Running Watches

Garmin Forerunner 970 vs Apple Watch Ultra 3: The Best Running Watches Compared

Two of the best running watches on the market go head to head on design, tracking accuracy, battery life, navigation, and smart features.

Two premium sports watches, one circular and one square, on a concrete surface

Introduction

The Garmin Forerunner 970 and Apple Watch Ultra 3 are two of the best running watches on the market right now, depending on what you want from a watch. The Forerunner 970 is arguably the best pure sports watch out there, while the Apple Watch Ultra 3 is the best smartwatch for runners, with the most impressive sports tracking features Apple has put on a watch plus its famously polished smart features.

They sit at fairly similar price points, with the Forerunner 970 cheaper: £629 in the UK and $749 in the US, versus £749 in the UK and $799 in the US for the Apple Watch Ultra 3. After extensive side-by-side use over long periods, including races and full marathon training blocks, this comparison breaks down where each watch wins and which one deserves a place on your wrist.

Design and Build

The Forerunner 970 sticks with Garmin’s classic circular watch and five-button setup, while the Apple Watch Ultra 3 has a squarer design with three buttons plus a digital dial for navigating menus. Both have very bright, large AMOLED touchscreen displays, though you use the touchscreen far more on the Apple Watch; the Garmin is very easy to navigate using buttons alone.

Two premium sports watches displayed side by side on a matte concrete surface

On materials, the Apple Watch is made from titanium with a sapphire crystal display. The Forerunner 970 also gets a titanium bezel and sapphire crystal display, but its case is mostly plastic, which helps it stay a fair bit lighter than the Ultra 3. A big practical difference: the Garmin has a built-in front-facing LED flashlight, which the Apple Watch cannot match with its screen-based flashlight mode. On the downside, the Forerunner 970 has a lower waterproof rating of 50 metres compared to 100 metres on the Apple Watch Ultra 3, which is also dive-proof to 14 metres.

Both watches include a mic and speaker, the usual sensor suite with a pulse oximeter and barometric altimeter, dual-band GPS, and external sensor support. In real-world wear, the Garmin is lighter, slimmer, and generally easier to wear day to day, while the Apple Watch has the more premium finish and feels a bit heavier on the wrist.

Tracking Accuracy and Heart Rate

The fundamentals are roughly the same, with the same mid-run basics covered, though third-party apps can push the Apple Watch closer to the Garmin experience. GPS accuracy is strong on both, performing reliably across a wide range of conditions from forest to urban runs, and both are dependable for pacing workouts and racing.

Heart rate is where they start to differ. The Garmin 970 is the more reliable of the two: the Apple Watch Ultra 3 can take a long time to lock on at the start of runs and occasionally reads very high, while the Garmin rarely missteps, possibly helped by sitting more securely on the wrist due to its lighter build. Pairing a chest strap with either watch remains a sensible move.

Runner checking a sports watch during an early morning run in the city

Where Garmin really pulls ahead is post-run training analysis. The 970 offers far more detail: training readiness, running tolerance, training load, race time predictions, and, with a compatible chest strap, running economy estimates. Apple’s training tooling is more limited, and while the Apple Watch does offer training load based on self-rated effort, Garmin’s automatic, comprehensive approach feels more in tune with actual training status.

Battery Life

Battery life favours the Garmin, though the gap is narrower in real use than the specs suggest. The Apple Watch Ultra 3 is listed at 42 hours in watch mode but reliably outlasts that, stretching to two and a half days in regular use and even three days on a marathon weekend. Its rapid charging helps too, loading 80% in about 45 minutes.

The Forerunner 970 still wins: it lasted four to five days per charge with the always-on display during heavy marathon training, versus around two and a half days for the Apple Watch with three hours of GPS training. During sleep tracking, the Apple Watch drained about 9% overnight versus 3 to 5% on the Garmin, so you will end up charging the Ultra 3 more often.

Trail runner navigating a mountain route at dusk using a watch

For big efforts the difference matters more. The Apple Watch Ultra 3 might stretch to a 100km ultra depending on pace, but the Garmin will definitely handle 100km and could make a 100-miler. If staying power is important, the Garmin is the pick.

Navigation is better on the Garmin. Maps are baked into the native system, visible within your run screens, routeable so you can create routes on the fly, and supported by ClimbPro. The Apple Watch Ultra 3 can deliver a good mapping experience through excellent third-party apps like WorkOutDoors or Footpath, just not natively within its running app.

The Apple Watch is far smarter overall, though. There is a massive app store, email and wallet apps you actually use, cellular and 5G connectivity, satellite SOS safety tools, and a built-in siren, plus deep integration with other Apple devices. Garmin’s smartwatch tools have improved, with offline music, contactless payments, and useful customisation, and the 970’s speaker and mic are handy for quick mid-run calls, but it is still well short of the Apple Watch’s depth.

Sports watch on a charging cable with soft ambient lighting

Which Watch Should You Choose?

If you care more about smartwatch tools than training analysis and the pure running experience, the Apple Watch Ultra 3 is the one to choose. It is better for day-to-day life, health tracking, activity tracking, and sleep tracking, and it offers phone-free connectivity and safety tools the Garmin cannot provide. For runners in the Apple ecosystem, it is the best in the business at that smartwatch-running mashup.

If you care about the nitty-gritty of training trends, detailed metrics, battery life, mid-run navigation, and a seamless running-data experience, go for the Forerunner 970. It is also the more comfortable daily wear thanks to its lighter, thinner design and has the built-in flashlight as a genuine bonus. Given the similar prices, the Forerunner 970 was the watch that stayed on the wrist out of these two, and for runners who prioritise the training experience, it is the stronger overall choice.

Conclusion

Both are very accomplished watches and among the best tested this year. The Garmin Forerunner 970 is the better sports tracker with superior training analysis, battery life, navigation, and comfort, while the Apple Watch Ultra 3 offers a more premium feel, far better smart features, and stronger health and sleep tracking. Choose based on which half of that split matters more to your running.

Further reading

Related Reviews

Coros Pace 3 running watch on brushed aluminium surface

Running Watches

Coros Pace 3 Running Watch Review: Why Software Matters More Than Specs

The Coros Pace 3 prioritizes runner-focused design and intelligent software over expensive hardware. Here's why it outperforms watches that cost twice as much.

6/27/2026
Seven running smartwatches arranged on concrete surface showing different designs and brands

Running Watches

GPS Running Watch Accuracy Test: Seven Watches Compared Across Urban, Trail, and Race Conditions

We tested seven popular running watches from major brands in three different environments to find out which delivers the most accurate GPS tracking for distance and pace.

6/27/2026
Compact black GPS running watch with five buttons on a concrete surface

Running Watches

Garmin Forerunner 70 Review: Garmin's Cheapest Forerunner Is More Capable Than You'd Expect

The new entry-level Forerunner 70 brings an AMOLED screen, a fresh interface, and real training analysis for £219/$249, with a few trade-offs to weigh before buying.

9/30/2026