Compare Xiaomi Watch 2 vs Amazfit Cheetah 2 Pro

Activity auto-detection was criticized as trigger-happy and inconsistent about stopping activities.

Pool testing gave the only clear auto-detection judgment, with the watch correctly identifying the reviewer’s freestyle swim style.

The app ecosystem was a strength because Wear OS provided Google services, downloadable apps, and broad wrist-based functionality.

Reviewers generally found Zepp improving into a usable ecosystem, but several said it still feels overloaded or less clean than Garmin/Coros ecosystems.

Band quality was mixed to weak: the included TPU band suited workouts but felt cheap or awkward for everyday use.

Band reactions were split: some reviewers found it comfortable or even a favorite, while others called it cheap, not premium, or irritating.

Battery life was the biggest split: one review praised two days, but several others found one-day endurance or daily charging disappointing.

Battery life was one of the strongest areas, with repeated praise for week-plus use and long GPS endurance, though one reviewer found it inconsistent and another compared it unfavorably to a T-Rex model.

Blood oxygen tracking received positive practical comments, including useful breathing-score context and close comparison to another oximeter-style device.

Blood oxygen evidence was limited to one first-look concern where an unexpected SpO2 reading made the reviewer question the result.

Bluetooth connectivity was praised in one review for staying reliable throughout testing.

Body temperature tracking was a missing feature and was called a consideration for users who specifically want it.

Brightness was praised as sufficient, including in direct sun or sunny-day use.

Brightness was consistently praised, with reviewers calling the 3,000-nit display highly readable in sun and a major visibility advantage.

Build quality ranged from superb or premium-feeling for the price to noticeably less premium than leading watches.

Build quality was widely praised thanks to the titanium and sapphire construction, with reviewers repeatedly describing the hardware as premium or impressive for the price.

Button controls were generally usable and customizable, but reviewers missed the Pro model’s crown.

The physical buttons were a clear strength for running use, wet hands, gloves and avoiding accidental presses, though one reviewer still missed a fifth button/crown-style setup.

Call handling was consistently positive, with reviewers saying watch calls sounded good or were easy to take from the wrist.

Call handling had limited but positive evidence, with the watch speaker and microphone judged loud and good enough for calls.

Calorie tracking usefulness was weak because Mi Fitness sometimes showed glitched calorie figures that did not match the watch.

Nutrition and calorie logging in Zepp received unusually strong praise because reviewers found automatic calorie and macro calculations easier than other apps.

Charging convenience was poor because reviewers disliked the proprietary or orientation-sensitive magnetic puck.

Charging convenience was mixed: the magnetic puck was liked, but reviewers disliked the proprietary charger and need to carry another accessory.

Charging speed was consistently praised as fast, often offsetting some frustration with short battery life.

Coaching was mixed: running and workout guidance existed, but sleep advice was described as generic.

Coaching features were broadly useful, especially Zepp Coach and structured plans, though some reviewers wanted deeper or more polished training analysis.

Comfort was a consistent strength, with reviewers praising the light body for daily wear, workouts, and sleep.

Comfort was polarized: some found the watch light and wearable on long runs, while others criticized its bulk, weight, thickness or tempo-run nuisance.

Companion app quality was split: some found Mi Fitness intuitive or fine, while Wareable called analysis a chore.

The companion app was useful and often clear for training data, nutrition, routes and analysis, but reviewers also described it as overwhelming or initially hard to learn.

Contactless payments worked well and were convenient, but the required screen lock was an annoyance.

Contactless payments were positively described as practical for errands, coffee or post-workout stops without carrying a phone.

Cross-platform compatibility was a weakness because the watch is Android-focused and loses potential or support outside that ecosystem.

Cross-platform compatibility was a weak spot in the available evidence because iPhone users lose direct SMS replies and some smartwatch integration.

Customization was a clear strength, including many watch faces, complications, straps, and Wear OS personalization options.

Customization was praised across brightness, data pages and watch setup, with reviewers noting the watch can be tailored heavily to training needs.

Display quality was one of the strongest areas, with multiple reviewers praising the AMOLED panel, clarity, and screen appearance.

Display quality was strong overall because it is sharp and bright, but several reviewers disliked the smaller usable display or large bezel relative to the case.

Durability had mixed evidence, with one reviewer feeling confident and another faulting the lack of military durability and sapphire glass.

Durability evidence was positive, with one fall leaving the watch unmarked and another review saying the case stayed immaculate after hard training.

ECG functionality was treated as a missing advanced feature, softened only by the watch’s lower price.

ECG functionality was a weakness because reviewers noted the feature is absent and that Garmin offers superior ECG-related capability.

Fit was acceptable but size-dependent; reviewers found it large or noticeable despite light weight.

Fit depended heavily on wrist size: one reviewer found it too large on a smaller wrist, while others found it lightweight or nicely fitting.

Fitness tracking accuracy was mixed: basic tracking worked well for some reviewers, but others found workout data rudimentary or inconsistent in accuracy and usefulness.

Fitness tracking accuracy was generally good for recreational training and racing, though reviewers noted GPS distance quirks and not-class-leading precision.

The flashlight was repeatedly praised as useful, with reviewers liking the real LED torch, red mode and practical running or nighttime use.

GPS accuracy was mostly praised for dual-band precision and strong real-world performance, with one reviewer finding it less exact.

GPS accuracy was one of the strongest consensus areas, with many reviewers finding it solid, fast, close to Garmin, or excellent, though a few noted corner-cutting or distance errors.

Reviewers treated general health data as useful directional guidance rather than professional-grade measurement; one review was positive about raw data while another warned not to treat it as hard fact.

Health tracking accuracy was positive but not flawless; heart-rate-based health metrics were useful, while scientific testing rated broader heart tracking as only okay.

Heart-rate accuracy was split sharply: one tester saw close agreement with a Garmin reference, while others reported unreliable or inconsistent readings.

Heart rate accuracy was good for steady efforts and often close to straps or Garmin, but several reviewers still recommended a chest strap for intervals, cycling or precision work.

LTE connectivity was a repeated drawback because the standard Watch 2 lacks cellular support and pushes untethered users toward the Pro model.

Mapping and navigation were mixed: one reviewer found directions unclear, while another showed GPS navigation working well.

Mapping and navigation were useful and feature-rich, but map smoothness, readability, rerouting and polish were repeated limitations.

Materials quality was mixed: one review praised the premium feel, while another called the materials cheaper than more expensive rivals.

Materials quality was a major strength, with reviewers praising titanium, sapphire glass and premium exterior hardware, though one first-look review flagged a polymer bezel.

Menu navigation was mostly intuitive, though the lack of a crown made swiping more necessary.

Menu navigation was serviceable but not effortless; reviewers liked straightforward navigation yet noted a learning curve and some complexity.

Music controls worked, but the experience had a caveat because album art was missing in one reviewer’s test.

Onboard music storage was praised as ample for playlists, apps, and offline listening.

Onboard music storage was useful because there is room for music, but reviewers criticized the MP3-only approach and lack of streaming integration.

Operating system experience was mixed: Wear OS gave strong app access, but reviewers criticized the older Wear OS 3.5 base and uncertain update path.

The operating system experience was mixed: Zepp OS and Zepp app features worked, but reviewers called parts of the interface overloaded or bloated.

Outdoor visibility was strong overall, with reviewers saying the display remained bright or visible outdoors.

Outdoor visibility was excellent across reviews, with the display repeatedly judged easy to read in bright sunlight.

Pairing and syncing were positive in the YouTube review that described automatic pairing and syncing with the Mi Fitness app.

Recovery insights were criticized because suggested recovery times could be unrealistic enough that the reviewer learned to ignore them.

Recovery insights were useful and practical, especially BioCharge, fatigue and sleep-related suggestions, though one reviewer found recovery time less conservative than Garmin.

Reliability was positive in Wareable’s Watch 2 review because earlier Xiaomi Wear OS bugs were not encountered.

Reliability evidence was limited and mixed, mainly around inconsistent heart-rate/GPS moments and one wrong first GPS run.

Running power support was useful for one reviewer, but others questioned related metric reliability or found the calculation too different to evaluate.

Safety features were praised mainly through the blinking flashlight/red light, which reviewers saw as useful for visibility in the dark.

Score tracking was useful when it summarized readiness, fatigue or race predictions into easy-to-read numbers, with one review praising accurate race-time prediction.

Size options were a weakness because reviewers noted only one case size and concern for smaller wrists.

Size options were a concern because reviewers repeatedly said smaller-wristed users could benefit from a smaller or more compact model.

Sleep tracking was generally one of the better health features, with several reviewers saying it was detailed or matched their experience, though one noted it was not perfectly precise.

Sleep tracking opinions were mixed: some liked the depth and comparable sleep duration, while others found missed awake time and only okay sleep-stage accuracy.

Notification handling was polarized: several reviewers found replies and mirroring reliable, while one highlighted Wear OS notification delays.

Smartphone notifications were usable for reading texts, but iPhone reply limits and texting restrictions reduced the score.

Smartwatch features were considered strong for the price, with reviewers calling the watch packed or complete enough for everyday smartwatch tasks.

Smartwatch features were useful but not full flagship-smartwatch quality, with reviewers praising everyday utility while noting slimmed-down features and unclear positioning.

Software smoothness was mostly good, with reviewers calling it slick or fluid, though some still saw occasional sluggishness or stutter.

Software smoothness was mixed, with map lag and polish concerns offset by one review’s praise for firmware improvements and updates.

Step counting was included in a positive basic-tracking judgment from one reviewer who felt daily steps were handled well.

Stress tracking was useful where it offered practical suggestions and fed into readiness-style guidance, but evidence was limited.

Style and design divided reviewers: some liked the minimalist look, while others found it plain or characterless.

Style and design were generally liked, with reviewers calling it premium, sleek or good-looking, though not everyone found it amazing or loved its size.

Third-party app support was a major advantage, with multiple reviewers praising access to Google Play apps and big-name services.

Third-party support was strong for fitness platforms like TrainingPeaks, Runna, Intervals.icu and Strava, but weaker for streaming services and app breadth.

Touch responsiveness was mixed: one reviewer found typing acceptable, while another said responsiveness could be slow after startup.

Touchscreen responsiveness was split: several reviewers called it responsive, while others said sensitivity caused accidental inputs during running or wet use.

The user interface was easy to learn overall, but small-screen typing and interaction still required patience.

The user interface was approachable for basics and liked by some reviewers, but others found it cluttered, unintuitive in places or frustrating.

Value for money was the strongest consensus point: reviewers repeatedly called it affordable, good value, or a bargain for Wear OS.

Value for money was mostly favorable versus premium Garmin pricing, but reviewers disagreed on whether the upgrade over cheaper Amazfit models justified the launch price.

Voice assistant quality was generally useful thanks to Google Assistant, though one reviewer noted recognition could be slow.

Voice assistant quality was mixed to weak: short commands could work, but reviewers often found Zepp Flow less useful, less smooth or unnecessary during runs.

Voice notes were positively received as a fun and useful way to capture run context, especially when geotagged to an activity.

Watch faces were praised for looking good on the AMOLED screen and offering customization.

Watch face quality had limited but positive evidence, with one reviewer noting decent watch faces as part of the strong specification.

Water resistance was generally appreciated for swimming or showers, but one review noted the limitation of 5ATM with no IP rating.

Wellness insights were limited; reviewers wanted more proactive tracking and described some health presentation as bare-minimum.

Wellness insights were useful because they tied sleep, stress, fatigue and activity into practical training feedback or recovery suggestions.

Wi-Fi connectivity had limited mixed evidence: map downloads over Wi-Fi worked but were described as mildly annoying.

Workout variety was viewed as broad, with 150+ or 160+ modes, though one reviewer cautioned that many modes can feel like simple exercise tags.

Workout variety was a consistent strength, with reviewers praising deep workout handling, extensive sport modes and broad activity coverage.