As a long-time consumer of Garmin watches, I used to be eager to check the Amazfit T-Rex 3 with the Forerunner 955. I wished to see how they stack up towards one another by way of GPS accuracy and run monitoring information. On this article I give the outcomes from a half-marathon run.
Garmin’s recognized for its precision, and the Forerunner 955 makes use of just about the identical sensor tech because the high-end Fenix collection, so I anticipated it to carry out nicely. Granted, the most recent units use the Elevate 5 coronary heart fee sensor, however Elevate 4 that’s within the Forerunner 955 stacks up simply as nicely. Amazfit, then again, has a little bit of a popularity for scuffling with GPS accuracy and coronary heart fee throughout train in earlier fashions, so I used to be curious to see how far they’ve come.
Proper off the bat, the Amazfit T-Rex 3 is a bit larger than the Forerunner 955, however equally light-weight. It’s a rugged-looking watch, whereas the 955 is extra streamlined. That mentioned, measurement wasn’t my important concern right here. I used to be centered on how correct the monitoring can be. Each watches have seen updates of their sensors over time, and the T-Rex 3, specifically, has come a good distance since Amazfit’s earlier struggles with GPS and coronary heart fee monitoring.
The outcomes – half marathon distance
To check GPS efficiency, I began with a easy sign acquisition take a look at. And as soon as once more, the T-Rex 3 really acquired the sign simply as rapidly because the Forerunner 955. I say as soon as once more, as a result of this was the case in every of the earlier 4 runs I did. Each watches lock onto GPS rapidly, and neither one struggles to take care of a connection throughout runs. It’s an enormous enchancment over early Amazfit fashions, which generally used to take minutes to discover a sign.
Important studying: Prime health trackers and well being devices
And I’ll use the phrase “once again”, the center fee outcomes from each watches had been virtually equivalent. The Amazfit T-Rex 3 recorded a mean coronary heart fee of 149 beats per minute through the half marathon run. This matched virtually precisely with the Forerunner 955 (148 beats per minute). The utmost coronary heart charges had been additionally shut, with just some beats-per-minute distinction between the 2.
Listed here are the screenshots for the Amazfit T-Rex 3.
And that is the Garmin information.
When it got here to pacing, the numbers had been simply as tight. The T-Rex 3 clocked my common tempo at 6 minutes 12 seconds per kilometer, whereas the Garmin confirmed 6 minutes 9 seconds. The distinction stems from a slight GPS discrepancy of round 10 meters per kilometer. Contemplating I ran in a semi-urban setting and neither watch will monitor distance with 100% accuracy – 10 meters per kilometre is kind of good.
Even cadence information, which I wasn’t certain would match up as nicely, was very related. The T-Rex 3 had me at a mean cadence of 177, whereas the Forerunner confirmed 175. There was additionally small distinction within the most cadence readings, however nothing that stood out as a serious discrepancy.
The plain query, after all, is how these watches would carry out throughout high-intensity runs. Wrist-based coronary heart fee sensors are usually much less dependable while you’re actually pushing your self, and that’s true for each watches right here. It’s not a flaw within the units themselves; it’s simply the character of utilizing wrist sensors for high-intensity exercises. For accuracy in these instances, a chest strap is all the time going to be the higher alternative. Fortuitously, the Amazfit T-Rex 3 can hook up with chest straps, which is a function I’m glad to see, particularly for a watch at this value level.
My takeaway
General, I’ve been impressed with the Amazfit T-Rex 3. It’s holds up surprisingly nicely towards the Garmin Forerunner 955, particularly contemplating the value distinction. The T-Rex 3 prices a few third or perhaps a quarter of what you’d pay for a Garmin Fenix mannequin, and but the info it gives is just about on par with the Garmin by way of GPS accuracy and coronary heart fee monitoring.
After all, Garmin nonetheless leads the way in which relating to the sheer variety of efficiency metrics and in-depth information it presents. In case you’re somebody who likes to dive deep into these stats, you’ll nonetheless discover Garmin to be extra superior in that space. However the hole is closing, and the T-Rex 3 proves that Zepp Well being is catching up. I wouldn’t be shocked if in one other 12 months or so, they’re matching Garmin even on the superior metrics entrance.
For the value, the T-Rex 3 presents so much. It’s dependable, correct, and has clearly benefited from years of enhancements. In case you’re searching for a extra budget-friendly different to Garmin watches, the Amazfit T-Rex 3 might match the invoice.
Amazfit T-Rex 3 – view on Zepp Well being | Amazon
Garmin Forerunner 955 – view on Garmin | Amazon
Like this text? Subscribe to our month-to-month e-newsletter and by no means miss out!