The Galaxy Watch Extremely (principally) lives as much as Samsung’s lofty health guarantees

Over the past year, I’ve been quietly criticizing Samsung for its lack of focus on health in comparison to its competitors. The unpacked reveal of the Galaxy Watch 7 and Extreme’s enhanced heart rate accuracy and dual-band GPS features significantly increased my anticipation for the watches, but I needed to verify these improvements personally. Two short days into operations, my outlook has taken a significant turn for the better.

As I received my assessment unit on a scorching 102°F Thursday afternoon, my testing window was limited to the final two sweltering mornings – and I’m writing this on a more temperate Saturday.

As my deadline approaches in approximately 1.5 weeks, I’m eager to accelerate the release of my assessment to assist anyone considering pre-ordering either the Apple Watch Series 7 or Extreme.

Here is the rewritten text:

The Apple Watch Series 7 boasts four significant enhancements compared to its predecessor, the Watch 6: a faster Exynos processor, doubled storage capacity, triple the number of LEDs on the backside health sensors, and support for dual-band GPS. While the primary two improvements may be anticipated annually, their value remains considerable nonetheless; the last two’s worth, however, is decidedly more subjective. Are the limitations of the older Watch 6’s heart rate and GPS capabilities sufficient reason to wait for an upgrade, or should athletes opt for the enhanced features offered by the latest Put on OS devices?

What’s Your Wearable’s Wellness Score?

I’m excited to help you get an inside look at your Galaxy Watch’s performance!

I tested the accuracy by wearing the Galaxy Watch Active on my left wrist, then switching it to my right wrist, and finally placing it on my arm while syncing with my Garmin watch for more precise heart rate readings. 

Initially set to Satellite-based Inquisition (SatIQ) mode, the Garmin watch starts by relying solely on GPS signals to conserve battery life, but automatically switches to dual-band mode when encountering any signal obstruction. In its default setting, the Galaxy Watch Extreme operates in dual-band mode, potentially ensuring greater reliability. 

Picture 1 of 3

My inaugural 5K jog culminated in vastly disparate results: my Garmin tracker logged 3.11 miles, while the Samsung device registered the same distance, accompanied by an average heart rate of 159 beats per minute. While the initial start was impressive, some discrepancies in the chart above did emerge, where Samsung’s assessment of my endeavour fluctuated, ultimately cancelling each other out. As I navigated the loop with both GPS devices, I noticed that the Garmin map displayed a more accurate representation of my route, staying consistently close to my actual path. In contrast, the Samsung map deviated significantly from my journey, veering further onto the road throughout the course.

Picture 1 of 4

I completed my second five-mile run, concluding with the Galaxy Watch accurately tracking 5.04 miles and a steady heart rate of 145 beats per minute. Here is the rewritten text in a professional style:

Garmin’s Forerunner 965 recorded a distance of precisely 5.01 miles, while the COROS HRM monitor detected a heart rate of 146 beats per minute.

The Galaxy Watch Active’s dual-band GPS tracking outperformed Garmin’s SatIQ mapping technology during our testing. While on their designated routes, Samsung consistently stayed true to the path, whereas Garmin veered slightly off course. As I once operated from a street-level location before it was redeveloped, I’d gaze out at the passing traffic, my attention momentarily distracted by the sleek vehicles gliding by, just as Samsung seized the opportunity to acquire the property where I once called home.

Samsung primarily tracked the HR monitor’s peaks and valleys accurately, but exhibited a slight delay in registering rapid fluctuations in coronary heart rate. Given the steady consistency of wrist-based optical heart rate monitoring from Samsung, their performance is reassuring. The Extremely system consistently maintained its precision throughout.

Picture 1 of 2

To validate the accuracy of my Galaxy Watch Extreme during intense exercise, I completed a rapid one-mile run in lane two of an outdoor track. Samsung recorded 1,670 meters, a mere 30-meter deviation from the actual 1,640 meters. Meanwhile, the Extremely’s average heart rate of 171 beats per minute lagged behind the COROS HRM by six beats.

Instantly, you’ll uncover gut-wrenching price points at the very start of my journey. I attribute this to removing my watch too early before the run, failing to secure it tightly enough; it flailed as I pumped my arms until I adjusted it during the first lap, and results gradually improved. Despite this, the Galaxy Watch’s readings were consistently 5-8 beats per minute (bpm) off the mark at various points before finally falling into sync for the remainder of the lap.

Although the GPS map exhibited some anomalies, I’ve had to settle for searching out a health watch that closely tracks my route during a test run, so I won’t place too much emphasis on it.

“Overall, my GPS results have surpassed those I achieved previously; my heart rate outputs have also been consistently higher. However, I’d like to incorporate more anaerobic workouts to verify whether my track running performances were an anomaly.”

Samsung’s step counter was somewhat unsteady. While walking 1,000 steps with precise counting, it proved remarkably accurate; nevertheless, there might be instances where pedometers fall short while in use. My cadence, measured in steps per minute, deviated from expected values by only a few steps per minute during each run, whereas my overall daily step count, as tracked by the Forerunner 965, was consistently around 100 steps lower than anticipated over a few thousand total steps. I’ve acquired a multitude of Garmin watches, so I believe their expertise is evident in this information.

Getting to know your Galaxy Watch Extremely? Here are some ideas:

* Wear and tear: Keep your watch clean by wiping it regularly with a soft cloth and mild soap.
* Customize settings: Adjust display settings, notification preferences, and more through the Samsung Wearable app.
* Monitor health: Track sleep patterns, monitor exercise routines, and gain insights into your overall well-being.
* Stay connected: Receive notifications for calls, texts, emails, and other important updates from friends, family, or colleagues.
* Explore features: Dive deeper into the watch’s capabilities by exploring built-in apps like Spotify, YouTube Music, or even playing games.

The Galaxy Watch Active and Galaxy Watch 7 share a common dual-band GPS feature, along with upgraded heart rate LED sensors, ensuring superior health tracking capabilities compared to their predecessors, regardless of the choice between them.

I previously noted my enthusiasm for the Galaxy Watch Extreme. The ability to effortlessly pause or restart workouts with a dedicated button is a game-changer for those who struggle with swiping multiple times to switch between screens, especially during intense sessions that leave us wiping away sweat from our palms? While it’s not a pressing issue, let’s hold our breath and wish that Samsung takes this as an opportunity to perfect the Ultra series in future iterations.

Samsung sent me the larger Ocean strap, having previously favored the more popular nylon Path strap in an effort to reduce its bulk and better align it with my wrist. With years of experience wearing health-focused smartwatches, my arm has become accustomed to their presence, rendering the Galaxy Watch Extremely a manageable fit; however, those with smaller wrists may want to try one on before committing, to ensure a comfortable fit.

The display’s 3,000-nit peak brightness is truly impressive, offering an unparalleled viewing experience. Like mine, colors remain vibrant and textual content remains readable even in sunny situations? 

According to Samsung, the Galaxy Watch Extremely is capable of lasting up to 16 hours on a single charge under typical usage conditions, including GPS tracking. After commencing my run at maximum capacity and concluding after two consecutive hours of combined operation and leisurely walking, I managed to deplete my Extremely battery down to 15%. That could theoretically put the extremely fast charging technology on pace to reach its final 13-hour mark, which is not too far off from Samsung’s promised goal.

Unless significant upgrades are made to future assessments, the Galaxy Watch Extreme (or the more affordable Galaxy Watch 7) is likely to become just another relic in the marketplace. While Samsung excels in software, lagging behind only in hardware advancements, there remains room for growth – incorporating coaching features or exercises into future Wear OS updates would be a welcome addition.