The Coros Nomad and Amazfit T-Rex 3 Pro are tough-built, long-lasting, adventure-oriented GPS smartwatches designed to compete with the popular Garmin Instinct line. Launched just weeks apart, and with so much in common, I just had to know which is more accurate.
To find out, I wore the Coros Nomad on my left wrist and the Amazfit T-Rex 3 Pro on my right wrist before heading out on an eleven-mile bike ride through Seattle, Washington. Using Strava as my control, the results of this head-to-head between the Coros Nomad and Amazfit T-Rex 3 Pro somewhat surprised me. Read on to find out why (and for the winner).
Coros Nomad vs Amazfit T-Rex 3 Pro: quick comparison
First, how do the Coros Nomad and Amazfit T-Rex 3 Pro compare in terms of price, design, and specs? The Nomad is $349, $50 less than the cheapest Instinct 3 model. The Amazfit T-Rex 3 Pro matches the Garmin competition with a $399 launch price.
Design-wise, both sport an oversized case with a hefty bezel for screen protection. Users can navigate the settings on either device via physical buttons or the touchscreen.
Coros and Amazfit took entirely different approaches to the display, though. The screen on the T-Rex 3 Pro is an impressive AMOLED affair with 3,000 nits of max brightness. The Nomad screen is a dimmer, less contrasty /colorful Memory in Pixel (MiP) panel that's easy enough to see in bright sunlight, but challenging to view in dimmer conditions.
Battery life is excellent on both devices, and each support sa huge variety of workout and activity types. They also offer similar fitness and holistic-tracking sensors.
For this head-to-head between the Coros Nomad and Amazfit T-Rex 3 Pro, one advantage the latter has is a more sophisticated GPS antenna that uses six satellites compared to two. Seattle's a hilly, tree-covered city with no shortage of tall buildings, i.e., the type of location where lesser GPS may struggle.
Finally, while durability is a big selling point of either model, the Amazfit offers 100 meters of water resistance, enough for high-impact watersports and even scuba diving, while the Coros boasts just 50 meters of water resistance.
Coros Nomad vs Amazfit T-Rex 3 Pro: Bike test results
Using Strava as my control (recording my ride from a handlebar-mount), here's how the results of the Coros Nomad vs. Amazfit T-Rex 3 Pro bike test played out:
| Header Cell - Column 0 | Coros Nomad | Amazfit T-Rex 3 Pro | Strava |
|---|---|---|---|
Distance | 11.21 miles | 11.17 miles | 11.23 miles |
Elevation gain | 725 feet | 628 feet | 676 feet |
Average speed (moving) | 11.4 mph | 11.63 mph | 12.2 mph |
Max speed | 25.8 mph | 23.3 mph | 26.6 mph |
Average heart rate | 162 bpm | 164 bpm | n/a |
Max heart rate | 188 bpm | 180 bpm | n/a |
Calories burned | 665 calories | 775 calories | n/a |
Battery drain | 2% | 3% | n/a |
Over the course of roughly 55 minutes, I cruised just over 11 miles and up around 675 feet of elevation (I told you Seattle is hilly!). Both smartwatches pretty much nailed the distance measurement; however, the elevation data was far less accurate.
While the Amazfit undercounted by 48 feet, the Coros overcounted by 49 feet. Neither of these results is great, and given that both smartwatches have onboard altimeters, I'm a bit surprised that either is this far off.
I recently tested the accuracy of the Coros Nomad vs. Garmin Instinct 3, and even though Garmin won, the Nomad's elevation data for that test was closer to the control, though it still overcounted.
Average moving speed data offers some peace of mind. Both watches recorded a slower pace than Strava, but not by a concerning amount (less than 1 mph). Max speed data also matches up nicely for the Coros. The Nomad is within 1 mph of Strava's max speed, while the T-Rex 3 Pro is off by 3.3 mph.
Average heart rate data from the watches is similar enough; however, the Nomad measured a notably higher maximum heart rate for my ride. While I definitely cranked the pedals, I wouldn't say I pushed myself any harder for this ride than others I've recently tracked.
Based on data from prior bike test comparisons along a similar route — including when I biked 11 miles with the Apple Watch 10 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch 8, and when I biked 13 miles with the Apple Watch Ultra 2 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch 8 — my max heart rate rarely crosses the 180 bpm threshold, suggesting that the Coros likely inflated the metric.
Despite the higher max heart rate, the Nomad calculated fewer calories burned than the T-Rex 3 Pro. Finally, neither smartwatch burned through that much battery, but the Amazfit used 1% more.
Coros Nomad vs Amazfit T-Rex 3 Pro: And the winner is...
With accurate distance data but equally inaccurate elevation data, it's difficult to crown a winner in this battle of the Coros Nomad vs. Amazfit T-Rex 3 Pro. As such, I'm calling this showdown a draw (something I rarely do).
Surprised? I'm just as shocked as you. As noted above, given either device's positioning as a hard-wearing, outdoor-adventure-ready wearable, I'd expect sterling elevation gain data. That wasn't the case this time around, despite fancy GPS antennas and onboard altimeters.
However, you know what smartwatch has proven time and time again to be reliable when it comes to not just distance, but elevation, too? The Garmin Instinct 3.
What smartwatches should I test head-to-head next? Let me know in the comments below.
Follow Tom's Guide on Google News and add us as a preferred source to get our up-to-date news, analysis, and reviews in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button!
More from Tom's Guide:
You must confirm your public display name before commenting
Please logout and then login again, you will then be prompted to enter your display name.
