Compare Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025) vs Apple Watch SE 3

P1 Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
P2 Apple Watch SE 3

Comparison Takeaways

Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)

Where It Has the Edge

  • ECG functionality is 4.1 vs 1.0. ECG functionality is widely listed as part of the health feature set, though one review notes Samsung-phone pairing...
  • blood oxygen tracking is 3.9 vs 1.0. Blood oxygen tracking is present across the health sensor set, but one long-term reviewer found SpO2 readings routinely...
  • brightness is 4.7 vs 3.5. Brightness earns strong praise, with reviewers citing high nits, bright AMOLED output, and easy readability.
  • outdoor visibility is 4.7 vs 3.6. Outdoor visibility is excellent, with multiple reviewers saying the bright display remains readable in sunlight.

Apple Watch SE 3

Where It Has the Edge

  • value for money is 4.8 vs 3.3. Value for money is the strongest consensus attribute, with reviewers repeatedly saying the SE 3 offers near-Series functionality...
  • reliability is 4.4 vs 3.5. Reliability appears strong in everyday use, with reviewers emphasizing smooth performance and lack of issues in ordinary tasks.
  • button controls is 4.6 vs 3.7. Button and gesture controls are strongly received, especially the Digital Crown, side button, Double Tap, and Wrist Flick...
  • comfort is 4.6 vs 3.9. Comfort is a strength, with reviewers calling the watch lightweight, unobtrusive, and well suited to sleep or smaller...
Average score
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.1
Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.1
activity auto-detection
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.4

Workout auto-detection is broadly useful, with reviewers citing automatic workout detection and reliable walk detection, though manual starts remain better for some activities.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.2

Reviewers found automatic workout or walk detection useful and generally dependable, though one noted occasional slower workout-end recognition.

app ecosystem
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.5

The app ecosystem is a strength: reviewers mention many available apps, Google Play access, and expanded usefulness from the extra storage.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.8

The app ecosystem is a major strength, with reviewers praising the Apple Watch App Store and broad app availability compared with rival budget watches.

band quality
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.1

Band feedback is mostly positive for comfort, stability, and easy removal, though one reviewer noted dirt collecting in the strap holes.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.5

Band support is a strength because the SE 3 uses Apple’s familiar strap system and has many Apple and third-party options.

battery life
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.4

Battery life is one of the clearest strengths, often described as the best in Samsung’s lineup, though heavy GPS or always-on use can reduce it.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
3.5

Battery life is the clearest mixed area: some reviewers saw all-day or better results, while others still treated it as a daily-charge watch.

blood oxygen tracking
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.9

Blood oxygen tracking is present across the health sensor set, but one long-term reviewer found SpO2 readings routinely low.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
1.0

Blood oxygen tracking is consistently described as missing from the SE 3, making it a clear limitation versus Series and Ultra models.

Bluetooth connectivity
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.5

Bluetooth support is present, including Bluetooth 5.3 mentions, but external sensor connections were criticized or described as unavailable.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.1

Bluetooth support is present and useful for headphones and audio, though reviewers mostly mention it as part of the connectivity package rather than a standout feature.

brightness
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.7

Brightness earns strong praise, with reviewers citing high nits, bright AMOLED output, and easy readability.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
3.5

Brightness is adequate for many reviewers, but the 1,000-nit display is repeatedly framed as weaker than the Series 11 in direct sunlight.

build quality
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.7

Build quality is consistently praised through the rugged titanium case, durable chassis, and robust construction.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.3

Build quality is generally praised as light, well made, and attractive, with tougher glass helping the SE 3 feel less like a budget device.

button controls
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.7

Button controls are mixed: reviewers like the Quick/action button and programmable shortcuts, but one long-term reviewer disliked accidental presses and limited workout button behavior.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.6

Button and gesture controls are strongly received, especially the Digital Crown, side button, Double Tap, and Wrist Flick gestures.

call handling
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.2

Call handling is supported through Bluetooth calling, speaker/mic use, and smartwatch features for calls and texts.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.1

Call handling is solid for a wrist device, with useful speaker, microphone, cellular, and voice isolation notes, though it is not ideal as a primary phone substitute.

calorie tracking usefulness
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.0

Calorie tracking is included as part of the activity metrics, but the evidence is limited to feature availability rather than deep accuracy testing.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.0

Calorie tracking is treated as part of the reliable core fitness feature set, with one reviewer noting workout calorie metrics matched comparison data.

charging convenience
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.8

Charging is wireless and reasonably convenient, but one reviewer criticized the missing wall charging block.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
3.9

Charging convenience improves with USB-C magnetic charging and fast top-ups, but sleep tracking still requires a daily charging routine for many users.

charging speed
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.2

Charging speed gets limited but positive evidence, with one review reporting a full charge in about 95 minutes.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.3

Charging speed is a repeated upgrade, with reviewers citing useful fast-charge top-ups and roughly 80 percent in around 45 minutes to an hour.

coaching features
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.5

Coaching features are a real addition, especially Running Coach, with reviewers describing personalized plans and guidance.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.0

Coaching features are useful but not deeply advanced; Workout Buddy is described as beginner-friendly, motivational, or basic depending on the reviewer.

comfort
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.9

Comfort depends on wrist and expectations: some reviewers found it comfortable, while others felt the weight or bulk.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.6

Comfort is a strength, with reviewers calling the watch lightweight, unobtrusive, and well suited to sleep or smaller wrists.

companion app quality
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.5

The companion app setup is useful but split, with health and smartwatch settings divided between Samsung Health and Galaxy Wearable.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
3.5

Companion app quality is functional but split across Watch, Health, and Fitness apps, which can be useful yet occasionally tedious.

contactless payments
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.5

Contactless payments are supported through Samsung Wallet or Samsung Pay shortcuts.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.8

Contactless payments are a strong Apple Watch staple, with Apple Pay repeatedly included among the SE 3’s core smartwatch strengths.

cross-platform compatibility
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
2.4

Cross-platform compatibility is limited: reviews say it works with Android but not iPhone, with the best experience tied to Samsung phones.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
2.0

Cross-platform compatibility is weak because reviewers frame the SE 3 as an iPhone smartwatch and note it only works with iPhone.

customization options
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.4

Customization is strong across programmable buttons, widgets, tiles, colors, and watch-face data.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.4

Customization is strong across watch faces, metrics, widgets, bands, and gesture-driven controls.

display quality
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.7

Display quality is a major strength, with repeated praise for the large, vibrant AMOLED display.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.3

Display quality is much improved by the always-on OLED screen, though thicker bezels and lower brightness keep it below Series and Ultra displays.

durability
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.7

Durability is a standout, backed by titanium construction, MIL-STD claims, scratch protection, and reviewer reports of little damage.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
3.9

Durability is improved through tougher Ion-X glass and water resistance, but some reviewers still point to weaker scratch or dust protection than pricier models.

ECG functionality
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.1

ECG functionality is widely listed as part of the health feature set, though one review notes Samsung-phone pairing requirements for ECG and blood pressure.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
1.0

ECG functionality is absent, and reviewers repeatedly call this one of the main health-feature tradeoffs.

fit
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.8

Fit is polarizing: it can fit some larger wrists well, but reviewers also note the single 47mm size and large wrist footprint.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.3

Fit is favorable for smaller wrists and sleep tracking, though one reviewer found the older chassis less flush than newer models.

fitness tracking accuracy
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.1

Fitness tracking accuracy is generally good for everyday and running use, though scientific testing places it below the top alternatives.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.7

Fitness tracking accuracy is a strong point, with reviewers reporting accurate workouts and close agreement with comparison devices.

GPS accuracy
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.4

GPS accuracy is good in several reviewer tests and supports dual-frequency GPS, but scientific testing found some route deviation.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.3

GPS accuracy is generally strong for a single-band Apple Watch, with caveats in tall-building or canyon-like conditions.

health tracking accuracy
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.7

Health tracking is feature-rich but mixed in accuracy, with strong sensor coverage offset by questionable antioxidant, HRV, and some sleep-stage findings.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.2

Health tracking accuracy is solid for the essentials, especially heart rate, sleep, and workouts, while advanced sensors are omitted.

heart rate accuracy
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.4

Heart-rate accuracy is strongest in running evidence, with one reviewer matching a Polar strap closely, while scientific testing calls it good rather than elite.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.6

Heart-rate accuracy is repeatedly praised, with reviewers finding close agreement against straps or other watches.

LTE connectivity
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.5

LTE is a consistent advantage because it is standard or broadly available, though one reviewer notes carrier setup can cost extra.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.3

LTE and cellular connectivity are improved by 5G, with reviewers noting better coverage, calls, texts, messages, and downloads away from the phone.

mapping and navigation
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.9

Navigation support is useful through offline maps, Google Maps routing, and GPS widgets, but one reviewer notes no built-in maps on-watch.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.3

Mapping and navigation are useful thanks to Apple Maps, offline maps, Find My basics, and Compass Backtrack, though precision finding is limited.

materials quality
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.6

Materials quality is strong, centered on titanium, sapphire/robust design references, and corrosion-resistant claims.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.0

Materials quality is good for the price, with aluminum and Ion-X glass, but premium titanium, sapphire, and some rugged ratings remain reserved for higher models.

menu navigation
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.3

Menu navigation is mostly straightforward through swipes, app drawers, digital bezel haptics, and simple operation.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.5

Menu navigation is easy and fast, helped by watchOS, the Digital Crown, touch controls, and one-handed gestures.

music controls
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.2

Music features are useful for downloaded Spotify, streaming, media tiles, and larger storage for music.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.8

Music controls are a strength, including Apple Music pairing, media controls, and playback improvements.

onboard music storage
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.6

Onboard storage is a clear 2025 upgrade, repeatedly described as 64GB and useful for music, apps, and offline maps.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.3

Onboard storage and offline playback are improved, with 64GB storage and support for music or media without the phone nearby.

operating system experience
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.2

The operating system experience benefits from One UI 8/Wear OS updates, Gemini, Now Bar, and refreshed interface features.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.6

The operating system experience is a major strength; reviewers praise watchOS 26 as polished, cohesive, and rich in Apple Watch features.

outdoor visibility
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.7

Outdoor visibility is excellent, with multiple reviewers saying the bright display remains readable in sunlight.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
3.6

Outdoor visibility is usable but not class-leading, with the 1,000-nit screen and direct sunlight repeatedly cited as limits.

pairing reliability
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.6

Pairing and setup reliability are positive where tested, with instant recognition and quick setup noted.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.7

Pairing and iPhone integration are strong, with reviewers praising how well the watch syncs, routes notifications, and pairs with Apple services.

recovery insights
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.5

Recovery-style insights are mixed: vascular load interests some reviewers, while HRV and related metrics draw skepticism.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.1

Recovery insights are present through training load, Vitals, sleep score, and workout feedback, but they are not as deep or prescriptive as some rivals.

reliability
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.5

Reliability is mostly acceptable but not flawless, with one review noting brief display interruptions and another calling performance not horrible rather than perfect.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.4

Reliability appears strong in everyday use, with reviewers emphasizing smooth performance and lack of issues in ordinary tasks.

safety features
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.3

Safety features include fall detection, emergency siren references, sleep apnea alerts, and related health/safety setup options.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.8

Safety features are a major strength, including fall detection, crash detection, emergency SOS, heart-rate alerts, and Compass Backtrack.

size options
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.4

Size options are limited by the single large 47mm format, though the band can fit a range of wrists and the screen size appeals to some users.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.0

Size options are adequate and familiar at 40mm and 44mm, with the smaller size appealing to smaller wrists, though color choices are limited.

sleep tracking accuracy
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.5

Sleep tracking is useful and improving, but reviewers disagree on sleep stages and awake-time accuracy.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.1

Sleep tracking is useful and generally accurate for time and stages, but sleep score is sometimes described as simple or limited.

smartphone notifications
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.3

Smartphone notifications are well supported, with reviewers noting detailed notification views and suggested replies.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.6

Notifications are a core strength, especially with always-on viewing, wrist vibration routing, and gestures for dismissal or management.

smartwatch features
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.2

Smartwatch features are broad, including LTE, calls, texts, Gemini, Now Bar, storage, and Samsung’s full watch software stack.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.8

Smartwatch features are excellent for the price, with reviewers emphasizing that it feels like a full Apple Watch rather than a stripped-down tracker.

software smoothness
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.3

Software smoothness is generally good, with smooth app launches and more functional One UI behavior, despite occasional reliability caveats.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.8

Software smoothness is one of the clearest strengths because the S10 chip keeps watchOS, apps, and gestures fast and responsive.

step counting accuracy
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.2

Step counting is positive in basic walking tests, but one reviewer notes accuracy drops when arms are not swinging.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.0

Step counting appears as part of the core activity toolkit, though reviewers discuss the feature more than rigorous step-count accuracy.

stress tracking
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.1

Stress tracking is included in Samsung’s health sensor set, though the reviews provide feature evidence more than accuracy testing.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
No score yet
style and design
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.9

Style is divisive: some reviewers like the rugged, colorful, stylish look, while others find it bulky or not pretty.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
3.3

Style and design are mixed: reviewers like the familiar Apple Watch look but often criticize the older body, thicker bezels, and limited colors.

third-party app support
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.5

Third-party app support is solid through Google Play, fitness apps such as Strava and Map My Run, and a growing Wear OS app selection.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.6

Third-party app support is strong because the SE 3 retains Apple’s large app store and broad developer support.

touchscreen responsiveness
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.3

Touchscreen responsiveness and gesture operation are described as intentional and straightforward in the long-term review evidence.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.7

Touchscreen responsiveness is strong, with reviewers saying touch, buttons, gestures, and everyday controls work promptly and fluidly.

user interface
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.3

The user interface is improved and functional, though some reviewers dislike parts of the visual layout.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.3

The user interface is easy, clean, and cohesive, especially with watchOS 26 and the familiar watch face/home structure.

value for money
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.3

Value for money is the main weak point because reviewers repeatedly question the high price and minimal 2025 hardware changes.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.8

Value for money is the strongest consensus attribute, with reviewers repeatedly saying the SE 3 offers near-Series functionality at a much lower price.

voice assistant quality
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.4

Voice assistant quality is a strength with Gemini, which reviewers describe as convenient, useful, and directly available on the wrist.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.4

Voice assistant quality improves with on-device Siri and the S10 chip, making requests faster and more useful than earlier SE models.

watch face quality
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.7

Watch faces are a strength, with reviewers praising quantity, customization, and Samsung’s polished face designs.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.6

Watch face quality is praised through attractive, high-quality options and watchOS 26 face support.

water resistance
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.7

Water resistance is a strong feature, with reviews citing 5ATM/10ATM ratings, IP68 claims, and pool/rain/snow use.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.3

Water resistance is solid for typical use, with reviewers noting 50-meter or 164-foot resistance and swim tracking, but not advanced dive sensors.

wellness insights
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
3.8

Wellness insights are useful but uneven: sleep coaching and vascular load get interest, while energy score and antioxidant index receive skepticism.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.1

Wellness insights are useful for mainstream users through sleep score, sleep apnea alerts, wrist temperature, Vitals, and heart-rate notifications.

Wi-Fi connectivity
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.0

Wi-Fi support is present across connectivity mentions, including LTE/Wi-Fi model references.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
3.5

Wi-Fi is adequate but not premium, with reviewers noting 2.4GHz-only or Wi-Fi 4 support rather than dual-band.

workout tracking variety
Product 1: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025)
4.6

Workout variety is strong, with reviewers citing many tracked activities, multisport/triathlon capability, and broad exercise lists.

Product 2: Apple Watch SE 3
4.6

Workout tracking variety is strong, covering many sports, workouts, running metrics, swimming, and common gym activities.