I bought the GW200MS-1CR as a second watch/user/beater.
Just so everyone knows, there's nothing glittery about the GW200MS-1CR. The Bezel and Strap are a dark gunmetal color. The GW9000A-1 Mudman is actually stealth-black compared to the Froggie.
The screen is definitely a "rusty" color, true to the name. Contrasty - just like the GW9000A-1, the maximum contrast is set somewhere below and to the left of "directly above" the watch face.
The Frogman's screen's size is larger than the five-eye Mudman, but to be honest, the Mudman's time display is larger than the Frogman's and easier to read. The Frogman does have simultaneous date/day display, which matters for some people (not me.) The "elapsed time" indicator doesn't mean much when you're not diving, as it is a bit redundant. However, it is necessary to meet ISO 6425 standards.
The crystal of the Froggie is perfectly round, while the Muddie has a flat-bottom common to other GSHOCKs.
Solar / Full Auto-EL again makes the GSHOCK series the ultimate digital "go anywhere" watch, part of the reason why I'm rid of my GLTV watches. The Frogman's Auto-EL stays illuminated for about half a second longer than the Mudman.
The Frogman strap isn't much longer than the strap on the Mudman. In fact, the straps for the Mudman and Frogman are at some level similar, both with dual-hook clasps.
Where the Frogman surpasses the Mudman is build quality. It is more detailed and much beefier than the Mudman. The strap clasp is thicker and more intricate. It has a little G-Shock "G" on it, while the Mudman's clasp does not. The piece of the strap that attaches to the watch body is enormous, the strap holes are round and about twice as big as those on the Mudman. Also the strap keeper has two holes on it where the Mudman does not have two holes (but they both have the slit on the inside part of the keeper.)
The Frogman's Titanium construction is totally awesome. The screwdown caseback is a serious hunk of metal, and makes the Mudman's four-screw caseback look a little puny. The resin bezel makes the Frogman about 3-3.5mm or so thicker than the Mudman.
The distance between the strap lugs is actually narrower on the Frogman than the Mudman. However, the ginormous straps on the Frogman cause the GW200 to be much wider on the wrist than the Mudman. I imagine that if I replaced the OEM resin straps with a NATO strap, the Froggie would actually shrink in size. That said, this watch has a chunky "oversize" look on my wrist and I have an 8.5" wrist. If you have a thinner wrist, consider wearing the Froggie with replacement straps.
The buttons on the Frogman are softer than the Mudman's, but the Mudman's buttons are actually easier to press. If I had to choose a watch that was going to see use with gloves, the Mudman would win hands down. The Froggie's buttons are sort of "hidden" underneath protrusions on the bezel.
So, is the GW200MS-1CR Frogman worth 3.5-4x the price of the GW9000A-1 Mudman? For the average person, I would say no. In my opinion, the GW9000A-1 beats out the GW200MS-1CR because it is a much better deal for the money. The Mudman is more "tactical" looking and to be honest, the 5-eye display + larger time digits and Atomic time sync make it much more practical. If I had to choose one watch between the two for a combat watch, I'd choose the Muddie simply because of its display and glove-friendly buttons.
However, if I were to compare the GW200MS-1CR against other dive watches, it is worth the money. With its subdued military-looks, titanium construction, and ISO 6425 certification, it's really a very good (and cost effective) alternative to what I consider to be a whole slew of overbearing, blinged-out analogs. It would be a good supplement to a large-display console style dive computer attached to a pressure gauge.
That is all. Thanks for reading.