Image source: Zepp Health

Seven things that separate Amazfit Balance 2 vs T-Rex 3

Zepp Health’s Amazfit Balance 2 and T-Rex 3 are cut from the same cloth but tailored for slightly different users. I recently reviewed the T-Rex 3 and came away impressed by how much you get for the price. Both watches are tough, smart, and packed with features but how they go about it is where the differences start to show.


Build quality and comfort are not one and the same

Starting with design – and the duo is clearly made to take a beating. That much is obvious. But they take different paths to get there.

The Balance 2 uses a sleeker aluminum alloy frame, polished up with sapphire glass and a polymer base. It’s smooth to the touch and wears smaller than it looks. Meanwhile, the T-Rex 3 leans into its rugged identity with exposed screws, stainless steel protection, along with a thicker shell.

Also, on the T-Rex you get four physical buttons. The Balance swaps that out for a rotating crown plus one physical button combo.

The difference on the wrist is noticeable. I’d describe the Balance 2 as sturdy but more refined. The T-Rex 3 feels heavier, bolder, and more like a field tool. I could wear the Balance 2 with a long-sleeved shirt. The T-Rex 3? It’s not exactly hiding under a cuff. Still, both are comfortable. The Balance 2 is 25 grams lighter, and that helps over longer periods.


Displays are equally bright but not the same

Screen size and resolution are identical. You get a 1.5-inch AMOLED panel on both, with sharp 480 x 480 resolution and up to 2000 nits of brightness. But there are subtle distinctions in usability.

The T-Rex 3 has a Glove Mode. That means you can tap and swipe even when it’s freezing out. The Balance 2 doesn’t offer that, but it does come with sapphire protection, which should hold up better to scratches over time.

Essential reading: Top fitness trackers and health gadgets

Both displays are easy to read in full sunlight. That wasn’t the case with earlier Amazfits, so it’s good to see. The difference here is more about niche utility than quality.


Sensor setups go in slightly different directions

At first glance, the sensor lineup looks nearly identical. They both offer the same core tracking package. Accelerometer, gyroscope, geomagnetic, temperature, barometric pressure. And both use the 5PD + 2LED BioTracker layout. But the Balance 2 uses the slightly newer Gen 6 sensor. That, combined with its refined optoelectronics, should deliver slightly more consistent heart rate data during exercise.

The original Balance has a BIA sensor for body composition, but that’s gone now. Zepp likely pulled it to make room for better water resistance and to simplify the internals. Few people used that feature anyway.

Amazfit Balance 2

Battery life depends on how you use them

If you’re someone who hates charging, both watches perform well. T-Rex 3 technically wins on specs. It has a 700 mAh battery versus 658 mAh on the Balance 2. You can stretch it to nearly a month with minimal use, or around 13 days with everything turned on.

Balance 2 lands a little lower, but not by much. You’re looking at about 21 days for typical use. Where it surprises is GPS. In power-saving mode, you get 67 hours, which slightly edges out the T-Rex 3.

Honestly, in the real world, the difference is minor. You will be good for well over two weeks on both, even with notifications and continuous heart rate running. You might see a bigger gap if you use more offline maps or music on one versus the other.


Maps, music and memory

Here there are some differences. Balance 2 has 27GB of storage, which gives it quite a bit of headroom for offline content. The T-Rex 3 tops out at 26GB, which is nearly on par. You can install maps on both, and music playback works fine if you pair Bluetooth earbuds.

That said, only the Balance 2 has stereo sound. In fact it has a dual speakers and a mic setup. The T-Rex 3 only has a mic. It does have a basic beeper for alarms and alerts, but if you want to take calls or listen to voice prompts, the Balance 2 has the edge. That’s, actually, one of the differences. Balance 2 has support for Bluetooth phone-calls from a connected smartphone, the T-Rex 3 doesn’t.


Smart features and software differences

Both run Zepp OS, but the Balance 2 ships with version 5 while the T-Rex 3 runs version 4.5. That matters mostly if you care about software extras. Balance 2 has a few exclusive features like a Time Difference Manager for jet lag, a scuba mode, and a screen magnifier. It also handles haptics more cleanly.

The T-Rex 3 still has the basics. You get offline assistant commands, notifications, app support, and Zepp Pay with Mastercard. And it should probably get support for Zepp OS 5.0 in the months ahead.


Durability is a shared priority

Both watches are rated at 10 ATM. But only the T-Rex 3 comes with freediving certification. You can take it down to 147 feet without issue. It also meets nine military-grade standards, compared to six on the Balance 2. So if you really want the most rugged device, the T-Rex 3 edges it.

That said, the Balance 2 is no slouch. It’s probably tougher than most people will need. And thanks to the sapphire crystal, it’ll probably look better a year in.


So which one should you pick?

This isn’t a clear-cut win for either watch. The Balance 2 feels more refined and is slightly smarter. It’s also more discreet and better for users who don’t want something screaming ruggedness on their wrist.

The T-Rex 3 offers more raw durability and a slightly larger battery. It feels like it’s built for adventure first, smartwatch second.

Both offer solid performance, long battery life and decent tracking. The price difference is not great so that should not play an important part in your decision. Although you are likely to pick up bigger discounts on the T-Rex 3 as it was released last year.

In the end, it comes down to which style and feature set fit your routine best. A masculine device – go for T-Rex 3. Something that is middle of the road – go for Balance 2.

You can check out the full Amazfit range on the Zepp Health website or Amazon (Balance 2, T-Rex 3).


Amazfit Balance 2 vs T-Rex 3: Tech specs comparison

Here is the tech specs comparison table based on the information you provided:

Feature
Amazfit Balance 2
Amazfit T-Rex 3
Release date
May-25
Sep-24
Case material
Aluminum alloy middle frame, Fiber-reinforced polymer bottom shell
High-strength polymer middle frame, Stainless steel bezel, back panel, bridge and buttons
Number of physical buttons
2
4
Shape
Round
Round
Size
47.4 x 47.4 x 12.3 mm
48.5 x 48.5 x 13.75 mm
Display type
AMOLED
AMOLED
Resolution
480 x 480 pixels, 2000 nits brightness, sapphire crystal display
480 x 480 pixels, 2000 nits brightness, Glove Mode
Screen size
1.5 inch
1.5 inch
Weight (without strap)
43 grams
68.3 grams
Sensors
BioTracker PPG 6.0 (5PD + 2LED), Accelerometer, Gyroscope, Geomagnetic, Barometric altimeter, Temperature, Ambient light
BioTracker PPG (5PD + 2LED), Accelerometer, Gyroscope, Geomagnetic, Air pressure, Temperature, Ambient light
Water-resistance
10 ATM
10 ATM, Frediving up to 147 feet certified
Positioning
Dual band & 6 satellite systems
Dual band & 6 satellite systems
Built-in speaker
Yes (2)
No
Microphone
Yes
Yes
NFC
Yes
Yes
Music storage
Yes (up to 27 GB)
Yes (up to 26 GB)
Connection
WLAN 2.4GHz, Bluetooth 5.2 & BLE
WLAN 2.4GHz, Bluetooth 5.2 & BLE
Cellular connectivity
No
No
Battery capacity
658 mAh
700 mAh
Battery life
21 days normal, 67 hours power-saving GPS
27 days typical, 40 days saver mode, 13 days heavy, 42 hours accuracy GPS
Operating system
Zepp OS 5.0
Zepp OS 4.5
Colors
Black
Onyx, Lava
Typical RRP
$300
$280

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter! Check out our YouTube channel.

Marko Maslakovic

Marko founded Gadgets & Wearables in 2014, having worked for more than 15 years in the City of London’s financial district. Since then, he has led the company’s charge to become a leading information source on health and fitness gadgets and wearables. He is responsible for most of the reviews on this website.

Marko Maslakovic has 2711 posts and counting. See all posts by Marko Maslakovic

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.