The information appears in Google results for several unrelated Suunto support pages. Opening those pages does not reveal the Race 3 material, suggesting an unpublished promotional section briefly became visible to Google before Suunto removed or disabled it.

This was first spotted in a Reddit thread. Gadgets & Wearables independently verified the indexed Suunto references and uncovered additional details about the Race 3 lineup and Suunto AI Coach.

Two Race 3 models are on the way

The smaller model is called the Suunto Race 3 S. Suunto describes it as a lightweight trail watch with a 1.32-inch AMOLED display, dual-band GPS and sapphire crystal.

The current Race S, also has a 1.32-inch display, but the standard model uses mineral glass. That means the Race 3 S may bring a useful durability upgrade even if its basic dimensions remain similar.

Suunto says the Race 3 S will be “available first,” although the indexed text does not provide a launch date. The full-sized Suunto Race 3 is described as coming later in 2026 with a larger 1.5-inch AMOLED display and longer battery life for extended outdoor use.

That screen size matches the existing Suunto Race 2, so the snippets do not reveal whether the new model will bring a brighter panel, slimmer bezels or a redesigned case. There is also no mention yet of its processor, heart rate sensor, storage, weight or exact battery figures.

The timing is unusually quick. Suunto launched the Race 2 on August 27, 2025, meaning its replacement could arrive less than a year later. That watch introduced a brighter 1.5-inch LTPO AMOLED display, a faster processor and an updated optical heart rate sensor, as covered in our Race 2 versus the original Race comparison.

The naming is also interesting. Suunto currently sells the Race 2 alongside the older Race S, but never released a Race 2 S. Launching the Race 3 S first could bring the large and small models back under the same generation.

AI Coach may be the bigger story

The leaked hardware details remain fairly limited. The more substantial change appears to be a new version of Suunto AI Coach that connects the app more directly with the watch.

Suunto says users will be able to ask what they should train, when they should recover or where they should run. The service will use their training, recovery, sleep and route data to produce personalised answers rather than general advice.

One example asks the app to find a local 7 km route. AI Coach then appears to consider the user’s location, training and goals before creating the route and sending it to the watch. The wording suggests it can also generate workouts and longer training plans, with the resulting sessions synced to the watch.

Suunto already uses the AI Coach name for adaptive training guidance. A recent Suunto software update added richer interval descriptions and structured sessions, while the company has also expanded its web-based route planner.

The Race 3 version looks broader. Conversational requests and automatic route creation would turn AI Coach into a more central part of the Suunto platform rather than another training widget buried inside the app.

A subscription appears to be coming

Both Race 3 models will include three months of Suunto AI Coach. Indexed text also refers to the service continuing as a paid plan, planned for 2027, although Suunto has not revealed the subscription price. Owners of other compatible watches may be able to request early access through a Pioneers Program.

That could prove more significant than the watches themselves. Suunto has traditionally sold its core training and mapping tools without a recurring fee, so placing its most advanced coaching features behind a subscription would mark a notable change in direction.

Plenty remains unknown, including pricing, case materials and the precise launch date of the Race 3 S. Still, the appearance of detailed marketing copy across Suunto’s own indexed pages makes this look like more than a placeholder or an AI-generated mistake.

We are tracking this device alongside the other watches, bands and health products expected over the coming months. See our upcoming wearable release radar for the latest launch window and supporting evidence.

The post Suunto Race 3 leak reveals two watches and a new AI Coach appeared first on Gadgets & Wearables.

In this article we compare Garmin CIRQA, Google Fitbit Air, Amazfit Helio Strap, WHOOP 5.0 and Polar Loop to find the best screenless fitness tracker for different types of users.

These devices give screenless fitness tracker buyers five genuinely different options. Garmin offers the deepest training tools without a required subscription, Fitbit Air is the lightest and cheapest route into passive tracking, while WHOOP still has the strongest recovery platform but costs far more over time.

A few years ago, choosing a screenless fitness tracker mostly meant deciding whether you were willing to pay for WHOOP. That has changed quickly, with Google, Garmin, Polar and Zepp Health all offering alternatives that collect health and activity data without putting another display on your wrist.

None of these trackers has built-in GPS. They all move most settings, results and analysis into a smartphone app, but the similarities begin to fade once you look at subscriptions, training tools, comfort and compatibility with other devices.

Price, design and battery life

The purchase price only tells part of the story. Fitbit Air and Helio Strap both cost $99.99, while Garmin CIRQA and Polar Loop have $199.99 list prices.

WHOOP does not sell the tracker in the conventional sense. The hardware comes with the membership, but continued access to the platform requires an active plan starting at $199 per year, rising to $239 for WHOOP Peak and $359 for WHOOP Life with the MG hardware. 

Fitbit Air is the easiest device to forget you are wearing. Its pod weighs only 5.2 grams, with the complete tracker coming in at around 12 grams, and its 17mm width makes it noticeably slimmer than everything else here.

That comfort was the strongest part of my Fitbit Air review. It works well for sleep and continuous wear, although the seven-day battery claim trails CIRQA, Helio Strap and WHOOP.

Amazfit Helio Strap is also fairly discreet at 20 grams. Its nylon strap uses a hook-and-loop fastening, and Zepp Health sells an official upper-arm accessory for workouts where wrist movement might interfere with optical heart-rate readings.

Garmin CIRQA is wider than Fitbit Air but remains reasonably light. Its 24mm ComfortFit strap uses quick-release pins, and a physical button gives it a small advantage over the other trackers.

Polar Loop is the heaviest option at 29 grams. That is not excessive for a normal watch, but it is noticeable in a category where the whole point is often to wear something less intrusive.

WHOOP has the best charging arrangement, provided you choose Peak or Life. Its Wireless PowerPack slides over the tracker while it remains on your body, reducing gaps in sleep and recovery data, while the entry WHOOP One plan uses a conventional wired charger.

Health, sleep and recovery tracking

All five trackers cover the foundations. Each records continuous heart rate, resting heart rate, HRV, respiratory rate, sleep duration and sleep stages, but some of the apparent similarities disappear once you look more closely.

Polar Loop does not provide a normal blood-oxygen metric, while its temperature sensor remains available through the software development kit rather than as a consumer-facing skin-temperature feature. WHOOP reserves ECG and irregular rhythm notifications for WHOOP MG, which requires the top Life membership.

Garmin CIRQA has the broadest health package without a required fee. It includes Pulse Ox, skin temperature, HRV Status, Body Battery, Training Readiness, stress tracking, nap detection, abnormal heart-rate alerts and a Smart Wake alarm.

Google has given Fitbit Air a strong selection of passive health features for a budget-friendly tracker. It records SpO2 and skin-temperature variation, supports Smart Wake and can provide irregular rhythm notifications in supported regions.

That combination makes Fitbit Air more of a health tracker than a serious training device. It is particularly useful for someone who wants sleep, heart rate and background health data without wearing a large smartwatch overnight.

Helio Strap sits closer to the fitness side. BioCharge estimates available energy throughout the day, while Readiness focuses more directly on recovery, and the Zepp app also provides sleep, stress, HRV and blood-oxygen trends.

Polar’s Nightly Recharge remains a useful and well-established recovery feature. Loop also feeds into Sleep Plus Stages and SleepWise, but it lacks a vibration motor, so there is no smart alarm or silent wake-up option.

WHOOP still does the best job of turning recovery information into a daily narrative. Its Recovery, Strain and Sleep system connects behaviour, training and rest more clearly than most competing apps, although useful features such as the real-time Stress Monitor and WHOOP Age require Peak or Life.

Training features and ecosystem differences

None of these products should be mistaken for a full sports watch. There is no onboard GPS, map, display or live pace field on your wrist, so runners and cyclists who depend on real-time feedback will still need a phone, watch or bike computer.

That said, the training gap between the devices is substantial. Garmin CIRQA offers more than 80 activity profiles, connected GPS, Training Status, recovery time, VO2 max and Fitness Age, while its physical button can start one chosen activity without opening the app.

CIRQA is the obvious choice for someone already using a Garmin watch or Edge computer. Health and activity data sync through Garmin Connect, and the band can broadcast heart rate to compatible Garmin equipment.

It can also fill a practical gap for people who do not want to wear a Fenix or Forerunner continuously. You can wear CIRQA for sleep and general health tracking, then switch to the watch for a run without splitting your long-term data between two platforms.

The main caveat is that CIRQA is new. Its feature list is excellent, but comfort, workout heart-rate accuracy and automatic activity detection still need extensive real-world testing before it can be declared the most accurate tracker in the group. Garmin’s official specifications confirm the 80-plus activity profiles, connected GPS, training tools and 10-day battery claim. 

Helio Strap is the strongest low-cost option for people who care about training. It offers more than 50 sports modes, BioCharge, Training Load, VO2 max, heart-rate broadcasting and an official upper-arm band, all without a subscription.

It also shares data with Amazfit watches inside the Zepp app. My earlier Helio Ring and Helio Strap comparison looked at how Zepp Health uses separate screenless devices to maintain sleep, recovery and exercise tracking when a watch is charging or not being worn.

Fitbit Air can record a decent workout, but its software remains the weak point. In my Fitbit Air and Garmin 5K test, heart rate and distance were surprisingly close, but the overall experience lacked the workout controls and post-run detail Garmin users will expect.

The hardware often seems more capable than the app. Automatic recognition can also record the wrong start or finish time, and Google Health does not always provide enough editing control to repair the session afterwards.

WHOOP is more polished for interpreting training than recording conventional workout statistics. It excels at showing how a session contributes to Strain and affects subsequent Recovery, but it is less useful for someone who wants maps, splits or detailed running dynamics.

That difference came through when I let Fitbit Air and WHOOP automatically record the same 8km run. Both detected activity, but neither produced a complete record without checking, which is a reminder that passive detection still needs supervision.

Polar Loop works best as a doorway into Polar Flow. Manual sessions use the tracker as a heart-rate sensor inside the app, with the phone providing GPS, while automatic detection can record casual sessions without the phone.

Training Load Pro and Nightly Recharge give it more depth than a simple activity band. However, its lack of vibration, SpO2 and a user-facing temperature metric makes the $199.99 price difficult to justify unless you already value Polar’s training system. That said, phone GPS can provide route, speed and distance during manually recorded outdoor workouts. 

Frequently asked questions

What is a screenless fitness tracker?

A screenless fitness tracker records health, sleep and activity data without putting a display on your wrist. Most settings and results appear in a companion app, which allows the tracker itself to stay lighter, simpler and less distracting than a smartwatch.

Are screenless fitness trackers accurate?

The better models can track resting heart rate, sleep duration and general activity trends reasonably well, although accuracy varies by device and activity. Workout heart rate, automatic exercise detection and GPS distance can be less consistent, especially because the trackers in this comparison rely on a connected phone rather than built-in GPS.

Is Garmin CIRQA better than WHOOP?

Garmin CIRQA is the better choice for Garmin users who want training, recovery and health data without a mandatory subscription. WHOOP has the more mature coaching platform and does a better job of connecting sleep, behaviour, Strain and Recovery, but its membership makes it considerably more expensive over time.

Does Fitbit Air require a subscription?

Fitbit Air does not require a subscription for its main health, sleep and activity features. Google Health Premium adds extra analysis and guidance, but the tracker remains usable without it.

Which screenless tracker has the longest battery life?

WHOOP 5.0 has the longest quoted battery life at more than 14 days. Garmin CIRQA and Amazfit Helio Strap follow with up to 10 days, while Polar Loop offers up to eight days and Fitbit Air up to seven days.

Do screenless fitness trackers have GPS?

None of the trackers in this comparison has built-in GPS. They can use a connected phone to record routes, distance and pace during outdoor workouts, although the available features and reliability vary between platforms.

The post Which screenless fitness tracker should you buy in 2026? appeared first on Gadgets & Wearables.

Samsung Galaxy Watch9 brings a larger battery, Qualcomm’s Snapdragon Wear Elite processor and a longer software-support period. It is the better watch for most new buyers, but the size you choose makes a surprisingly large difference to the value of the upgrade.

The 40mm Watch9 receives a substantial 20% battery-capacity increase over its Watch8 equivalent. The 44mm version gains just 10mAh, making it much harder to recommend to someone who already owns the previous model.

There is also the Galaxy Watch8 Classic to consider. It retains Samsung’s physical rotating bezel, offers twice the storage of the standard watches and has the same 445mAh battery as the larger Watch9, although it is considerably heavier and still uses Samsung’s older Exynos processor.

Galaxy Watch 9 vs 8 vs 8 Classic specifications

Samsung has changed the processor and battery, but much of the surrounding hardware is familiar. The displays, dimensions, durability ratings, storage capacity and health sensor categories are effectively unchanged between Watch9 and the standard Watch8.

On mobile, swipe across the table to see both watches.

Feature	Galaxy Watch9	Galaxy Watch8	Galaxy Watch8 Classic
Product
Case sizes	40mm and 44mm	40mm and 44mm	46mm
Dimensions	42.7 x 40.4 x 8.6mm 46.0 x 43.7 x 8.6mm	42.7 x 40.4 x 8.6mm 46.0 x 43.7 x 8.6mm	46.4 x 46.0 x 10.6mm
Weight without strap	31.5g or 34g	30g or 33.8g	63.5g
Case and controls	Armor Aluminum, two buttons	Armor Aluminum, two buttons	Stainless steel, rotating bezel and three buttons
Display	1.34 inches, 438 x 438 1.47 inches, 480 x 480	1.34 inches, 438 x 438 1.47 inches, 480 x 480	1.34 inches, 438 x 438
Peak brightness	3,000 nits	3,000 nits	3,000 nits
Processor	Snapdragon Wear Elite, 3nm	Exynos W1000, 3nm	Exynos W1000, 3nm
RAM and storage	2GB and 32GB	2GB and 32GB	2GB and 64GB
Battery	390mAh or 445mAh	325mAh or 435mAh	445mAh
Official battery estimate	Up to 30 hours with always-on display	Up to 30 hours with always-on display	Up to 30 hours with always-on display
GPS	Dual-frequency L1 and L5	Dual-frequency L1 and L5	Dual-frequency L1 and L5
Durability	5ATM, IP68 and MIL-STD-810H	5ATM, IP68 and MIL-STD-810H	5ATM, IP68 and MIL-STD-810H
Launch software	Wear OS 7 with One UI Watch 9	Wear OS 6 with One UI Watch 8	Wear OS 6 with One UI Watch 8
Expected support	Five major Wear OS upgrades, security support into 2031	Expected support into 2029	Expected support into 2029
Band compatibility	Compatible with Watch8 Dynamic Lug bands	Compatible with Watch9 bands	Compatible with Watch8 and Watch9 Dynamic Lug bands
US launch price, Bluetooth	$379.99 or $409.99	$349.99 or $379.99	$499.99
US launch price, LTE	$429.99 or $459.99	$399.99 or $429.99	$549.99

The battery upgrade depends on the size

Battery capacity is the most important difference, but the headline requires some qualification. Samsung has not improved the two Watch9 sizes by anything close to the same amount.

The 40mm Watch9 moves from 325mAh to 390mAh. That is an exact 20% increase and should provide more breathing room for sleep tracking, workouts and notifications on the smaller watch.

The 44mm version rises from 435mAh to 445mAh. That works out to an increase of only 2.3%, which is unlikely to transform how frequently it needs charging.

Most comparisons describe Watch9 as simply having a larger battery. Someone buying the 40mm model, however, benefits more. A 44mm buyer is getting almost the same battery as before.

Samsung still gives the watches a headline estimate of up to 30 hours with the always-on display enabled and 40 hours with it switched off. The larger battery therefore should not be interpreted as a guaranteed 20% improvement in actual runtime.

Early evidence is mixed. A ComputerBild test of the 40mm Watch9 produced a little over 24 hours, despite the larger battery, which was shorter than the publication recorded from its predecessor.

One result cannot describe every combination of settings, workouts and network use. It does show why capacity and endurance should not be treated as interchangeable figures, especially when the new Snapdragon platform may distribute power differently from Samsung’s Exynos chip.

Charging speed has not changed significantly either. Short top-ups remain useful, but Watch9 does not introduce the kind of charging improvement that would alter the daily routine on its own.

Snapdragon Wear Elite is the bigger long-term change

Watch9 replaces Samsung’s Exynos W1000 with Qualcomm’s Snapdragon Wear Elite platform. Both processors are manufactured using a 3nm process, but the Qualcomm chip introduces a different architecture and low-power system.

The Exynos W1000 already makes Watch8 feel responsive during ordinary use. Notifications, Samsung Health, maps and most apps do not suddenly become difficult simply because a newer processor exists.

Watch9 should still have advantages in app loading, voice processing and maintaining performance as Wear OS becomes more demanding. The new platform may also provide Samsung with more room for future on-device health analysis and Gemini features.

Battery efficiency is less certain. The Snapdragon name alone does not guarantee longer endurance, particularly when Samsung’s official runtime estimate has remained unchanged and the first independent results have not shown a clear breakthrough.

The stronger argument for the new chip is longevity. Samsung is promising five major Wear OS upgrades for Watch9, with security support expected to continue into 2031, giving it a longer runway than the Watch8 generation.

For someone who replaces a watch every two or three years, that difference may have little practical value. Anyone planning to keep it for four or five years has a better reason to pay extra for Watch9.

Watch8 Classic remains a very different proposition

Galaxy Watch8 Classic is not simply a larger Watch8. Its stainless-steel case, physical rotating bezel, additional Quick Button and 64GB of storage give it a distinct identity.

The rotating bezel remains one of Samsung’s best watch controls. It makes scrolling through menus and notifications easy without covering the screen with a finger, and it gives the Classic a more conventional watch-like feel.

There are substantial compromises. The Classic weighs 63.5g before the strap is attached, compared with 34g for the 44mm Watch9, and its 10.6mm case is noticeably thicker than the 8.6mm standard models.

It also uses a 1.34-inch display, the same screen size as the 40mm watches, despite having a 46mm case. The physical bezel occupies space that Samsung uses for additional display area on the 44mm Watch9 and Watch8.

Battery capacity is more competitive. Watch8 Classic has a 445mAh cell, matching the larger Watch9 and slightly exceeding the 44mm Watch8.

Storage doubles from 32GB to 64GB, which is helpful for offline music, apps and downloaded media. It retains the Exynos W1000, however, so buyers do not receive Watch9’s new processor or extended support period.

At its $499.99 starting price, the Classic is difficult to recommend purely on specifications. It makes the most sense when the rotating bezel and stainless-steel construction are features someone actively wants, rather than extras that merely sound useful.

The design has barely changed

Samsung has retained the cushion-shaped case introduced with Watch8. The circular display sits inside a softly squared outer frame, producing a design that falls somewhere between a conventional Galaxy Watch and the larger Ultra.

Watch9 uses the same 40mm and 44mm sizes and the same 8.6mm thickness. The case is slightly heavier, rising from 30g to 31.5g at 40mm and from 33.8g to 34g at 44mm.

Those increases are too small to affect comfort. Both standard watches remain much easier to wear overnight than Watch8 Classic or either Galaxy Watch Ultra generation.

The design continues to divide opinion. Some will find the cushion shape more distinctive than Samsung’s older fully circular cases, while others will see little reason to replace a Watch8 with something that looks almost identical.

Watch9 does introduce Cream as a 40mm color, while the larger version is available in Graphite and Silver. Color availability is a minor buying consideration rather than an upgrade reason.

The displays are effectively identical

Watch9 retains the same display sizes, resolutions and claimed 3,000-nit peak brightness as Watch8. The 40mm models use a 1.34-inch, 438 x 438 panel, while the 44mm versions use a 1.47-inch, 480 x 480 panel.

Both generations use Super AMOLED panels protected by sapphire crystal. Visibility, sharpness and always-on watch faces should therefore look very similar.

The Classic also reaches 3,000 nits, but its physical bezel limits it to the smaller 1.34-inch display. Buyers are trading screen area for tactile control rather than gaining both.

The unchanged displays reinforce the broader upgrade picture. Watch9 improves the platform underneath the screen, but it does not provide a visibly larger, brighter or sharper interface.

Health tracking is mostly about interpretation

Samsung lists the same core sensor categories across all three watches. These include optical heart-rate monitoring, ECG, bioelectrical impedance analysis, blood oxygen, temperature, accelerometer, gyroscope, barometer, compass and ambient light sensing.

Watch9 launches with additional tools including Vitals, Heart Health Score and Fitness Index. These features organize and interpret signals the watch is already collecting rather than measuring an entirely new type of health data.

Vitals builds a baseline using overnight measurements and looks for changes from someone’s usual patterns. Heart Health Score and Fitness Index apply further analysis to existing cardiovascular and activity information.

That may make the presentation more useful, but it is not a completely new health-sensing platform. Some of these software features are also expected to reach older watches through Samsung Health updates, although availability and timing may differ by device and region.

Watch8 already provides Running Coach, Energy Score, sleep coaching, Bedtime Guidance, Antioxidant Index and Vascular Load in supported markets. The everyday health experience is therefore much closer than Samsung’s Watch9 feature list initially suggests.

The usual restrictions remain. Some health functions require a compatible Samsung Galaxy phone, and ECG, blood-pressure and sleep-apnea features depend on local regulatory approval.

GPS and fitness hardware have not moved far

All three models support dual-frequency L1 and L5 GPS. This was already one of Watch8’s more valuable improvements, particularly when tracking through built-up areas or beneath heavy tree cover.

Watch9 does not introduce a clearly different GPS system in Samsung’s specifications. Any change in route accuracy or power consumption would therefore be more likely to come from software, antenna tuning or the Snapdragon platform than a new headline capability.

The same applies to workout tracking. Samsung Health remains well suited to general fitness, running plans, sleep tracking and daily activity, but Watch9 does not suddenly turn the standard Galaxy Watch into a specialist endurance device.

The more revealing buying debate continues to be Samsung against Garmin rather than Watch9 against Watch8. Samsung is stronger for apps, calls, messaging and everyday phone integration, while specialist sports watches generally provide longer endurance and deeper training analysis.

Watch8 bands still fit Watch9

Samsung has retained the Dynamic Lug System used by the Watch8 generation. Compatible Watch8 and Watch8 Classic bands can therefore be used with Watch9, and Samsung is selling newer bands as compatible across the three models.

That removes a potential hidden upgrade cost for existing owners. Someone who has already bought several Watch8 bands does not need to replace the collection when moving to Watch9.

Galaxy Watch Ultra bands use a different connection and are not interchangeable. The compatibility applies to the standard Watch8, Watch8 Classic and Watch9 Dynamic Lug families.

Price may matter more than the specifications

Galaxy Watch9 starts at $379.99 for the 40mm Bluetooth model and $409.99 at 44mm. Adding LTE increases either price by $50.

Watch8 launched at $349.99 and $379.99, making Watch9 officially $30 more expensive at each size. That is a reasonable premium for the Snapdragon processor, larger 40mm battery and longer support period.

Retail discounts create a different comparison. Samsung has already listed Watch8 from around $299.99, and third-party prices may fall further as retailers clear older stock.

At 40mm, paying around $50 to $80 more for Watch9 is defensible because the battery increase is substantial. Once the difference passes roughly $100, Watch8 becomes the stronger value unless long-term software support is especially important.

At 44mm, the older watch becomes attractive sooner. Watch9 adds just 10mAh, so the processor and support period must do most of the work when justifying the extra cost.

Watch8 Classic starts at $499.99, or $549.99 with LTE. At that price, it should be chosen for its bezel, steel construction and 64GB storage rather than on the assumption that “Classic” means universally better.

Trade-in offers can, of course, overturn any of these calculations. So they are worth checking out.

The post Samsung Galaxy Watch9 vs Watch8: How they stack up appeared first on Gadgets & Wearables.

Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 improves the original with a 35% larger battery, much faster charging, a slimmer body, a brighter display and Qualcomm’s new Snapdragon Wear Elite chip. It is clearly the better watch for a new buyer, but the case for upgrading from an existing Galaxy Watch Ultra is far less convincing.

Worth clarifying, there are actually two original Ultra models

Samsung launched the first Galaxy Watch Ultra in 2024, then refreshed it in 2025. The second release added Titanium Blue and increased storage from 32GB to 64GB, but the processor, battery, display and sensor selection remained virtually unchanged.

This distinction is important when comparing storage. Ultra 2 doubles the capacity of the 2024 model, but it offers no storage advantage over the 2025 Ultra, which already comes with 64GB.

For most of this comparison, the 2024 and 2025 versions can be treated as the same watch. Where storage and colour options differ, the model year needs to be taken into account.

With that in mind, let’s continue.

Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 vs Ultra specifications

The headline specifications point to a substantial hardware update, but not every difference will be equally noticeable in daily use. The larger battery, faster charging and slimmer case should have the clearest impact, while the new processor and brighter display are more likely to feel like useful refinements.

On mobile, swipe across the table to see both watches.

Feature	Galaxy Watch Ultra 2	Galaxy Watch Ultra
Product image
Case size	47.4 × 47.1 × 10.7mm	47.1 × 47.4 × 12.1mm
Weight without strap	61.5g	60.5g
Display	1.52-inch AMOLED, 498 × 498	1.47-inch AMOLED, 480 × 480
Peak brightness	5,000 nits	3,000 nits
Processor	Snapdragon Wear Elite	Exynos W1000
RAM	2GB	2GB
Storage	64GB	32GB in 2024, 64GB in 2025
Battery	800mAh	590mAh
Fast charging	Up to 40% in around 30 minutes	Not supported
GPS	Dual-frequency L1 and L5	Dual-frequency L1 and L5
Water protection	10ATM and IP69K	10ATM and IP68
Diving certification	EN13319	None
US launch price	$699	$649 for the 2025 model

It looks the same but should wear better

From the front, Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 could easily be mistaken for the original. Samsung has retained the 47mm cushion-shaped titanium case, circular display, three physical buttons and distinctive orange Quick Button.

The significant change appears when the watches are viewed from the side. Ultra 2 measures 10.7mm thick, down from 12.1mm, which works out to a reduction of around 12%.

That does not turn it into a small watch. The width and height have barely changed, so it will still dominate a smaller wrist and may feel excessive for sleep tracking.

It should, however, sit closer to the skin and catch sleeves less often. The redesigned Marine Band is also softer and thinner, with an Air Pocket structure intended to help moisture escape.

One detail that has already been reported incorrectly is the weight. Ultra 2 weighs 61.5g without its strap, one gram more than the original, so the watch itself is not lighter.

Samsung’s lighter band may reduce the total weight on the wrist, but that is not the same as making the case lighter. Existing Ultra bands remain compatible, so owners do not need to replace their current collection.

Battery is the biggest reason to choose Ultra 2

Samsung has increased capacity from 590mAh to 800mAh, a jump of around 35.6%. That is easily the largest practical upgrade and the main reason some existing owners are considering replacing their watches.

The official runtime figures create a slightly odd situation. Samsung advertises up to 60 hours with the always-on display enabled and up to 80 hours with it switched off, even though the battery is substantially larger.

As we noted in our earlier look at Samsung’s Ultra 2 battery claims, the extra capacity does not automatically translate into a similar increase in advertised endurance. The brighter display, new processor, LTE modem, health processing and outdoor features may use some of that additional energy.

There should still be more breathing room during normal use. The larger cell should be particularly helpful during GPS workouts, LTE sessions and overnight tracking, where the original Ultra’s battery can feel more restrictive.

The difference may also feel larger for someone upgrading from a 2024 Ultra. A battery that has already gone through two years of regular charging will no longer perform like a new 590mAh cell, so the real comparison may be 800mAh against an ageing battery rather than the original factory specification.

Fast charging could have an equally noticeable effect. Ultra 2 can reach up to 40% in around 30 minutes, while Ultra has slower charging, with no equivalent 30-minute claim.

That makes it easier to top up the watch while showering, having breakfast or getting ready for bed. It also reduces the usual conflict between charging and collecting overnight sleep data.

Snapdragon Wear Elite is the unknown quantity

Ultra 2 moves from Samsung’s Exynos W1000 to Qualcomm’s Snapdragon Wear Elite. Both use a 3nm manufacturing process, but Qualcomm’s platform introduces a different CPU layout, on-device AI hardware and a redesigned low-power system.

Samsung says apps launch faster and interactions feel smoother. That sounds good, although the Exynos W1000 is already quick enough for normal watch use and early demonstrations do not show an enormous difference.

Efficiency could be more important than raw speed. LTE, GPS, background health tracking and the always-on display place a steady load on a smartwatch, so even modest power savings could improve endurance.

The new chip may also give Samsung more headroom for future health analysis and AI features. We previously looked at Samsung’s switch to Snapdragon Wear Elite, but the final judgement will depend on battery tests, heat, GPS performance and long-term software support.

The display is larger and much brighter

Samsung has reduced the bezel slightly, increasing the screen from 1.47 to 1.52 inches without making the case wider. Resolution moves from 480 x 480 to 498 x 498 pixels, so the difference in sharpness will probably be difficult to spot.

Brightness rises from 3,000 to 5,000 nits. That should improve visibility under strong sunlight and may be useful when glancing at workout data outdoors.

There is some small print behind the 5,000-nit figure, though. Samsung describes it as localised peak brightness under high ambient light, so the entire display will not necessarily sit at that level.

The original Ultra already has a bright screen, which means this is more refinement than rescue operation. It should be most noticeable on exposed trails, bright summer runs and underwater.

Health tracking is not a complete sensor overhaul

Samsung has packed broadly the same sensor categories on both watches, including its BioActive package, skin temperature, accelerometer, barometer, gyroscope, compass and ambient light sensor. Ultra 2 still supports ECG, body composition, blood oxygen, heart rate and the usual Samsung Health tools.

The company describes the BioActive sensor as upgraded on the Ultra 2 product page, but it does not provide much detail on what has changed internally. The closer fit due to the thinner case may contribute to better readings.

Many of Samsung’s newer health tools are software-led rather than dependent on new hardware. Vitals, Heart Health Score, Fitness Index and other features use signals that Galaxy Watches were already collecting.

Several of these tools were announced before Ultra 2 and are part of Samsung’s wider health platform. Our earlier coverage of the new Galaxy Watch health features explains how Vitals builds a personal baseline from overnight heart rate, HRV, breathing, temperature and blood oxygen.

Diving is the clearest new capability

Both watches carry a 10ATM rating, but Ultra 2 steps up from IP68 to IP69K and gains EN13319 certification. The IP69K rating adds protection against high-pressure and high-temperature water jets, while EN13319 covers depth and time instruments used for diving.

Ultra 2 can automatically show depth, dive duration and water temperature after entering the water. Samsung rates it for diving down to 40 metres, while more advanced software developed with Mares is scheduled to arrive later in 2026.

This is a real functional difference rather than a specification created for marketing. Anyone who plans to use a Galaxy Watch for recreational diving should choose Ultra 2.

For everyone else, IP69K is reassuring but unlikely to change daily use. The original Ultra is already rated to 10ATM, so Ultra 2 does not increase the headline pressure rating beyond 100 metres.

Trail running gets more attention

Ultra 2 introduces a dedicated Trail Run mode with elevation, climbing progress and terrain-related information. It also adds hydration guidance that estimates sweat loss relative to body weight and suggests when to drink.

This does not mean the watch directly measures hydration or sweat composition. It uses workout and personal data to estimate fluid loss, which can still be useful but should not be confused with a new hydration sensor.

Samsung also retains GPX navigation, dual-frequency GPS and climbing guidance. Those features make Ultra 2 a more credible outdoor watch, especially when combined with the larger battery.

It still approaches the category as a smartwatch first. Garmin and Coros offer deeper navigation, recovery and training systems, while Samsung remains stronger for apps, calls, messaging and integration with a Galaxy phone.

That same division appears repeatedly in owner discussions. People interested mainly in training continue to look towards Garmin, while those who want a watch that can replace more phone functions tend to favour Samsung.

Price could decide the comparison

Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 starts at $699 in the US, while the 2025 Ultra launched at $649. A $50 increase looks reasonable considering the upgrades.

The calculation changes once retailers discount the older model. If the price gap reaches several hundred dollars, the original Ultra begins to look much more attractive.

Existing owners are looking at the decision in much the same way. Many appear willing to upgrade only when trade-in offers bring the cost down substantially, while others see no point paying again for a watch that looks and behaves much like the one already on their wrist.

That is probably the right way to approach it. Ultra 2 is better hardware, but the value of those improvements depends heavily on what someone already owns and what the upgrade actually costs.

The post Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 vs Ultra: All the differences explained appeared first on Gadgets & Wearables.

The FCC confirms it is a chest strap

When we first reported on the Suunto SHRM2, the device had appeared in Singapore’s IMDA database. That listing described it as a Bluetooth heart rate monitor, but did not say whether Suunto was working on a conventional chest strap or something worn elsewhere on the body.

The FCC documents now settle that question. Suunto describes SHRM2 as a heart rate belt in the testing material, while the regulatory information is printed on a circular battery cover similar to the one used by its current chest sensor.

The label confirms a replaceable CR2032 battery. Suunto’s existing Smart Heart Rate Belt uses a smaller CR2025 cell and has an official battery life estimate of around 500 hours.

A CR2032 has more capacity, so longer battery life looks likely. The filing does not provide an official runtime, though, and battery efficiency will also depend on the new electronics and how often the sensor stores or transmits data.

Water resistance is rated at 30 metres, or 100 feet. That matches Suunto’s current belt and makes swimming support likely.

Bluetooth details and an earlier processor clue

SHRM2 uses Bluetooth Low Energy across the standard 2402 to 2480 MHz frequency range. Testing covers both 1 Mbps and 2 Mbps modes, suggesting Suunto has moved to a more recent Bluetooth platform.

The documents do not mention ANT+. That may mean the new belt will remain Bluetooth-only, but the public filing is not detailed enough to rule out additional wireless modes before the full manual appears.

There is also no confirmation of simultaneous Bluetooth connections. Support for two or more connections would allow the belt to send heart rate to a Suunto watch and another device, such as gym equipment or a training app, at the same time.

An earlier clue from Nordic Semiconductor’s developer forum pointed to the nRF54L15 processor. References to SHRM2 appeared in software build paths linked to the chip, although the filing has not confirmed that it sits inside the device.

What remains unknown

The external photos, internal photos and user manual remain confidential until January 19, 2027. That date does not necessarily point to the launch, as Suunto can release the documents earlier when it announces the product.

Suunto has already shown how quickly one of these regulatory discoveries can turn into a finished product. The Suunto Core 2 appeared in FCC documents before launching this week, so SHRM2 may also be further along than the confidential filing dates suggest.

We will update this article when further details emerge. In the meantime, our upcoming wearables release guide provides the latest expected timing and confidence rating.

The post Suunto’s next heart rate belt clears the FCC appeared first on Gadgets & Wearables.

More than a single oxygen reading

The APK includes fields for average, minimum and maximum saturated haemoglobin percentage. It also contains average, minimum and maximum total haemoglobin concentration.

The potential upcoming device would need to track both because they measure different things. Saturated haemoglobin measures the amount of oxygen-carrying haemoglobin in the muscle, while total haemoglobin measures the total amount of haemoglobin present, whether it is carrying oxygen or not. Together, they give a more complete picture of what is happening inside the muscle during exercise.

MUSCLE_OXYGEN
Muscle Oxygen
sensor_name_type_muscle_oxygen

avg_saturated_hemoglobin_percent
min_saturated_hemoglobin_percent
max_saturated_hemoglobin_percent

avg_total_hemoglobin_conc
min_total_hemoglobin_conc
max_total_hemoglobin_conc

That is more detailed than simply recording one muscle oxygen number at the end of a workout. Garmin Connect can follow how muscle oxygen changes throughout an activity, then identify typical levels, the lowest point reached and the highest recovery point.

Average saturated haemoglobin percentage provides a broad view of muscle oxygen availability across the session. The minimum value shows when the working muscle became most depleted, while the maximum reflects recovery during easier sections, rest intervals or the period immediately after an effort.

Total haemoglobin concentration adds another layer. This measurement reflects changes in blood volume within the monitored tissue, which can help distinguish between a drop in oxygen saturation and a wider change in local blood flow.

The device would need specialised optics

Current Garmin devices cannot produce these readings. Muscle oxygen monitoring normally relies on near-infrared spectroscopy, using several light wavelengths to estimate oxygenated and deoxygenated haemoglobin inside a specific muscle.

That also explains why the likely device would need to sit directly over the muscle being measured. A cyclist may place it on the thigh, while a runner could use the calf or quadriceps. An upper-arm position might work for strength training or general conditioning.

The fields in Garmin Connect suggest the sensor would need to record continuously and send more than a basic SmO2 percentage. It would also need enough optical information to calculate total haemoglobin concentration and track changes over time.

In essence, we are expecting a dedicated optical pod. Garmin watches could act as the display and recording device, while the sensor itself handles the specialised measurements.

That matches our reporting in April on the Garmin Muscle Battery patent filing. This described software for analysing muscle oxygen saturation and related performance data.

Muscle oxygen sensors are not new

Muscle oxygen sensors have been around for years, although they remain few and far between. They have never really caught on outside serious endurance athletes. We reviewed the Humon Hex back in 2019, while Moxy remains one of the better-known options.

The difference is that these have always been third-party products sitting on the edge of the Garmin ecosystem. They can send muscle oxygen data to compatible watches, but Garmin has zero control over the hardware and the algorithms.

Whether these fields currently support third-party sensors or future Garmin hardware, they show that Garmin Connect already understands the muscle oxygen data Muscle Battery could use. A Garmin-made sensor could integrate those measurements more closely with Body Battery, Training Readiness and the wider Garmin ecosystem.

Separately, the same Garmin Connect 5.27 teardown also revealed more clues on the likely Enduro 4 and possible Fenix 9 family.

APK teardown note

This article is based on an APK teardown. Code found inside an app can reveal features or devices that are under development, but there is no guarantee they will appear in a future public release.

The post APK teardown reveals what Garmin’s muscle sensor could measure appeared first on Gadgets & Wearables.

The update starts rolling out globally today and is free for existing users. It applies across Ultrahuman’s wider ecosystem, including the Ring AIR and Ring PRO, the M1 and M2 Live glucose monitoring services, Blood Vision and the Ultrahuman Home.

The app now focuses on what to do next

UltraSphere sits at the centre of the redesigned home screen. It turns health data into more than 60 suggested actions based on sleep, recovery, HRV, movement, stress, skin temperature, cycle phase and glucose readings.

These can include getting outside for morning light, taking a short walk during an afternoon energy dip, cutting off caffeine or beginning an evening wind-down routine. The recommendations can also adjust for location, weather, circadian timing and different routines, including shift work, parenthood and frequent travel.

The company’s Jade AI health assistant now gets its own tab. It connects information from across Ultrahuman’s devices and services rather than treating ring, glucose and blood test data as separate streams.

The redesign also moves longer-term measurements such as UltraAge, Pulse Age, Blood Age and Brain Age into a dedicated Longevity tab. Meanwhile, the new Windows view places time-sensitive information, including caffeine timing and circadian phases, onto a single daily timeline.

More insights now work offline

Emerald moves more analysis onto the phone, allowing sleep, recovery and movement scores to calculate without an internet connection. Live heart rate, stress, steps and UltraSphere recommendations can also remain available while offline.

This should be useful during flights, travel and time spent in areas with poor reception. It also means more of the app remains functional without a continuous connection to Ultrahuman’s servers.

Sleep Screener brings sleep duration, temperature, respiratory information, rhythm data and the Ultrahuman Smart Alarm into one nightly view. AFib Detection, where supported, also sits here after previously launching through Ultrahuman’s PowerPlugs platform.

Workout tracking gets an upgrade

Ultrahuman says it has also rebuilt workout tracking for Ring AIR and Ring PRO, with improved automatic detection, activity tagging and heart rate algorithms. This is an area worth watching, as workout heart rate was one of the weaker points in my Ultrahuman Ring AIR review.

The VO₂ Max algorithm has also been revised. Ultrahuman says it tested the estimate against CPET laboratory results from more than 100 athletes, with readings falling within 5 mL/kg/min of the lab measurement.

Emerald’s main change is a cleaner way of presenting Ultrahuman’s existing data and services. The redesigned interface and offline processing should make the app easier to use, while the new heart rate and VO₂ Max claims will need testing once the update reaches more users.

The post Ultrahuman app overhaul brings clearer insights and offline access appeared first on Gadgets & Wearables.

As revealed by 9to5Google, the listing names the device as Pixel Watch 5 and gives it the codename “godric.” It also shows 2.8GB to 2.9GB of available memory, which means Google is almost certainly fitting the watch with 3GB of RAM.

That would be the first memory increase in the history of the Pixel Watch range. Every model since the original Pixel Watch has shipped with 2GB.

The processor looks unchanged

The Play Console identifies the system-on-chip as Qualcomm SW5100. It lists four Cortex-A53 CPU cores running at 1.7GHz, paired with an Adreno 702 GPU at 1GHz.

Those figures match the Pixel Watch 4 listing. They also trace back to the Snapdragon W5 platform Google first adopted with the Pixel Watch 2.

There is a little more nuance here than the listing initially suggests. The SW5100 name covers the main application processor used across different Snapdragon W5 generations, so it does not tell us the complete platform configuration.

Google moved to the Snapdragon W5 Gen 2 with the Pixel Watch 4. That upgrade retained the same basic CPU and GPU arrangement but added support for Satellite SOS, improved location technology and a newer Cortex-M55 co-processor.

The Play Console does not identify the Pixel Watch 5 co-processor. Google could, potentially, upgrade that part of the platform while leaving the main processor untouched. However, there is no evidence of such a change yet.

As things stand, the safest conclusion is that Pixel Watch 5 will offer little or no conventional CPU and GPU improvement over Pixel Watch 4. Which is a bit of a disappointment.

More memory could be the real upgrade

The jump from 2GB to 3GB of RAM is positive, though. An extra gigabyte gives Wear OS more room for apps, background services and increasingly demanding AI features.

Google has been pushing Gemini deeper into its smartwatch software, and the previously leaked Pixel Watch 5 renders show a new analogue face with a prominent Gemini shortcut. The same design appears in the Play Console image (as shown above), adding another indication that the listing relates to finished hardware rather than an early prototype.

More RAM does not automatically make a processor faster. It can, however, reduce the need to reload apps and allow more services to remain available in the background. That may prove more noticeable in daily use than a modest increase in clock speed.

It could also help Google introduce new Gemini features without making them exclusive to cloud processing. That remains speculation for now, as the listing says nothing about specific AI capabilities.

Samsung has the faster platform on paper

The timing makes Google’s apparent processor decision stand out. Samsung has just launched the Galaxy Watch 9 with Qualcomm’s newer Snapdragon Wear Elite platform.

The 3nm chip uses one Cortex-A78 performance core and four Cortex-A55 efficiency cores. It also includes dedicated AI hardware, while the watch itself has 2GB of RAM.

That gives Samsung a sizeable architectural advantage on paper. Our earlier look at the Snapdragon Wear Elite explains why it represents a much bigger processor step than the changes Qualcomm made between the two W5 generations.

Real-world performance will still depend on software, power limits and how often a smartwatch needs its fastest cores. A Pixel Watch does not have to win a benchmark contest to feel responsive, but Google may have a harder time explaining a price increase if the core processor barely changes.

The Pixel Watch 5 is expected to launch on August 12 in 41mm and 45mm sizes. Previous leaks suggest the familiar domed design will return, so the combination of 3GB of RAM, software changes and any unannounced co-processor upgrade may have to carry much of this year’s hardware story.

The post Pixel Watch 5 may reuse last year’s processor but gains 3GB of RAM appeared first on Gadgets & Wearables.

Enduro 4 now has a codename

We compared the main APK from Garmin Connect 5.27 with the base APK contained inside the older version. The most useful entry is product 5179, which Garmin categorises under fitness, outdoor, golf and wellness. Version 5.27 associates that product number with the internal codename GOBI.

That number is not new by itself. Our previous Garmin Connect 5.26 teardown found an Enduro 4 reference tied to the same internal ID, 5179. The difference is that the direct Enduro 4 name does not appear in the new version. Instead, Garmin now lists 5179 as GOBI, giving us a likely development codename for the watch.

The connection is fairly clean. Garmin used 4575 as the internal product ID for Enduro 3, and the company appears to be preparing Garmin Connect to recognise its successor under 5179.

The number cannot be converted into Garmin’s eventual retail part number or website product ID. Those sit in separate databases, so 5179 is mainly useful as a search key for future firmware files, support pages, image servers and Connect IQ records.

Eight more devices appear

The same registry update introduces eight other product entries. These are BRISTLECONE under product 5169, MARGAY_CARACAL under 5161, BENGAL_SIBERIAN under 5162, PANTHER under 5164, TORR_SNARF under 5143, LEAH_CHEETARA under 5144, WILYCUB_PANTHRO under 5145 and Rogers under 5193.

All except Rogers carry the same fitness, outdoor, golf and wellness categories as GOBI. That combination is normally associated with Garmin watches that support a broad mix of sports, outdoor navigation and health features, rather than simple activity trackers.

The naming pattern is difficult to ignore. Six of the entries use feline references and appear to form two groups of three. Products 5143, 5144 and 5145 use names linked to ThunderCats characters, while products 5161, 5162 and 5164 use real cat breeds or species.

One possible explanation is that these six entries belong to the future Fenix 9 family. Garmin commonly releases its Fenix watches in three case sizes, while also separating AMOLED and MicroLED models into different internal product records. Two groups of three could therefore represent three sizes across two display or charging configurations.

That remains speculation, as the APK does not mention Fenix 9 by name. The matching categories, coordinated codenames and closely grouped product numbers do suggest the six devices belong to one wider hardware programme rather than six unrelated watches.

BRISTLECONE appears separate from the feline group, although its outdoor-focused categories suggest another capable Garmin watch. Rogers is the odd one out, as Garmin assigns it only fitness and wellness categories, which could point to a simpler wearable or accessory.

Software changes are also included

Garmin Connect 5.27 is not only about new hardware records. The update also adds the new Garmin Connect Essentials section, which lets users place selected health and training stats at the top of the Home screen.

Garmin has also reworked parts of the device setup process, with new flows for primary wearable selection, sleep schedules, Wi-Fi, backups and firmware updates. There are further changes around Garmin Coach, including expanded triathlon support, along with smaller updates to Pulse Ox reports, workout syncing and activity screens.

APK teardown note

This article is based on an APK teardown. Code found inside an app can reveal features or devices that are under development, but there is no guarantee they will appear in a future public release.

The post Garmin Connect 5.27 points to Enduro 4 and a possible Fenix 9 family appeared first on Gadgets & Wearables.

The details come from WinFuture, which also published images showing the tracker in grey, Pomelo Pink, black and white. There is no confirmed launch date, but the report says sales should begin soon, most likely within the next few weeks.

The leak adds another model to the picture created by our recent Smart Band 11 certification findings. Those filings pointed to standard and NFC versions, but there was no mention of an Active edition at the time.

The hardware barely moves

The Smart Band 11 Active reportedly uses a 1.47-inch LCD touchscreen with a resolution of 320 x 172 pixels. It weighs 16.5 grams without the strap and measures 10.2mm thick, keeping it in lightweight fitness band territory.

Inside sits a 300mAh battery. This should be good for up to 14 days of normal use, dropping to nine days with the always-on display enabled, while a full charge should take around two hours.

Health tracking covers the familiar basics, including heart rate, blood oxygen, sleep and stress. The tracker is also expected to offer more than 50 sports modes and 5ATM water resistance, so swimming should be covered.

The strange part is how closely all of this matches the Smart Band 9 Active. That model also has a 1.47-inch 320 x 172 TFT display, weighs 16.5 grams, carries a 300mAh battery and offers 50 fitness modes with 5ATM protection.

The older tracker is actually rated for up to 18 days of typical use, four days more than the figure in this leak. Xiaomi may have changed its testing conditions, or the always-on screen may require a different display setup, but the headline battery number does not look like progress.

This looks like the entry-level model

There is no sign of built-in GPS or NFC in the leaked specification sheet. Outdoor routes will therefore probably depend on a connected phone, while contactless payments look unlikely.

That places the Active well below the regular Smart Band 11 described in an earlier specification leak. That device may come with a larger 1.78-inch AMOLED display, HRV, temperature sensing, EDA-based stress tracking and more than 200 sports modes, although none of those details have been confirmed by Xiaomi.

The distinction also leaves the new Active in a slightly awkward position. Our Smart Band 10 review found that Xiaomi’s current regular model already offers a bright 1.72-inch AMOLED screen, more than 150 sports modes and strong exercise heart-rate performance, while keeping the usual long battery life. And that one is pretty budget friendly, as well.

Xiaomi has not announced the Smart Band 11 Active or confirmed its price. For now, it looks like a cheap and lightweight tracker for steps, sleep, basic workouts and notifications, but the leaked headline specs give Smart Band 9 Active owners very little reason to upgrade.

This is one of several unannounced devices currently appearing in filings, app code and leaks. You can follow them through our regularly updated upcoming wearables guide.

The post Xiaomi Smart Band 11 Active leaks with €40 price and 14-day battery appeared first on Gadgets & Wearables.