We emotion pitting fittingness wearables against 1 another. Whether it’s nan Apple Watch 9 against nan Apple Watch 8 aliases nan latest Fitbit Charge versus nan newest Fitbit Inspire, uncovering retired which trackers are astir meticulous is benignant of our obsession present astatine Tom’s Guide.
With this successful mind, I walked 3,000 steps pinch nan Fitbit Inspire 3 and G-Shock Move DWH5600 strapped to my wrists. Which tracked my steps much accurately? Read on.
Before nan large reveal, it’s worthy rubbing connected immoderate cardinal creation differences betwixt these 2 celebrated models. The Inspire 3 is Fitbit’s astir entry-level, budget-friendly option. Priced astatine $100, it has a slim, low-key creation centered astir a 0.7-inch AMOLED colour touchscreen.
The Casio G-Shock Move, connected nan different hand, is simply a $300 fashion-forward smartwatch packed pinch fittingness features. It looks conscionable for illustration a classical integer Casio from nan 1980s, which I find charming, complete pinch a B&W LCD. Unlike nan Inspire 3, this watch is meant to beryllium shown off.
Design differences aside, some models connection galore of nan aforesaid workout search features. Neither has an onboard GPS, truthful steps are calculated done a operation of accelerometer information and GPS information from a paired device, if available. Both models besides show bosom complaint and usage that information to find really strenuous your workout was. You besides get an estimation of really galore calories you burned, mean bpm and more.
I walked 3,000 steps pinch nan Fitbit Inspire 3 and G-Shock Move — here's which was astir accurate
To complete my test, I wore nan G-Shock connected my near wrist and Fitbit connected my right. Neither instrumentality was paired pinch my iPhone’s GPS during nan walk. Steps were counted manually, and I besides ran Strava connected my phone, which uses nan GPS signal, arsenic a secondary control.
So which wearable came retired connected top? It whitethorn travel arsenic a surprise, but nan G-shock Move calculated my steps much accurately than either nan Fitbit Inspire 3 aliases Strava. While nary fittingness locator aliases app is going to springiness a 100% meticulous result, nan G-Shock was wrong 15 steps of nan existent number, which is impressive.
Swipe to scroll horizontally
|Fitbit Inspire 3||2,942|
For what it’s worth, each 3 methods of search were wrong 100 steps of my 3,000-step count. That said, I’m a small amazed that Strava was nan slightest meticulous of nan bunch. I really thought entree to GPS information would springiness it an edge.
It’s worthy noting that some nan Strava and nan Fitbit apps supply a last tally of nan number of steps taken erstwhile you complete a walk. The Casio Watches app, connected nan different hand, does not. Instead, you get a full measurement count for nan time but for immoderate reason, nary measurement count for nan individual activities you've tracked.
I’m not judge if this is an omission connected nan portion of G-Shock— I’m moving up-to-date firmware — but it is frustrating. For immoderate clarity, I’ve reached retired to Casio to make judge I’m not overlooking immoderate benignant of hidden setting. And I will update this communicative erstwhile I study more.
Fortunately, nan G-Shock app does stock your mean stride arsenic good arsenic full region walked. Using these figures, I was capable to cipher my steps taken by simply dividing 5,280 (the number of feet successful a mile) by my mean recorded stride distance, which was 2.3 feet for this locomotion (Note: not 2 feet 3 inches). This gave maine my mean number of steps per mile (2,296) which I multiplied by nan recorded region covered (1.3 miles) to get my full steps taken (2,985).
If that is simply a spot excessively overmuch mathematics for your taste, I consciousness your pain. No quality being should person to disagreement numbers, fto unsocial cognize really galore feet are successful a mile, to fig retired their full measurement count for a short walk. In that regard, while nan G-Shock was much meticulous than nan Fitbit, I’d apt urge nan second because nan information is easier to access. (The G-Shock app is simply a spot clunky to navigate overall).
Fitbit Inspire 3 vs. G-Shock Move — different metrics compared
Comparing different metrics, nan G-shock said I burned 202 calories during my short locomotion while nan Fitbit placed that number astatine 263. (it’s intolerable to cognize which number is much accurate.) There was besides a reasonably notable discrepancy betwixt my mean bpm recorded by each. While nan Fitbit said I averaged 103 bpm during my walk, nan G-Shock recorded 117 bpm (which strikes maine arsenic a tad high).
To effort and diagnose this difference, I wore nan 2 devices while sitting astatine my table to seizure my resting bosom rate. I besides took nan aforesaid reference utilizing an existent humor unit monitor. All 3 came backmost pinch 63 bpm, which is reassuring successful immoderate ways, but still doesn’t explicate nan conflicting information from my walk.
Verdict: G-Shock wins nan battle, but not nan war
Ultimately, nan galore metrics captured by these devices are conscionable mini pieces of information successful a overmuch bigger picture. And what makes a fittingness locator useful is not whether each information constituent is 100% meticulous but rather, really nan instrumentality contextualizes that information successful a measurement that is easy to entree and promotes personification wellness and well-being.
So, while nan G-shock won nan conflict of nan steps, I’m not convinced it thumps nan Fitbit successful nan greater warfare of nan workout devices.
More from Tom's Guide
- I walked 5,000 steps pinch nan Apple Watch 9 and Apple Watch 8 — and nan results are surprising
- I utilized nan double pat characteristic connected Apple Watch 9 during my rowing workout — and it was a immense help
- I spent a play pinch nan G-Shock smartwatch — 7 things that amazed me