- precisionagricultu.re
- Compare
- eTrex SE vs Rino 700
Garmin eTrex SE vs Garmin Rino 700
What eTrex SE does better (4) and where Rino 700 wins (0) — every spec side by side.
Dimensions
Size comparison
eTrex SERino 700
| eTrex SE | Rino 700 | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Height | 100 mm | 178 mm | −78 mm |
| Width | 61 mm | 60 mm | +1 mm |
| Depth | 33 mm | 44 mm | −11 mm |
| Weight | 156 g | 268 g | −112 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is eTrex SE better than Rino 700?
- Battery life168 h vs 13 h12.9×
- Satellite systems supported5 vs 22.5×
- Weight156 g vs 268 g+72%
- Pixel density185 ppi vs 93 ppi+99%
Why is Rino 700 better than eTrex SE?
Rino 700 has no measurable advantages in this pair.
Specifications
Side by side
| Satellite positioning | ||
| Satellite systems | GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou, QZSS | GPS, GLONASS |
| Satellite systems supported | 5 | 2 |
| Multi-band GNSS (L1 + L5/L2) | No | No |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 2.2″ | 2.2″ |
| Resolution | 240 × 320 | 128 × 160 |
| Horizontal resolution | 240 px | 128 px |
| Vertical resolution | 320 px | 160 px |
| Pixel density | 185 ppi | 93 ppi |
| Display type | Transflective colour (sunlight-readable) | Monochrome LCD |
| Maps & navigation | ||
| Preloaded maps | No | No |
| Turn-by-turn routing | Yes | — |
| Internal storage | 0.03 GB | — |
| Memory card slot | — | No |
| Electronic compass | Yes | — |
| Waypoints | 1,000 | 1,000 |
| Connectivity & safety | ||
| Bluetooth | Yes | — |
| USB-C | Yes | — |
| Smartphone notifications | Yes | — |
| Battery & power | ||
| Battery life | 168 h | 13 h |
| Power source | AA batteries | Built-in rechargeable |
| Runs on AA batteries | Yes | — |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | IPX7 | IPX7 |
| Water protection (IPx) | IPx7 | IPx7 |
| Weight | 156 g | 268 g |
| Width | 61 mm | 60 mm |
| Height | 100 mm | 178 mm |
| Depth | 33 mm | 44 mm |
