I wore a $99 running watch next to my Garmin during marathon training — here's what I missed
The Amazfit Active 2 recorded every run during my four-week marathon, stayed close to my Garmin on total distance, and lasted longer between charges. For $99, that is an impressive result.
But wearing it alongside a Garmin Forerunner 965 made the price gap make more sense. I missed Garmin's cleaner workout execution, steadier instant pace, deeper training history, and the reassurance of having every race-planning feature in one place.
The cheaper watch gave me the run data. The Garmin actually understood my training sessions.
I gave both watches the same 18-run marathon test
I wore the Amazfit Active 2 on my left wrist and the Garmin on my right for four weeks. The block included 18 outdoor runs and 142.6 miles on the Garmin:
- Eight easy runs;
- Four interval or threshold sessions;
- Two marathon-pace workouts;
- Four long runs between 12 and 20 miles.
I paired a chest-strap heart-rate monitor to the Garmin as a reference point and left the Active 2 on its optical sensor. Both watches used their normal high-accuracy positioning settings. I disabled auto-pause, matched kilometre auto-laps, and began each activity only after both had a location lock.
Routes included open roads, tree cover, a dense town centre, and one riverside section that usually exposes GPS shortcomings. I also wore both overnight for 12 nights to compare comfort, sleep tracking, and how the recovery information affected the next day's training.
However, let’s keep in mind that opposite-wrist testing isn’t perfectly controlled. Arm position, satellite view, and sensor fit can differ. All I wanted to find out is: if the Garmin battery died during race week, would I trust the Active 2 to replace it?
Surprisingly precise mileage for a budget watch
Across 18 runs, the Active 2 recorded 143.3 miles, 0.7 miles more than the Garmin. That is an average difference of roughly half a percent.
| Test measure | Amazfit Active 2 | Garmin Forerunner 965 | What I noticed |
| Total distance, 18 runs | 143.3mi | 142.6mi | Close enough for weekly mileage |
| 20-mile long run | 20.12mi | 20.00mi | Active 2 added distance in town |
| Avg HR vs chest strap | +2.8 bpm | Reference | Amazfit lagged during sharp intervals |
| Typical charge interval | 6–7 days | 4–5 days | Amazfit needed less planning |
| Failed activity syncs | 1 | 0 | Zepp required a manual reopen |
| Nights worn comfortably | 11/12 | 9/12 | Smaller Amazfit case won in bed |
On open roads, the route lines were difficult to tell apart. The largest gap came on the 20-miler: the Active 2 added 0.12 miles, mostly through a town section where its route drifted to the wrong side of the street and cut back.
While this discrepancy would not ruin my training log, it could matter during a precisely paced marathon.
Overall, the Active 2's GPS result changed my view of what an entry-level running watch can do. It was not flawless, but it was well beyond the “rough activity tracker” category.
I missed Garmin's instant pace during intense sessions
Average pace looked sensible on both watches after each run. However, live pace was a different story.
During six-minute threshold repeats, the Active 2 often took 15 to 25 seconds to settle after running faster. The displayed pace increased before merging with the lap average. Garmin also fluctuated, but it stabilized faster.
The difference was smaller on easy runs and almost irrelevant on the long run, where lap pace mattered more than the in-the-moment number. It became the most noticeable when the workout changed intensity frequently.
I worked around this on the Amazfit by keeping an eye on lap pace. That got the job done, but it meant knowing which data fields to rely on before heading out. Garmin's default screens just felt natural right away.
For a first marathon, the Active 2 is sufficient. For a precise time target with many structured workouts, Garmin's smoother pacing tools reduce cognitive load.
Optical heart rate was good until running speed accelerated
Across my whole training block, the Active 2 matched my chest strap to within three beats per minute. When I kept a steady pace, the heart rate readings were practically identical.
Unfortunately, intervals revealed its limits. The wrist sensor lagged behind sharp increases and occasionally remained elevated into the recovery. On one cool morning, it locked close to cadence for the first six minutes before correcting itself.
That is not unique to an affordable watch. Wrist optical heart rate depends on fit, skin, movement, temperature, and activity type. The Garmin's optical sensor was not part of this comparison because its activity used the chest strap.
The fix is simple: runners who train by heart-rate zones should pair a compatible external sensor and verify that it is connected before starting. The Active 2 supports external workout sensors, which gives it room to grow beyond its price.
Garmin removed cognitive load from planned workouts
My coach's sessions were already in Garmin Connect, so the Forerunner presented each step automatically: warm-up, target range, repetition, recovery, and cool-down. Alerts were clear, and the buttons were reliable in rain.
I recreated the same sessions in Zepp. The watch could guide the intervals, but the setup took longer and editing a complex workout was less intuitive. One session synced only after I reopened the app and refreshed the device connection.
Once the workout began, the Active 2 completed it. The difference was reliability. With Garmin, I did not double-check whether Tuesday's workout was recorded before leaving the house.
That sounds minor until marathon training becomes busy. A good platform removes the logistics around running. Garmin still does that better.
The $99 watch won on battery life and comfort overnight
Amazfit claims up to 10 days of use and up to 21 hours of continuous GPS. My settings — raise-to-wake display, continuous health tracking, phone notifications limited to calls, and four to five GPS activities each week — allowed for six to seven days between charges.
The Garmin lasted four to five days in my configuration, largely because I used multi-band positioning, always-on display, and longer navigation sessions. Both could have lasted longer with reduced settings.
The Active 2 was more comfortable to wear overnight. Its smaller case sat flatter under a sleeve and pressed against my wrist less when I slept. That helped it collect a more accurate sleep record.
The Zepp sleep and recovery report was clear enough to spot a restless night. Garmin went further by connecting sleep, HRV status, recovery time, acute load, and recent stress into training readiness. I missed that integrated context more than any individual metric.
Neither watch knew why I slept badly or whether I was ready to train, as they only helped me make the decision to train or take it easier that day.
Maps were useful, but Garmin still wins on navigation
The Active 2 can import offline maps and routes. I used it on a new 16-mile loop, and the on-screen line kept me oriented at two unfamiliar crossroads.
The experience was more basic than Garmin's. The smaller display limited context, route preparation was required, and the map did not replace a phone when I needed to understand a complicated diversion.
On a known road marathon, this difference would barely matter. On trail races, travel runs or courses with complex navigation, it could justify a more advanced watch.
The important buying question is not “does it have maps?” It is “what happens when I leave the route?” For my training, the Active 2 helped me follow a prepared course. The Garmin gave me more tools to solve a more complicated route.
What I didn’t miss from the Garmin
I didn’t miss the premium watch on easy runs. Distance, lap pace, time, and heart rate were enough. The Active 2's AMOLED display was bright, its two buttons handled basic controls, and the post-run summary gave me the essential information.
I also didn’t miss Garmin's long list of metrics every morning. During a heavy block, more interpretation can start causing anxiety. The cheaper watch encouraged a simpler review: did I complete the session, how did it feel, and am I recovering normally?
And I did not miss charging as often. A watch that remains on the wrist collects more consistent data than a more advanced one charging.
Limitations that matter before buying the Amazfit Active 2
First, instant pace was less stable when speed changed suddenly. Use lap pace, effort, or a foot pod if precise pacing is crucial.
Second, the Zepp training workflow is less refined. Check how your coaching platform exports workouts before expecting automatic compatibility.
Third, map support is not equivalent to full navigation. Prepare routes and carry an appropriate backup in unfamiliar places.
Fourth, long-term software and ecosystem depth remain part of the purchase. Garmin's platform has years of my training history, accessories, and learned settings. Switching has a cost even when the cheaper hardware performs well.
Any watch can also be inaccurate. Consumer GPS, optical heart rate, sleep and recovery estimates can be wrong. Stop training and seek appropriate help for chest pain, unusual breathlessness, or other concerning symptoms rather than using a normal watch score as reassurance.
My verdict: I would trust the Active 2 during a marathon
The Amazfit Active 2 stayed close to my Garmin on total distance, survived every long run, lasted longer between charges, and felt more comfortable overnight. That is impressive considering its starting price.
What I missed was not the ability to record a marathon block. It was Garmin's refinement: faster live-pace response, effortless structured workouts, richer navigation, and a training system that connects months of load and recovery.
I would recommend the Active 2 to a new marathoner, a runner whose budget matters more than advanced analytics. I would keep the Garmin for an aggressive time goal or complex coaching plan.
The $99 watch did not replace every reason I use Garmin. It did prove that the core job — training consistently and recording it credibly — no longer belongs only to premium watches.
