
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.

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.