I walked 5,500 steps with the Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Amazfit Active Max — and it's not even close

The Garmin Forerunner series consistently makes our list of best smartwatches, and for good reason. Whether you’re a beginner on a budget, a marathon-seasoned pro, or something in between, there’s almost certainly a Garmin Forerunner watch for you.

Price-wise, the entry-level Garmin Forerunner 55 starts at just $169 (though it's even cheaper right now), while the most advanced Forerunner 965 — which boasts support for offline maps, a seriously bright AMOLED screen, and additional running-centric training metrics and tools — starts at $599.

But what if you could get all or most of the higher-end models' features in a smartwatch that costs the same as the entry-level version? That’s exactly what the wallet-friendly wearables brand, Amazfit, is attempting to do with the new Amazfit Active Max.

I walked 5,500 steps with the Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Amazfit Active Max

For $169, the Amazfit Max features a seriously impressive AMOLED touchscreen (that’s brighter than even the Apple Watch 11’s display), support for offline maps and music, advanced running metrics including ground contact time and vertical oscillation, and custom-tailored training plans for everything from a 3K to a full marathon.

It’s almost as if the folks at Amazfit said, ‘Everything the best Forerunner has, our watch will have too.’ The question is, when it comes to tracking accuracy, can the Amazfit Active Max compete with the rock-solid performance of a modern Garmin Forerunner?

I decided to find out. While I didn’t have the highest-end Garmin Forerunner 965 handy, I do have the next-best Forerunner 570.

So, on a sunny and clear Seattle afternoon, I stepped out into the January chill with the Amazfit Active Max on my left wrist, the Garmin Forerunner 570 on my right wrist, Strava running on my iPhone 16, and a manual tally counter in hand to note every hundred steps taken.

Find out which watch performed better, the Garmin Forerunner 570 or Amazfit Active Max, when compared to the control data (my manual count and Strava), below.

Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Amazfit Active Max: Walk test results

Strava’s step count total of 5,496 steps nearly perfectly matches my manually-counted tally of 5,500 steps. The Forerunner 570, meanwhile, was within 38 steps of 5,500, which is well within a reasonable margin of error for an hour-long walk.

Step count-wise, the Active Max missed the mark by just over 800 steps, a fairly notable amount. The distance data also seems to be missing a little over half a mile compared to Garmin and Strava's data, which mirror one another nicely.

Both smartwatches appeared to have overcounted my climb, but not by a concerning amount. Garmin noted 17 more feet of climb, and Amazfit measured 22 additional feet compared to Strava.

Elapsed pace data for this comparison is similar enough across the board. It's worth noting that while my walk started at a fairly reasonable pace, I really picked things up for the second half (toward the last 15 minutes, I desperately need to pee).

My efforts are reflected in Garmin's maximum heart rate of 170 bpm. This is still well under my average max for hardcore cardio activities, like cycling up a hill or snowboarding in powder. Still, it's reassuring to see that I was able to get my heart rate up above a moderate effort level for at least a portion of the walk.

Meanwhile, the Amazfit Active Max's max and average heart rate for this walk strike me as surprisingly low. However, assuming the watch had tracking issues toward the last quarter of my walk — which seems to be the case based on the post-workout GPS map — it's likely missed my hardest-fought efforts.

With more steps taken, distance covered, and a higher heart rate, it's no wonder that the Forerunner 570 also calculated more calories burned.

Finally, one win for the Amazfit: it used half as much battery as the Forerunner 570.

Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Amazfit Active Max: And the winner is...

The Garmin Forerunner 570 wins this walk test comparison against the Amazfit Active Max. Of course, the former is more than three times the price of the latter. Still, I expected the Active Max do a little better in this showdown. After all, it held its own against the Apple Watch SE 3 in my previous walk test.

Which smartwatch or fitness trackers would you like me 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.

More from Tom's Guide

• 5 reasons why the Apple Watch SE 3 is the smartwatch I recommend most
• 7 hidden Apple Watch features I swear by
• I walked 5,500 steps with the Apple Watch 11 vs Apple Watch SE 3 — And the results are surprising