I Ran a 10K With a Top-of-the-Line Garmin on One Wrist and a Budget Model on the Other, and Here’s What Happened

Last weekend I strapped two different Garmin running watches to my wrists and ran a 10k. On one arm I carried the Precursor 970Garmin’s high-end $750 running watch. On the other, I wore the Precursor 165 Musicwhich is much more economical at $300. I wanted to see if having a fancy running watch really made a difference during a race. The answer is complicated.

Consider this: the weekend before my race, the winners of the London Marathon competed with the Forerunner 55 and Forerunner 255– two watches that are, by technological standards, practically ancient. This fact was certainly on my mind as I ran (at a fraction of the pace of these runners and over a much shorter distance): two of the most elite runners in the world are currently wearing solid, no-frills Garmins. Why would I need anything better? What difference can a wearable device actually make during a competitive race?

Both Garmins have accurate heart rate and GPS

Before race day, I completed a controlled interval run wearing both watches and a chest strap to test heart rate accuracy. Compared side by side, both watches performed well: They captured highs and lows without clipping at either end of the range (which is more than can be said for many optical sensors on the wrist). The 970, with its more advanced sensor, tracked cleanly throughout, although the 165 was also solid, if lagging behind at times, with a slightly low reading in the moments after a hard interval effort. The difference wasn’t dramatic, but it was noticeable when I looked for it. For a serious runner obsessed with every BPM, this matters. For the rest of us, either watch would be more than enough.

The black line corresponds to the chest strap; purple is 165; orange is 970.
Credit: Meredith Dietz

As for GPS, both watches quickly locked onto a signal and held it throughout the race. For a standard 10K in an open environment, you’d be hard-pressed to feel the difference. Again, the 970 edges ahead in terms of precision, which is especially useful if you’re running tight trail intervals or navigating complex urban routes. But for most runners putting in real-world miles, the 165 will still give you a GPS recording you can trust.

Only the Forerunner 970 has my favorite Garmin watch features

The 970 has an undeniable advantage when it comes to advanced features. The main selling point of this watch is that it offers deeper analysis of performance data: more advanced running dynamics, detailed training load analysis and racing specific features. A prime example is Auto Lap from Timing Gates: during an official race, the 970 can automatically detect smart timing mats and split your laps accordingly, a real game-changer for runners like me who are constantly sweating over every little detail on race day.

The 165 remains simpler. You get your reliable baseline metrics (pace, distance, heart rate, cadence), but that’s it. For a runner who wants the essentials without drowning in data, I would say this type of simplicity is an advantage and not a limitation.

The 970 definitely has a more premium vibe.
Credit: Meredith Dietz

Is it worth upgrading your running watch?

Running with both of these watches simultaneously made me better appreciate the ease of use of a touchscreen like the one on the Forerunner 970. Sliding through data screens mid-run, navigating menus with a tap instead of fumbling for buttons – it has a certain “elite” feeling. It’s responsive, intuitive, and refined in a way that a button-based interface simply isn’t.

But here’s the thing: feeling elite doesn’t make you a better runner. A fancier watch is definitely a quality of life improvement, but I honestly can’t say it made me run a different race. It’s up to you to decide if a quality of life improvement is worth $400.

Like my colleague Beth Skwarecki said itanything outside of your time and pace is icing on the cake. If you’re a competitive athlete who runs frequently, obsesses over training data, and values ​​having the most accurate sensor on your wrist, the 970 delivers. If you’re training for your first race, chasing a personal best, or just want a reliable watch to track your morning runs, the 165 Music will serve you well at a fraction of the price. And if you compare it to real budget options, the 165 is still far from “basic”.

Remember, the winners of the London Marathon crossed the finish line before anyone else wearing the simplest running watches. Elite performance lies not in the hardware, but in your body. But hey, if the 970’s touchscreen makes you want to lace up every morning, then it’s worth the high price.