
Market range: <1.2 inch – >1.82 inch
This smartwatch has a screen size of 1.19 inch which is smaller than the screens of 93.5% of smartwatches and equal to those of 0.8% of smartwatches.
Some sources mention multiple/uncertain size variants.
Display type
AMOLED
Display type
AMOLED
â–² Better than 50% of models
This smartwatch uses a AMOLED display type which is more advanced than that of 49.9% of smartwatches and the same as that of 50.1% of smartwatches.
Resolution
390x 390
Resolution
390x 390
â–² Better than 61% of models
This smartwatch has a display resolution of 390x390 which is higher than that of 60.9% of smartwatches and equal to that of 6.1% of smartwatches.
Pixel density
463 ppi
Pixel density
463 ppi
★ Better than 96% of models
Market range: <207 ppi – >461 ppi
This smartwatch has a pixel density of 463 ppi which is higher than that of 96.3% of smartwatches and equal to that of 1% of smartwatches.
Display brightness
?
Show more
What reviewers say
CPU speed
?
Processor model
Snapdragon Wear 3100
Processor model
Snapdragon Wear 3100
â–² Better than 62% of models
This smartwatch uses the Snapdragon Wear 3100 processor model.
RAM
1 GB
RAM
1 GB
â–² Better than 31% of models
Market range: <0.5 GB – >2 GB
This smartwatch has 1 GB of RAM which is larger than the RAM in 31.3% of smartwatches and equal to that of 45.8% of smartwatches.
Internal storage
4 GB
Internal storage
4 GB
â–² Better than 40% of models
Market range: <0 GB – >32 GB
This smartwatch uses 4 GB for internal storage which is larger than that of 40.4% of smartwatches and equal to that of 27% of smartwatches.
External memory slot
no
External memory slot
no
Category Benchmark
This smartwatch does not include an external memory slot. 0.3% of smartwatches include an external memory slot.
Show more
What reviewers say

Fossil Gen 5E vs the average smartwatch

246810TotalHealthFitnessBatteryConnectivityDisplay & DesignSmart featuresHardware
  • 60 min shorter charge time
    Charge time
    60 min
    â–² Better than 83% of models
    Market range: <60 min – >150 min
    This smartwatch charges faster than the average smartwatch (60 min vs 120 min). The average smartwatch charges in 120 min.
    60 min vs 120 min
  • More advanced operating system
    Operating system
    Wear OS
    â–² Better than 79% of models
    This smartwatch runs a more advanced operating system than the average smartwatch (Wear OS vs Proprietary OS).
    Wear OS vs Proprietary OS
  • Maps support
    Maps support
    yes
    â–² Better than 69% of models
    This smartwatch supports maps, the average smartwatch does not. 31.5% of smartwatches support maps.
  • VO2 max measurement
    VO2 max measurement
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch measures VO2 max, the average smartwatch does not. 47.6% of smartwatches measure VO2 max.
  • NFC functionality
    NFC
    yes
    â–² Better than 57% of models
    This smartwatch supports NFC, the average smartwatch does not. 43.4% of smartwatches support NFC.
  • Third-party app support
    Third-party app support
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch supports third-party apps, the average smartwatch does not. 47.6% of smartwatches support third-party apps.
  • External heart rate monitor support
    External heart rate monitor compatibility
    yes
    â–² Better than 57% of models
    This smartwatch supports external heart rate monitor compatibility, the average smartwatch does not. 42.7% of smartwatches support external heart rate monitor compatibility.
    Supports external monitors over Bluetooth/BLE.
  • Cadence tracking
    Cadence sensor
    yes
    â–² Better than 69% of models
    This smartwatch includes a cadence sensor, the average smartwatch does not. 31.1% of smartwatches include a cadence sensor.
  • 61.3% more popular
    Fossil Gen 5E has a higher popularity than the average smartwatch (9.87 vs 6.1).
    9.87 vs 6.12
  • VO2 max measurement
    VO2 max measurement
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch measures VO2 max, the average smartwatch does not. 47.6% of smartwatches measure VO2 max.
  • Calorie tracking
    Calorie tracking
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch supports calorie tracking, the average smartwatch does not. 48.6% of smartwatches support calorie tracking.
  • External heart rate monitor support
    External heart rate monitor compatibility
    yes
    â–² Better than 57% of models
    This smartwatch supports external heart rate monitor compatibility, the average smartwatch does not. 42.7% of smartwatches support external heart rate monitor compatibility.
    Supports external monitors over Bluetooth/BLE.
  • Cadence tracking
    Cadence sensor
    yes
    â–² Better than 69% of models
    This smartwatch includes a cadence sensor, the average smartwatch does not. 31.1% of smartwatches include a cadence sensor.
  • 60 min shorter charge time
    Charge time
    60 min
    â–² Better than 83% of models
    Market range: <60 min – >150 min
    This smartwatch charges faster than the average smartwatch (60 min vs 120 min). The average smartwatch charges in 120 min.
    60 min vs 120 min
  • Maps support
    Maps support
    yes
    â–² Better than 69% of models
    This smartwatch supports maps, the average smartwatch does not. 31.5% of smartwatches support maps.
  • NFC functionality
    NFC
    yes
    â–² Better than 57% of models
    This smartwatch supports NFC, the average smartwatch does not. 43.4% of smartwatches support NFC.
  • Supports Wi-Fi
    Wi-Fi support
    yes
    â–² Better than 57% of models
    This smartwatch supports Wi-Fi, the average smartwatch does not. 43.3% of smartwatches support Wi-Fi.
  • 137 ppi higher pixel density
    Pixel density
    463 ppi
    ★ Better than 96% of models
    Market range: <207 ppi – >461 ppi
    This smartwatch has a higher pixel density than the average smartwatch (463 ppi vs 326 ppi). The average smartwatch display reaches 326 ppi.
    463 ppi vs 326 ppi
  • Better band material
    Band material
    silicone, leather, stainless steel
    â–² Better than 89% of models
    This smartwatch uses silicone, leather, stainless steel for the band material, while the average smartwatch uses silicone.
    silicone, leather, stainless steel vs silicone
  • Better case material
    Case material
    stainless steel
    â–² Better than 58% of models
    This smartwatch uses stainless steel for the case material, while the average smartwatch uses polycarbonate.
    stainless steel vs polycarbonate
  • More advanced operating system
    Operating system
    Wear OS
    â–² Better than 79% of models
    This smartwatch runs a more advanced operating system than the average smartwatch (Wear OS vs Proprietary OS).
    Wear OS vs Proprietary OS
  • Third-party app support
    Third-party app support
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch supports third-party apps, the average smartwatch does not. 47.6% of smartwatches support third-party apps.
  • More advanced processor model
    Processor model
    Snapdragon Wear 3100
    â–² Better than 62% of models
    This smartwatch uses the Snapdragon Wear 3100 processor model, while the average smartwatch uses Silicon Labs EFM32 Giant Gecko.
    Snapdragon Wear 3,100 vs Silicon Labs EFM32 Giant Gecko
  • No blood oxygen monitoring
    Blood oxygen monitoring
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    This smartwatch does not support blood oxygen monitoring, the average smartwatch does. 66.7% of smartwatches support blood oxygen monitoring.
  • No GPS support
    Route support
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    This smartwatch does not support GPS, the average smartwatch does. 56.1% of smartwatches support GPS.
  • No multi-sport mode
    Multi-sport mode
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
    This smartwatch does not include a multi-sport mode, the average smartwatch does. 68.4% of smartwatches include a multi-sport mode.
  • No stress monitoring
    Stress monitoring
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    This smartwatch does not support stress monitoring, the average smartwatch does. 65.4% of smartwatches support stress monitoring.
  • No elevation tracking
    Elevation tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
    This smartwatch does not support elevation tracking, the average smartwatch does. 64.3% of smartwatches support elevation tracking.
  • No pace tracking
    Pace tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    This smartwatch does not support pace tracking, the average smartwatch does. 78.6% of smartwatches support pace tracking.
  • 6 days day/s shorter battery life
    Battery life
    1 days
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    Market range: <1 days – >16 days
    This smartwatch offers 1 days of battery life, while the average smartwatch offers 7 days.
    1 days vs 7 days
  • No compass
    Compass
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This smartwatch does not include a compass, the average smartwatch does. 52.6% of smartwatches include a compass.
  • 53.9% more expensive
    Fossil Gen 5E is more expensive than the average smartwatch (£200 vs £130).
    £200 vs £130
  • No blood oxygen monitoring
    Blood oxygen monitoring
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    This smartwatch does not support blood oxygen monitoring, the average smartwatch does. 66.7% of smartwatches support blood oxygen monitoring.
  • No stress monitoring
    Stress monitoring
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    This smartwatch does not support stress monitoring, the average smartwatch does. 65.4% of smartwatches support stress monitoring.
  • No cycle tracking
    Menstrual cycle tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
    This smartwatch does not support menstrual cycle tracking, the average smartwatch does. 64.3% of smartwatches support menstrual cycle tracking.
  • No multi-sport mode
    Multi-sport mode
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
    This smartwatch does not include a multi-sport mode, the average smartwatch does. 68.4% of smartwatches include a multi-sport mode.
  • No elevation tracking
    Elevation tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
    This smartwatch does not support elevation tracking, the average smartwatch does. 64.3% of smartwatches support elevation tracking.
  • No pace tracking
    Pace tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    This smartwatch does not support pace tracking, the average smartwatch does. 78.6% of smartwatches support pace tracking.
  • No achievement tracking
    Achievements
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
    This smartwatch does not support achievements, the average smartwatch does. 85.8% of smartwatches support achievements.
  • 6 days day/s shorter battery life
    Battery life
    1 days
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    Market range: <1 days – >16 days
    This smartwatch offers 1 days of battery life, while the average smartwatch offers 7 days.
    1 days vs 7 days
  • No GPS support
    Route support
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    This smartwatch does not support GPS, the average smartwatch does. 56.1% of smartwatches support GPS.
  • No compass
    Compass
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This smartwatch does not include a compass, the average smartwatch does. 52.6% of smartwatches include a compass.
  • Older Bluetooth version
    Bluetooth version
    4.2
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    This smartwatch supports an older Bluetooth version than the average smartwatch (4.2 vs 5). The average smartwatch uses 5.0.
    4.2 vs 5.0
  • 75 g heavier weight
    Weight
    120.0 g
    â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
    Market range: <29 g – >80 g
    This smartwatch is heavier than the average smartwatch (120 g vs 45 g). The average smartwatch weighs 45.0 g.
    120.0 g vs 45.0 g
  • No ambient light sensor
    Ambient light sensor
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    This smartwatch does not include an ambient light sensor, the average smartwatch does. 60.7% of smartwatches include an ambient light sensor.
  • 0.21 inch smaller screen size
    Screen size
    1.19 inch
    â–¼ Worse than 94% of models
    Market range: <1.2 inch – >1.82 inch
    This smartwatch has a smaller screen size than the average smartwatch (1.2 inch vs 1.4 inch). The average smartwatch screen is 1.40 inch.
    Some sources mention multiple/uncertain size variants.
    1.19 inch vs 1.40 inch
  • 20 m lower water resistance depth
    Waterproof depth rating
    30 m
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    Market range: <1 m – >50 m
    This smartwatch has a shallower waterproof rating than the average smartwatch (30 m vs 50 m). The average smartwatch reaches 50 m.
    3 ATM class (ISO 22,810 shallow-water rating, not diving certification).
    30 m vs 50 m
  • 0.4 mm thicker watch body
    Thickness
    12 mm
    â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
    Market range: <9.8 mm – >14.1 mm
    This smartwatch is thicker than the average smartwatch (12 mm vs 11.6 mm). The average smartwatch thickness is 11.6 mm.
    12 mm vs 11.6 mm
  • 1 year/s older release date
    Release date
    2020
    â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
    Market range: <2k – >2k
    This smartwatch is an older model than the average smartwatch (2020 vs 2021). The average smartwatch was released in 2021.
    October 2020
    2020 vs 2021

Video reviews

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

8.0
M20UBR
≈ estimated
08/05/2022
Hands-on review · one week of daily use
Verdict
Fossil Gen 5E is a strong everyday watch, but battery life and Wear OS problems hold it back.
8.0
Struggleville2
≈ estimated
10/01/2022
Hands-on walkthrough · features, apps and battery
Verdict
Fossil Gen 5E is a satisfying, useful watch overall, though battery life disappoints and Amazon apps are missing.
9.0
Wearholic
≈ estimated
10/11/2021
Long-term review · over a month of daily use
Verdict
Fossil Gen 5E is a stylish smartwatch for women that handles everyday health and basic fitness tracking well, but it is not built for serious athletes.
7.0
The Product Lab
≈ estimated
19/05/2021
Hands-on review · design, fitness and battery
Verdict
Fossil Gen 5E suits buyers who put design first; for stronger performance, Samsung or Apple watches are better.
8.0
NDTV
≈ estimated
13/03/2021
Hands-on review · display, sensors, calls and battery
Verdict
Fossil Gen 5E is a good-value budget Wear OS watch, recommended despite no blood oxygen sensor and about one day of battery life.
9.0
JDubb
≈ estimated
16/01/2021
Short review · design, battery and performance
Verdict
Fossil Gen 5E is a good pick for a replacement or first smartwatch, with fast performance and a sleek look, worth the money.
Not graded yet

What reviewers agree on

Based on 8 · 12

Reviewers love the design and call features, but battery life disappoints almost everyone and fitness tracking falls short.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
androidcentral.com
✓ explicit
25/04/2021
Two-week use · Wear OS watch
Verdict
The Fossil Gen 5E is a smooth, decent Wear OS watch, but its one-day battery and lack of GPS keep it from standing out.
6.0
sypnotix.com
≈ estimated
19/07/2021
Daily-wear review · Wear OS watch
Verdict
The Fossil Gen 5E feels like a real watch with smooth performance, good for office wear, though its bulk and short battery life limit it.
7.0
tech.hindustantimes.com
✓ explicit
11/08/2021
Hands-on test · Dress-style watch
Verdict
The Fossil Gen 5E is a classy watch for everyday wear, but its battery and basic fitness tracking fall short for gym-goers.
8.0
indianexpress.com
✓ explicit
07/04/2021
Hands-on test · Fitness and calls
Verdict
The Fossil Gen 5E is a smooth, stylish Wear OS watch that tracks steps and heart rate well, but needs your phone for GPS and a charge every night.
8.0
thehindubusinessline.com
≈ estimated
01/09/2021
Hands-on test · Design-first smartwatch
Verdict
The Fossil Gen 5E is a smooth, classy Wear OS watch for people who don't focus on fitness, though a 12–14-hour battery and no GPS hold it back.
7.0
smartworld.it
≈ estimated
22/07/2021
Photo review · Wear OS watch
Verdict
The Fossil Gen 5E is an elegant Wear OS watch with a bright screen, best for people who care more about notifications and calls than sports tracking.
8.0
techprincess.it
≈ estimated
13/04/2021
Hands-on review · Wear OS watch
Verdict
The Fossil Gen 5E is a refined Wear OS watch for notifications, calls and smart home control, not for sports.
9.0
focustech.it
≈ estimated
17/03/2021
Hands-on test · Notifications and calls
Verdict
The Fossil Gen 5E is a classy, well-built Wear OS watch whose notifications and calls stand out, held back by its battery and lack of GPS.

Third-party reviews

Read buyer reviews on Amazon →

What we like about Fossil Gen 5E

  • Stylish, traditional watch design that looks premium
  • Vibrant and responsive AMOLED touchscreen display
  • Built-in speaker and microphone for taking calls directly on the wrist
  • Fast charging capabilities, typically reaching a full charge in about an hour
  • Smooth performance and low lag despite older chipset
  • Comfortable fit with two available case sizes (42mm and 44mm)

What we don't like about Fossil Gen 5E

  • Short battery life that often fails to last a full 24-hour day
  • Lacks built-in GPS, requiring a tethered phone connection for route tracking
  • Hardware durability concerns, specifically issues with the charging rings on the back
  • Occasional connectivity and pairing issues with the Wear OS app
  • Reduced internal storage (4GB) compared to the standard Gen 5 (8GB)
  • Fitness tracking is basic and lacks advanced sensors like SpO2 or an altimeter

Verdict

The Fossil Gen 5E is a versatile Wear OS smartwatch available in 42mm and 44mm stainless steel cases, featuring a 1.19-inch AMOLED display with a 328ppi pixel density and an always-on mode. It is powered by the Qualcomm Snapdragon Wear 3100 processor with 1GB of RAM and 4GB of internal storage, offering essential features like a built-in speaker and microphone for wrist-based calls, NFC for Google Pay, and 3ATM water resistance. Main advantages include its classic, premium aesthetic that mimics traditional timepieces, smooth interface performance, and rapid charging that reaches 80% in about 50 minutes. However, it lacks built-in GPS (relying on a tethered phone connection) and an altimeter, while users frequently report poor battery life requiring daily charging and a lack of advanced health sensors like SpO2 or ECG.

Compare Fossil Gen 5E with other Smartwatches

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

Graphic comparison of Fossil Gen 5E and other Smartwatches

No results found