Test Setup: Two Watches, One Half-Marathon
To make this running watch comparison meaningful, both devices were worn simultaneously during the same half-marathon. The Garmin Forerunner 970 sat on one wrist, while an AmazFit running watch—the Amazfit Cheetah 2 Pro—occupied the other. Despite a slightly messy start at the line, official results provide a solid benchmark: the race finished in 2:04:49 at a 9:32 per mile pace. The AmazFit logged 13.23 miles in 2:04:26, while the Garmin recorded 13.22 miles in 2:04:20, each reporting a 9:24 pace. Those tiny discrepancies are well within what most runners experience in real-world events filled with crowds, tall buildings, and GPS interference. With both watches exposed to identical conditions and worn by the same runner, this half-marathon GPS tracking test offers a clear, side-by-side look at fitness watch accuracy under race pressure.
GPS, Heart Rate, and Pace: A Dead Heat on Accuracy
When it comes to core race metrics, the Garmin Forerunner 970 and the AmazFit running watch are essentially neck and neck. Distance readings were nearly identical, differing by just 0.01 mile, and both watches produced very similar finishing times and paces compared with the official chip result. More importantly for fitness watch accuracy, heart rate data lined up perfectly: both logged an average of 166 bpm and a maximum of 192 bpm over the half-marathon effort. This consistency suggests that for basic GPS accuracy, heart rate monitoring, and pace tracking, there is no meaningful performance gap between the two devices. If your primary concern is whether a watch can reliably capture a long run or race without wild spikes or obvious miscalculations, both the Forerunner 970 and AmazFit Cheetah 2 Pro easily clear that bar.
Battery Life, Comfort, and On-the-Run Usability
While the article’s half-marathon test focused more on performance metrics than exact battery percentages, several practical differences emerged that matter over long distances. The AmazFit running watch is notably lightweight, which becomes a real advantage when you are on your feet for hours; less bulk means less wrist fatigue and a more forget-it’s-there feel. The Garmin Forerunner 970 counters with superior readability and more responsive wrist-raise activation, allowing you to glance at your pace or time without fumbling mid-stride. Over an extended run or race, those split-second checks add up, affecting how confidently you manage pacing and effort. Both watches demonstrated solid endurance across the race, comfortably supporting extended running activity, but Garmin’s more polished display interaction makes it easier to extract meaningful information in the heat of competition.
Training Metrics and Post-Run Analysis: Where Garmin Pulls Ahead
Race-day accuracy is only half the story for serious distance runners. The real differentiator is what happens after you stop your watch. Here, Garmin’s ecosystem gives the Forerunner 970 a clear edge. In Garmin Connect, runners can dive into a deep well of training data, from standard splits and cadence to more advanced running dynamics unlocked by accessories like the HRM 600 chest strap, including metrics such as step speed loss and running economy. While the AmazFit Cheetah 2 Pro feeds data into the Zepp app and performs well as a racing tool, its training ecosystem, recovery insights, and daily coaching features feel less comprehensive by comparison. For athletes building toward a half or full marathon, those richer analytics and structured tools can be more valuable than marginal differences in race-day performance, making Garmin the stronger choice for long-term training.
Value for Distance Runners: Which Watch Makes More Sense?
Both the Garmin Forerunner 970 and the AmazFit running watch proved they can track a half-marathon with confidence-inspiring precision. The Amazfit Cheetah 2 Pro comes in at USD 449.99 (approx. RM2,100), undercutting the Forerunner 970’s USD 749.99 (approx. RM3,500) price tag while matching its core metrics on race day. However, value for serious distance runners is not only about the sticker price; it is about the depth of tools that support months of structured training. Even against similarly priced rivals like the Garmin Forerunner 570 (USD 449.99; approx. RM2,100), the AmazFit ecosystem struggles to stand out in areas like coaching, recovery guidance, and advanced analytics. For runners who just want accurate half-marathon GPS tracking at a lighter weight, AmazFit is a capable option. For data-driven athletes invested in long-term improvement, Garmin still offers the more compelling package.