The Casio A700 vs A168 comparison is one of the most interesting choices in the Casio Vintage line. Both watches are affordable silver digital Casios with retro style, stainless steel bracelets, simple functions and everyday usability. But they feel very different on the wrist.
The Casio A168 is the classic choice. It has the familiar 1990s-style Casio Vintage look, a strong electro-luminescent backlight and a design that many people instantly recognize.
The Casio A700 is the slimmer and more modern-looking option. It is much thinner, cleaner, sharper and more elegant. It feels less like a cheap digital watch and more like a thin retro accessory.
My honest opinion is simple: the A168 is the safer classic, but the A700 looks more refined.
If you want the most recognizable vintage Casio, buy the A168. If you want the thinner, cleaner and more stylish watch, buy the A700.
- Quick Verdict
- Casio A700 vs A168: Main Differences
- Design and Style
- Comfort and Wrist Feel
- Backlight
- Battery Life
- Functions and Everyday Use
- Water Resistance
- Durability and Long-Term Wear
- A700 Versions: Bracelet vs Mesh
- What Reddit-Style Discussions Usually Get Right
- Price and Value
- Which One Should You Buy?
- Better Alternatives to Consider
- Pros and Cons
- Final Verdict
- FAQ
- Author
Quick Verdict
| Buyer type | Better choice | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Best classic Casio Vintage | Casio A168 | More recognizable and more iconic |
| Best slim design | Casio A700 | Much thinner case |
| Best modern vintage look | Casio A700 | Cleaner and more elegant |
| Best backlight experience | Casio A168 | Classic EL backlight feel |
| Best battery life | Casio A168 | Around 7 years vs around 3 years on many A700 versions |
| Best for small wrists | Casio A700 | Thin case wears very easily |
| Best retro charm | Casio A168 | Stronger old-school Casio identity |
| Best dressy casual look | Casio A700 | Looks more refined with outfits |
| Best first Casio Vintage | Casio A168 | Safer and more iconic choice |
| Best style-focused pick | Casio A700 | Better if design matters most |
Short answer: A168 is the classic. A700 is the stylish upgrade.
Casio A700 vs A168: Main Differences
| Feature | Casio A700 | Casio A168 |
|---|---|---|
| Watch type | Ultra-thin vintage digital Casio | Classic vintage digital Casio |
| Case size | 37.4 x 35.5 x 6 mm | 38.6 x 36.3 x 9.6 mm |
| Weight | Around 50 g | Around 50 g |
| Case / bezel material | Resin / chrome plated or tone-finished depending on version | Resin / chrome plated |
| Band | Stainless steel band or mesh band depending on version | Stainless steel band |
| Glass | Resin glass | Resin glass |
| Water resistance | Water Resistant | Water Resistant |
| Battery | CR1616 on many versions | CR2016 |
| Approx. battery life | Around 3 years | Around 7 years |
| Light | LED backlight | Electro-luminescent backlight |
| Stopwatch | Yes | Yes |
| Daily alarm | Yes | Yes |
| Best for | Thin style and refined vintage look | Classic Casio feel and better battery life |
The A700 is not a direct technical upgrade over the A168. It is more of a design upgrade. The A168 is still stronger in battery life and classic Casio identity.
Design and Style
This is the main reason to choose the A700.
The A168 looks like a classic Casio Vintage watch. It has a chunkier case, a more traditional digital face and a stronger retro-tech personality. It feels like the metal-bracelet version of old-school Casio digital watches.
The A700 looks sleeker. The case is only about 6 mm thick, which makes a huge difference. It sits flatter on the wrist, slides under sleeves more easily and looks more elegant with casual or smart-casual outfits.
| Style factor | Casio A700 | Casio A168 |
|---|---|---|
| Overall look | Thin, clean, refined | Classic, retro, more familiar |
| Case thickness | Very slim | Noticeably thicker |
| Wrist presence | Elegant and low-profile | More old-school digital presence |
| Retro feel | Modern vintage | Stronger classic vintage |
| Dressy casual use | Better | Good |
| Streetwear use | Good | Better |
| Minimalist style | Better | Good |
| Recognizable Casio identity | Good | Stronger |
My personal opinion: the A700 is the better-looking watch if you care about style. It looks less toy-like and more mature than the A168.
But the A168 has more soul. It feels more like the classic Casio Vintage experience.
Comfort and Wrist Feel
The A700 wins for comfort, even though the weight is similar.
The reason is thickness. A 6 mm case feels very different from a 9.6 mm case. The A700 wears flatter, cleaner and smoother under sleeves. It is one of the easiest Casio Vintage models to wear all day.
The A168 is still compact and comfortable, but it feels thicker and more noticeable.
| Comfort factor | Casio A700 | Casio A168 |
|---|---|---|
| Weight | Around 50 g | Around 50 g |
| Thickness | Much thinner | Thicker |
| Small wrist fit | Excellent | Good |
| Sleeve comfort | Better | Good |
| Sleep comfort | Better | Less ideal |
| Bracelet feel | Depends on version | Standard folded metal feel |
| Wrist presence | Slim and flat | More noticeable |
If you hate bulky watches, the A700 is clearly better.
If you like a little more retro wrist presence, the A168 feels more satisfying.
Backlight
Both watches have a light, but the experience is different.
The A168 is known for its electro-luminescent backlight. It gives the watch a classic blue-green glow and is one of the reasons people still love the model.
The A700 uses an LED backlight. It is usable and practical, but it does not have quite the same nostalgic glow as the A168.
| Backlight factor | Casio A700 | Casio A168 |
|---|---|---|
| Light type | LED backlight | Electro-luminescent backlight |
| Night readability | Good enough | Good |
| Nostalgic feel | Lower | Higher |
| Practical use | Fine | Fine |
| Main appeal | Thin design, not the light | Classic EL glow |
I would not choose the A700 because of the light. I would choose it because of the case.
I would not choose the A168 only because of the light either, but the EL backlight definitely adds charm.
Battery Life
This is where the A168 has a real practical advantage.
Many A700 versions are rated for around 3 years of battery life. The A168 is rated for around 7 years. That is a big difference if you want a low-maintenance watch.
| Battery factor | Casio A700 | Casio A168 |
|---|---|---|
| Battery type | CR1616 on many versions | CR2016 |
| Approx. battery life | Around 3 years | Around 7 years |
| Charging needed | No | No |
| Maintenance level | Low | Lower |
| Best for long ownership | Good | Better |
The A700 is not bad here, but the A168 is better.
If you want to buy the watch and forget about battery changes for longer, the A168 is the more practical pick.
Functions and Everyday Use
Functionally, the A700 and A168 are close. Both are simple digital Casios with the basic features most people need.
| Function | Casio A700 | Casio A168 |
|---|---|---|
| Time | Yes | Yes |
| 12/24-hour format | Yes | Yes |
| Daily alarm | Yes | Yes |
| Hourly time signal | Yes | Yes |
| Stopwatch | Yes | Yes |
| Calendar | Yes | Yes |
| Light | Yes | Yes |
| Smart features | No | No |
| Sensors | No | No |
Neither watch is advanced. Neither is a sports watch. Neither is a G-Shock.
The real choice is not about functions. It is about design, thickness, battery life and wrist feel.
Water Resistance
Both watches are Water Resistant. That means they can handle normal daily moisture, but they are not proper swimming watches.
I would not buy either watch for water use. The metal bracelet and chrome-style finish are not ideal for repeated wet conditions, salt water or heavy sweat abuse.
If water resistance matters, look at Casio W59, W800H, AE1200 or a G-Shock.
Durability and Long-Term Wear
Neither the A700 nor the A168 is rugged.
Both use resin glass, chrome-style case construction and affordable metal bracelets. They are fine for normal casual wear, but they are not ideal for rough work, gym abuse or outdoor punishment.
| Durability factor | Casio A700 | Casio A168 |
|---|---|---|
| Daily reliability | Good | Good |
| Scratch resistance | Basic | Basic |
| Bracelet durability | Basic but acceptable | Basic but acceptable |
| Case finish wear | Possible over time | Possible over time |
| Rough work | Not ideal | Not ideal |
| Sport use | Not ideal | Not ideal |
| Long-term casual wear | Good | Good |
The A168 may feel slightly more “classic cheap Casio durable” because it has a thicker case. But in real life, both should be treated as casual vintage watches.
If you want real durability, buy a G-Shock DW-5600.
A700 Versions: Bracelet vs Mesh
One advantage of the A700 line is that it comes in different strap styles. This changes the personality of the watch.
| Version type | Style | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| A700 with stainless steel bracelet | Classic vintage digital look | People who want a cleaner A168 alternative |
| A700 with mesh band | More elegant and dressier | People who want a thinner fashion-focused Casio |
| Gold-tone A700 | More visible and jewelry-like | Style-focused outfits |
| Silver A700 | Cleanest and most versatile | Everyday wear |
The mesh bracelet versions are especially interesting because they make the A700 feel less like a standard cheap digital Casio and more like a slim retro accessory.
If you want the most refined look, I would choose the silver mesh A700. If you want the more classic Casio feel, I would choose the standard bracelet A168.
What Reddit-Style Discussions Usually Get Right
In watch communities, the A700 vs A168 debate usually comes down to the same few points.
People who prefer the A700 usually say:
| A700 argument | Why it makes sense |
|---|---|
| It is much thinner | True and important |
| It looks more elegant | I agree |
| It wears better under sleeves | True |
| It feels more modern | True |
| It works better as a style watch | Often true |
People who prefer the A168 usually say:
| A168 argument | Why it makes sense |
|---|---|
| It has more classic Casio charm | True |
| Battery life is better | True |
| The EL backlight is cool | True |
| It feels more iconic | I agree |
| It is the safer first Vintage Casio | True |
My personal conclusion: A700 wins as a design object. A168 wins as a classic Casio.
Price and Value
Prices vary by market, color and bracelet style. In general, the A168 is often the safer value because it is iconic, practical and has better battery life.
The A700 can be worth paying more for if you care about the slim case. The thickness difference is not a small detail. It changes the whole wearing experience.
| Value question | Better choice |
|---|---|
| Best classic value | A168 |
| Best slim design value | A700 |
| Best battery value | A168 |
| Best style value | A700 |
| Best first Vintage Casio | A168 |
| Best if you already own A168 | A700 |
| Best if prices are close | Depends on priority |
If you want utility and nostalgia, A168 is safer.
If you want elegance and thinness, A700 is worth it.
Which One Should You Buy?
Buy the Casio A700 if:
| Reason | Explanation |
|---|---|
| You want a very thin watch | The 6 mm case is the main advantage |
| You prefer a cleaner design | A700 looks more refined |
| You wear smart-casual outfits | It fits better than A168 |
| You want something less common | A700 feels more modern and niche |
| You like mesh bracelets | Some A700 versions look excellent |
| You care more about style than battery life | A700 is the style pick |
Buy the Casio A168 if:
| Reason | Explanation |
|---|---|
| You want the classic Casio Vintage feel | A168 is more iconic |
| You want longer battery life | Around 7 years |
| You like EL backlight | A168 has the classic glow |
| You want a safer first Casio | Easy to recommend |
| You prefer stronger retro presence | A168 feels more old-school |
| You want better value for daily use | A168 is more practical |
My personal recommendation
If I were buying one watch only, I would choose the A168 if I wanted the classic Casio Vintage experience.
But if I already owned a classic Casio, I would choose the A700 next. It feels different enough to justify itself.
The A168 is more iconic. The A700 is better-looking.
Better Alternatives to Consider
| Model | Why consider it |
|---|---|
| Casio A700 | Thin, refined and more modern-looking |
| Casio A168 | Classic Vintage Casio with EL backlight |
| Casio A158 | Smaller, simpler and cheaper vintage option |
| Casio A159 | More niche compact alternative |
| Casio B640W | Sportier vintage metal digital |
| Casio AE1200WHD | More features with stainless steel bracelet style |
| Casio F91W | Plastic icon, lighter and cheaper |
| Casio F105W | F91W-style watch with better light |
| G-Shock DW-5600 | Real durability upgrade |
If you want elegance, choose A700. If you want classic nostalgia, choose A168. If you want toughness, skip both and buy a G-Shock.
Pros and Cons
| Watch | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|
| Casio A700 | Very thin, refined, stylish, elegant, good for smart-casual wear, interesting strap options | Shorter battery life, less iconic, not rugged |
| Casio A168 | Classic design, EL backlight, 7-year battery, strong Casio Vintage identity, easy to recommend | Thicker, less elegant, more common |
| Both | Affordable, simple, reliable, stainless steel bracelet options, retro digital charm | Basic water resistance, resin glass, not sports watches, not G-Shocks |
Final Verdict
The Casio A700 and A168 are both excellent affordable vintage digital watches, but they appeal to different buyers.
The A168 is the classic. It has the stronger Casio Vintage identity, better battery life and the familiar EL backlight. It is the safer choice for most people buying their first silver Casio digital.
The A700 is the style pick. It is much thinner, cleaner and more refined. It looks better with smart-casual outfits and feels more modern on the wrist.
So the final answer is simple:
A168 for classic Casio charm.
A700 for slim vintage style.
If you want the more iconic watch, buy the A168. If you want the better-looking watch, buy the A700.
FAQ
What is the difference between Casio A700 and A168?
The A700 is much thinner at about 6 mm and has a cleaner, more refined design. The A168 is thicker, more iconic and has longer battery life.
Is Casio A700 better than A168?
For style and thinness, yes. For battery life and classic Casio identity, the A168 is better.
Which is thinner, Casio A700 or A168?
The A700 is much thinner. It is about 6 mm thick, while the A168 is about 9.6 mm thick.
Which has better battery life, A700 or A168?
The A168 has better battery life at around 7 years. Many A700 versions are rated around 3 years.
Which has better backlight, A700 or A168?
The A168 has the more nostalgic EL backlight. The A700 has a regular LED backlight.
Are Casio A700 and A168 waterproof?
No. Both are Water Resistant, not proper waterproof watches.
Which is better for small wrists, A700 or A168?
The A700 usually wears better on small wrists because it is much thinner and flatter.
Is the Casio A700 a good dress watch?
It is not a true dress watch, but it is one of the dressier affordable Casio digital watches because of its thin case and clean design.
Which looks better, A700 or A168?
The A700 looks more refined and modern. The A168 looks more classic and retro.
Should I buy Casio A700 or A168?
Buy the A700 if you want slim style. Buy the A168 if you want classic Casio Vintage charm.
