How we scoreBlogAdvertise
Amidioheadphones · speakers · earbuds
  1. Amidio
  2. Compare
  3. Coda W vs R3S

KEF Coda W vs Ruark R3S

What Coda W does better (5) and where R3S wins (1) — every spec side by side.

KEF Coda W
KEF · 2025Coda W
5 advantages≈ $970
vs
Ruark R3S
Ruark · 2023R3S
4.5Score
1 advantage≈ $950
Higher score
7.6Sound3.3
Dimensions

Size comparison

Coda WR3S
168 × 285268420 × 167220
Coda WR3SDifference
Height285 mm167 mm+118 mm
Width168 mm420 mm−252 mm
Depth268 mm220 mm+48 mm
Weight11,300 g5,300 g+6,000 g

Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).

Why is Coda W better than R3S?

  1. Output power200 W vs 30 W6.7×
  2. Hi-res codec (LDAC / aptX HD / LHDC)Yes · R3S: No
  3. aptXYes · R3S: No
  4. Bluetooth version5.4 vs 5.2+4%
  5. Lowest frequency38 Hz vs 40 Hz+5%

Why is R3S better than Coda W?

  1. Weight11,300 g vs 5,300 g2.1×
Specifications

Side by side

KEF Coda WKEF Coda W≈ $970
Ruark R3SRuark R3S≈ $9504.5
Sound
Output power200 W30 W
Speaker channels2.0—
Channel count2—
Lowest frequency38 Hz40 Hz
Highest frequency20,000 Hz20,000 Hz
Hi-Res AudioYes—
StereoYes—
Battery & charging
Mains poweredYesYes
Battery powered (portable)NoNo
Connectivity
WirelessYesYes
Bluetooth version5.45.2
Bluetooth codecsaptX Lossless, aptX AdaptiveSBC
Hi-res codec (LDAC / aptX HD / LHDC)YesNo
aptXYesNo
LDACNoNo
USB audioYes—
3.5 mm jack / AUXYesYes
Optical inputYesYes
Smart & streaming
Wi-FiYesYes
Spotify Connect—Yes
Voice assistant built in—Yes
Companion app—Yes
Design & build
Weight11,300 g5,300 g
Width168 mm420 mm
Height285 mm167 mm
Depth268 mm220 mm
To compare: 0up to 4 models
Compare