Compare Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2024) vs Garmin Forerunner 965

Reviewers generally praised automatic workout detection, saying it started or paused workouts reliably and often worked without asking for confirmation.

Exercise auto-detection was criticized because training features require manually starting activities.

Only the one-year review gave opinionated evidence on antioxidant tracking, and it was lukewarm because the reviewer had barely used it and noted it was not passive.

Wear OS app access was treated as a major strength, with reviewers citing useful mainstream apps and thriving third-party support, though not every customization app remained compatible.

Reviewers liked Garmin’s cloud sync, Strava/Apple Health integration, Connect IQ options, and lack of a required subscription, though it remains sports-first.

Band feedback was split: several reviewers liked the ease, comfort, or redesigned mechanism, while others criticized the Marine or stock band design.

The stock silicone/removable straps were generally praised as flexible, comfortable, good-looking, and easy to swap.

Battery life was one of the clearest improvements, usually landing around two to three days, though reviewers still noted it falls short of true outdoor-watch endurance.

Battery life was broadly praised as strong for everyday training and most races, with caveats around always-on AMOLED, GPS-heavy use, and ultra-distance events.

Blood oxygen evidence was limited and negative, with one review finding the overnight readings unusually low versus other wearables.

One reviewer found blood oxygen readings close to a pulse oximeter, supporting strong SpO2 tracking confidence.

Bluetooth-related sensor connectivity drew criticism in the FTP/power-meter context, where the connection was described as spotty.

Sensor connectivity was viewed as a strength because the watch supports broad ANT+ and Bluetooth Smart pairing.

Brightness was widely praised, especially the 3,000-nit display and strong automatic brightness behavior in direct sun.

Reviewers found the AMOLED display bright enough indoors and at low settings, with clear improvements over older displays.

Build quality was a standout strength, with reviewers repeatedly calling it top-notch, excellent, solid, or tank-like.

Build quality was mixed: reviewers liked Garmin durability in general but noted the flatter screen and bezel can be easier to hit or scratch.

Button feedback was mixed: reviewers liked the Quick Button and tactile controls, but several missed a rotating bezel or crown-like navigation.

Buttons were consistently praised as tactile, easy to use during workouts, and a dependable alternative to touch controls.

Call handling had limited but positive evidence, with one long-term reviewer saying calls worked well enough to use more often.

Call handling was mixed to weak: one review listed calls among lifestyle features, while others noted missing wrist-call or hands-free functionality.

Calorie usefulness was split between helpful fueling alerts and weak diet/caloric-consumption tracking.

Charging convenience was mixed: one reviewer liked infrequent charging, while others disliked losing reverse wireless charging.

Charging convenience was a repeated weakness due to Garmin’s proprietary connector, loose cable complaints, and lack of wireless charging.

Charging speed was a repeated weakness, with reviewers often reporting around two hours or saying faster charging should be expected at this tier.

Charging speed was praised as fast or at least on the better side, with reviewers noting quick top-ups.

Coaching evidence was limited and mixed, with strength-training voice guidance seen as potentially useful but dependent on the user’s routine.

Suggested workouts, interval tools, race guidance, and on-wrist coaching were repeatedly described as helpful for training.

Comfort was highly wrist-dependent: several reviewers found it comfortable despite the size, while others said it disrupted sleep or remained hard to forget.

Comfort was mostly positive because the watch is light and wearable 24/7, though some reviewers found it bulky or heavy at first.

Companion app feedback was limited but negative because one reviewer disliked needing three separate Samsung apps to access full watch functionality.

Garmin Connect was viewed as powerful and data-rich, but some reviewers found its organization confusing or dated.

Payments were useful and reliable in the positive evidence, though one reviewer found PIN friction annoying.

Garmin Pay was treated as useful in concept but limited by inconsistent bank support, especially outside the US.

Compatibility was a recurring concern: reviewers praised Samsung ecosystem integration but criticized Samsung-phone-only features and Android-only restrictions.

Cross-platform use was positive overall, with Android offering more watch interaction and Apple Health integration appreciated.

Customization was praised for giving easy access to preferred health information and allowing users to tailor the home screen.

Customization was a clear strength, from data screens and watch faces to app and watch settings.

Display quality was one of the strongest areas, with reviewers calling the AMOLED screen excellent, gorgeous, and among the best on Android watches.

The AMOLED display drew very strong praise for color, legibility, sharpness, maps, and overall upgrade value.

Durability was generally strong, supported by scratch resistance and long-term wear, though one reviewer noted everyday case indentations.

Durability was mixed: some reviewers saw scratch resistance and solid materials, while several reported scratches or durability concerns.

ECG evidence was limited and lukewarm, with one reviewer finding it interesting but not personally necessary.

ECG was a recurring missing feature and was called disappointing or expected by several reviewers.

Fit evidence was limited but positive, with one reviewer able to get a snug, usable fit from the supplied band setup.

Fit was positive for users comfortable with Garmin sizing, but the larger case was not ideal for smaller wrists.

Fitness tracking accuracy was mostly positive but not flawless, with reviewers finding valid or strong data while also flagging average or sport-specific weaknesses.

Fitness tracking accuracy was broadly praised across distance, elevation, running dynamics, and sports metrics, with gym heart-rate caveats.

Flashlight evidence was limited but positive, with one reviewer naming the flashlight shortcut as their favorite Quick Button use.

The missing dedicated flashlight was repeatedly framed as a disappointment, especially compared with higher-end Garmin models.

GPS accuracy drew strong agreement: multiple reviewers found routes, lock speed, and distance tracking accurate, with only some urban caveats.

GPS accuracy was one of the strongest points, repeatedly described as highly accurate, reliable, and often best-in-class.

Health tracking accuracy was mixed: some readings closely matched controls, but broader health metrics and fitness tracking drew caveats.

Health tracking was praised for the breadth and quality of Garmin’s metrics, especially for active users.

Heart rate accuracy was good for many runs and workouts, but several reviews found sport-specific misses, especially cycling, rowing, or rough conditions.

Heart-rate accuracy was generally strong and often close to chest straps, though high-intensity intervals could show lag or spotty readings.

LTE connectivity evidence was opinionated around the forced LTE/cellular model, which one reviewer disliked because there was no cheaper Bluetooth-only version.

LTE was a clear omission; reviewers called Garmin’s lack of cellular connectivity a shame or noted it was not added.

Navigation was a weak spot: reviewers liked basic Track Back or GPX-style routing but criticized missing maps and bare-minimum routing.

Mapping and navigation were major strengths, with detailed AMOLED maps, turn prompts, trail help, and strong route-following support.

Materials quality was praised for titanium and sapphire construction, with reviewers describing the casing and glass as premium or durable.

Materials were mostly praised for high-quality straps and a premium titanium bezel, though not all durability concerns disappeared.

Menu navigation was one of the weaker usability areas, mainly because reviewers missed the rotating bezel and found Tile scrolling tedious.

Menu navigation was generally easy once learned, with reviewers calling controls frictionless or easy to get used to.

Music controls had limited but positive evidence, with one reviewer liking the ability to pause or skip audio from the watch.

Music controls were adequate for basic use, but one reviewer noted playback issues when skipping or changing playlists.

Onboard music was praised for Spotify/offline support and 32GB storage for music and maps.

Operating system feedback was mostly positive for Wear OS completeness, though the one-year review noted a One UI update skewed some running metrics.

The OS experience was viewed as effective and more fun with the refreshed AMOLED-era interface.

Outdoor visibility was consistently strong thanks to the bright display, with reviewers reporting easy readability in sun and outdoor workouts.

Outdoor visibility was praised in sun, water, and all-light conditions, despite AMOLED battery tradeoffs.

Pairing reliability was mixed: phone/GPS pairing could be easy or reliable, while power-meter pairing was strongly criticized.

Pairing and syncing were positive, with quick phone pairing and seamless Strava syncing noted.

Recovery insights were useful when tied to Energy Score, Wellness Tips, sleep score factors, and physical recovery context, though reviewers did not treat them as perfect.

Recovery insights were a standout, especially Training Readiness, which reviewers found actionable, digestible, and useful.

Reliability was mixed: some reviewers saw software or wear-detection quirks, while another only complained about a missing low-battery warning.

Reliability was generally positive, with only minor bugs noted and one long-term reviewer saying it performed well in demanding use.

Safety features had limited positive evidence, with the emergency siren described as loud enough to be meaningful.

Safety-related features were praised through navigation alerts, LiveTrack, and situational-awareness benefits.

Size options were a common limitation because the watch only comes in one large 47mm case and several reviewers found it bulky.

Size options were a weakness because the 965 comes in only one size and can feel large on small wrists.

Sleep tracking accuracy was mixed: some reviewers found sleep timing and stages accurate, while others saw gaps, inflated scores, or difficulty distinguishing waking from stillness.

Sleep tracking was mixed: several reviewers found it excellent or improved, while others criticized sleep phases or felt results were off.

Notifications were generally useful and prompt in the scored evidence, helping the watch function as a less distracting phone extension.

Notifications were useful and more readable, but iOS limitations and limited message handling held them back.

Smartwatch features were praised overall, especially for Samsung users, though some reviewers stressed it is still a large, premium sports-style smartwatch.

Smartwatch features were the main compromise: useful basics exist, but reviewers repeatedly called the experience barebones or limited.

Software smoothness was a strong point, with reviewers repeatedly describing the interface as snappy, glitch-free, or without lag.

Software smoothness was praised, with the UI described as smoother, faster, and free of lag in normal use.

Step counting was acceptable but imperfect, with one reviewer tolerating discrepancies and another noting phantom steps while driving.

Step counting was tested as accurate, with a very low error rate in one review.

Stress tracking was weak in the available evidence, with one review calling it an afterthought and another saying it made them more stressed.

Stress tracking was included in useful readiness and health context rather than treated as a standalone killer feature.

Design reactions were highly polarized: some reviewers loved the bold Ultra look, while others called it derivative, bulky, or aesthetically off.

Style and design were praised as sporty, premium, modern, and among the better-looking Forerunner designs.

Third-party app support was useful through Wear OS, but custom watch-face support created a notable limitation for one reviewer.

Third-party app support was mixed: Strava and Connect IQ are useful, but Garmin apps can feel clunky or less polished.

Touch interaction was mixed: the touch bezel could be excellent, but wet or sweaty workout use remained a clear limitation.

Touch controls were useful and optional, with reviewers appreciating that buttons can replace touch during workouts.

The user interface was praised by the reviewers who scored it, especially for refinement, tiles, and intuitive operation.

The interface was widely praised as easier, cleaner, more modern, and dramatically improved by AMOLED.

Value was one of the most contested areas because reviewers liked the watch but repeatedly compared its $649 price against cheaper Galaxy alternatives.

Value was context-dependent: reviewers praised the feature set and later discounts, but questioned the price for casual users or 955/265 owners.

Voice assistant evidence was limited but positive when using Google Assistant instead of Bixby.

Voice assistant support was weak because the watch lacks true assistant, microphone, and call-smarts expected from fuller smartwatches.

Watch faces were a highlight for several reviewers, with praise for aesthetics, data density, and wide selection.

Watch faces benefited from AMOLED and were sometimes called stunning, though one reviewer noted fewer choices than before.

Water resistance was useful for swimming and surf-style testing, but reviewers repeatedly cautioned that it is not a true dive-sports watch.

Water resistance was strong in swim/shower-style use, with no accidental toggles and 50m/5ATM confidence noted.

Wellness insights were mixed: Energy Score and tips sometimes felt useful or accurate, while AGEs and some readiness-style metrics were vague or inconsistent.

Wellness insights were valued for health, fitness, stress, body battery, and sleep context, though one reviewer ignored some metrics.

Wi-Fi was a weak point for large map downloads because the watch-side transfer was described as slow.

Workout variety was good for mainstream exercise and multisport use, though one review noted the data-field depth still trails endurance-focused rivals.

Workout variety was a major strength, with reviewers praising the large sport-mode library and deep multisport functionality.