I Ran a Half-Marathon the Garmin Forerunner 970 on One Wrist and This AmazFit Running Watch on the Other, and Here's How They Compared
A recent comparison of the Garmin Forerunner 970 and Amazfit Cheetah 2 Pro during a half-marathon revealed that both watches performed similarly in tracking key metrics. Despite a slight user error at the start, both devices logged nearly identical distances and paces. The review highlighted the Garmin's superior display visibility, while the Amazfit was noted for its lightweight design.
- ▪The Garmin Forerunner 970 and Amazfit Cheetah 2 Pro were tested during the Brooklyn Half-Marathon.
- ▪Both watches provided nearly identical GPS readings and heart rate data throughout the race.
- ▪The Garmin's display was found to be more visible and easier to read during the run.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Earlier this month, I strapped on two different Garmin watches to race a 10K—a mid-range model on one wrist, a premium one on the other—to see how they stacked up. This time, I branched outside of Garmin's ecosystem. For the Brooklyn Half-Marathon, I wore the Garmin Forerunner 970 ($749.99) on my right wrist and the Amazfit Cheetah 2 Pro ($449.99) on my left, pitting one of the most trusted running watches in the game against Amazfit's more affordable and most ambitious claim to the long-distance running space. Here's how it went.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Lifehacker.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Lifehacker
