Price (USD)
XMAX QOMO edgeFENiX 2.0
$129
XMAX QOMO
$89
XMAX QOMO is typically around $40 lower.
Vaporizer Comparison
Side-by-side specs, pricing context, and clear decision guidance.
FENiX 2.0
FENiX $129
XMAX QOMO
XMAX $89
FENiX 2.0 and XMAX QOMO are both portable / electronic vaporizers, but they target different priorities. XMAX QOMO is usually the lower-cost pick at $89, around $40 below FENiX 2.0. XMAX QOMO has the quicker listed heat-up profile, which can matter for shorter sessions.
Specs Compared
23
Different Specs
20
Shared Specs
3
Overall Overlap
13%
Shared Traits
A quick snapshot of the specs people usually care about first.
FENiX 2.0
$129
XMAX QOMO
$89
XMAX QOMO is typically around $40 lower.
FENiX 2.0
<30 seconds
XMAX QOMO
~20 seconds
XMAX QOMO has the quicker listed heat-up profile.
FENiX 2.0
Convection
XMAX QOMO
Conduction
Heating style differs, which can impact flavor and extraction behavior.
Top specs where these two devices diverge.
Price (USD)
FENiX 2.0
$129
XMAX QOMO
$89
Heating Type
FENiX 2.0
Convection
XMAX QOMO
Conduction
Heat Up Time
FENiX 2.0
<30 seconds
XMAX QOMO
~20 seconds
Temperature Range
FENiX 2.0
160°C - 221°C (320°F - 430°F)
XMAX QOMO
280°C - 350°C (536°F - 662°F)
Battery Capacity
FENiX 2.0
4400 mAh
XMAX QOMO
1350mAh
Battery Life
FENiX 2.0
~75 minutes
XMAX QOMO
10-20 Sessions
Charging
FENiX 2.0
Micro USB
XMAX QOMO
USB-C
Charge Time
FENiX 2.0
2.5 hours
XMAX QOMO
1-2 Hours
Dimensions
FENiX 2.0
110x60x30mm
XMAX QOMO
127x50x29.6mm
Power Adjustment
FENiX 2.0
Digital (precise)
XMAX QOMO
Modular - 3 Stages
Direct comparison of every spec from each device profile.
| Specification | FENiX 2.0 | XMAX QOMO |
|---|---|---|
| Price (USD) | $129 | $89 |
| Device Type | Portable | Portable |
| Heating Type | Convection | Conduction |
| Heat Up Time | <30 seconds | ~20 seconds |
| Temperature Range | 160°C - 221°C (320°F - 430°F) | 280°C - 350°C (536°F - 662°F) |
| Chamber Capacity | — | 0.15g |
| Battery Type | Internal | Internal |
| Battery Capacity | 4400 mAh | 1350mAh |
| Battery Life | ~75 minutes | 10-20 Sessions |
| Charging | Micro USB | USB-C |
| Charge Time | 2.5 hours | 1-2 Hours |
| Dimensions | 110x60x30mm | 127x50x29.6mm |
| Weight | ~232 grams | — |
| Power Adjustment | Digital (precise) | Modular - 3 Stages |
| Chamber Material | Removable titanium | Ceramic |
| Concentrate Support | — | Yes |
| Brand | FENiX | XMAX |
| Country of Manufacture | China | China |
| Display Type | 0.95 inch OLED | — |
| Manufacturer | South Reed Technology Co | TopGreen Technology Co |
| Release Date | 2016 | 2020 |
| Session Style | Session | — |
| Warranty | 2 years | 1 year |
The biggest practical difference is heating approach: FENiX 2.0 runs convection while XMAX QOMO runs conduction. That changes flavor delivery, vapor density, and how the device responds to slow versus fast draws.
XMAX QOMO is the cheaper option at $89 compared with $129 for the FENiX 2.0, about $40 less. Live retailer pricing can shift, so confirm before buying.
XMAX QOMO reaches session-ready temperature in ~20 seconds, while the FENiX 2.0 takes <30 seconds. That's roughly 10 seconds quicker on the XMAX QOMO, which is useful if you want shorter, on-demand sessions.
FENiX 2.0 uses convection heating, while the XMAX QOMO uses conduction. Heating style influences flavor profile, vapor density, and how forgiving the device is to draw technique.
FENiX 2.0 controls heat with digital (precise), while the XMAX QOMO uses modular - 3 stages. FENiX 2.0 gives you finer per-degree control.
XMAX QOMO fully charges in 1-2 Hours, ahead of 2.5 hours on the FENiX 2.0.
FENiX 2.0's spec sheet lists ~75 minutes; the XMAX QOMO lists 10-20 Sessions. The two manufacturers measure battery life differently here, so direct comparison isn't straightforward.
Jump into the comparison hub to pick any two devices and open a canonical side-by-side page.