Sunday Thursday
In this weekly column, Android Central Wearables editor Michael Hicks talks about the world of wearables, apps and fitness tech as it relates to running and health in his quest to get faster and fitter .
I’ve spent the last year mildly bashing Samsung for not taking fitness as seriously as its rivals. Unpacked reveals that the Galaxy Watch 7 and Ultra had improved HR accuracy, and dual-band GPS turned my watch hype up to 11, but I had to test these improvements myself. Two days of running later, I’m extremely optimistic!
My Galaxy Watch Ultra review unit arrived Thursday afternoon 102ºF, so my testing time was limited to the last two sweaty mornings (I’m writing this on Saturday). I’ll have more in-depth testing in about 1.5 weeks, but I wanted to rush this out for anyone thinking of pre-ordering a Watch 7 or Ultra.
There are four major upgrades from the Watch 6 to the Galaxy Watch 7 and Ultra: faster Exynos, doubled memory, tripled LEDs on the bottom health sensors, and dual-band GPS. The first two are welcome but predictable for an annual improvement, while the value of the last two is somewhat subjective. Is the old Watch 6 HR and GPS data good enough to expect to upgrade, or make Wear OS athletes need improvement?
My Galaxy Watch Ultra Fitness Test
To test their accuracy, I ran wearing the Galaxy Watch Ultra on my left wrist, the Garmin Forerunner 965 on the right, and the COROS Heart Rate Monitor on my arm synced with the Garmin for more accurate HR results.
The Garmin watch was set to SatIQ mode, which starts with GPS only to save battery, but switches to dual-band mode if the signal encounters jamming. In theory, the Galaxy Watch Ultra stays in dual-band mode by default, which would be more reliable.
image 1 e 3
My first 5K run was completed with Garmin and Samsung tracking 3.11 miles with an average heart rate of 159 bpm. It was a great start, although the graph above shows some heart rate gaps where Samsung over- or under-estimated my efforts which balanced out. The GPS map shows the Garmin (blue) sticking more to my path, while the Samsung (orange) drifted more into the path throughout the loop.
image 1 e 4
My second five-mile run ended with the Galaxy Watch Ultra tracking 5.04 miles and an average of 145 bpm. The Garmin Forerunner 965 measured 5.01 miles and the COROS HRM measured 146 bpm.
In this test, the Galaxy Watch Ultra’s dual-band GPS map fared better than Garmin’s SatIQ map. In a back-and-forth, the Samsung stuck more consistently on the treadmill while the Garmin pulled away from the trail. And at an early moment when I was running down the street past some construction, the Samsung better captured the moment I stopped and turned to look at the cars passing by.
In terms of heart rate, the Samsung mostly matched the peaks and valleys of the HR monitor, but lagged a bit during quick changes. That’s pretty solid for wrist-based optical HR data, so Samsung is in good company. Aside from a few hits, the Ultra stayed close in accuracy.
image 1 e 2
To wrap things up, I did a quick one-mile run on lane 2 of a track to test the accuracy of the Galaxy Watch Ultra at maximum effort. In this case, Samsung measured 1,670 m, while the correct distance was 1,640 m; The Ultra’s 171 bpm average was 6 bpm less than the COROS HRM.
You will immediately notice the heart rate issues at the beginning of my run. I attribute it to taking off my watch for pre-run photos and not tightening up enough; it wobbled as I pumped my arms until I tightened it during the first lap and the results improved (though not immediately). However, the Galaxy Watch Ultra’s results dipped by about 5–8 bpm at various points before getting fully back on track during the last lap.
The GPS map was a little crazy, but I still haven’t found it any fitness watch that matches my wrist perfectly during a track run, so I wouldn’t read too much into it.
Overall, my GPS results were significantly better than what I got during last year’s Galaxy Watch 6 fitness test; My heart rate results were better, but I want to do more anaerobic training to see if the track running issues were a fluke.
As a side note, the Samsung’s step count was a little weak. It was almost accurate when I walked 1000 steps counting, but I suspect it misses a few steps while you’re jogging. My cadence (steps per minute) dropped by a few spm each run, and my daily Ultra step count was about 100 steps less than the Forerunner 965 for every few thousand steps. Garmin watches have won several of my step count tests, so I trust its data more here.
Thoughts on working with the Galaxy Watch Ultra
The Galaxy Watch Ultra and Watch 7 have the same dual-band GPS and upgraded HR LED, so you should get better fitness results than the last-generation Galaxy watches, whichever you choose.
Focusing specifically on the Galaxy Watch Ultra, I wrote earlier this week that I’m disappointed that the Ultra has an inactive crown. I like having a dedicated button to pause or resume workouts, only to get annoyed when I have to swipe multiple times to change screens, even as I try to wipe the sweat off my fingers. It’s not a major issue, but I’ll hope Samsung makes it a proper crown for future Ultras.
Samsung sent me the larger Ocean band, when I would have preferred the Nylon Trail band to shed some weight and fit the Ultra better on my wrist. My arm has been trained for heavy fitness watches over the years, so I didn’t find the Galaxy Watch Ultra too difficult to wear; That said, people with smaller wrists will want to try one on first and see if they agree.
I love the jump to 3000 nits of screen brightness. Like the Apple Watch Ultra 2, colors remain vibrant and text legible in sunny conditions.
Samsung told us that the Galaxy Watch Ultra can last 16 hours in normal conditions with full GPS. I started my run with the Ultra fully charged and finished at 85% after two cumulative hours of auto-tracked running and walking. That would theoretically make the Ultra last 13 hours, which isn’t far off Samsung’s promise.
If nothing changes in future tests, the Galaxy Watch Ultra (or more affordable Galaxy Watch 7) will easily join the best fitness watches. Samsung still has a ways to go on the software side—I’d love to see workout loading or recommended workouts in future Wear OS updates—but for the hardware, it’s on par with the competition.
Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra