I have both. Please do yourself a favor and buy a Garmin. Period. And don't be one of these guys who keeps pondering this every day. Waste of time. Apple Watch (Ultra) is only worth it for most people if you have family that is heavily connected in the ecosystem and you call a lot from your watch, etc, receive messages and photos on your watch and reply and so on. My guess is you will be happy with Garmin.
If you want the watch as a smartwatch for notifications, calls, photos, emails and some added fitness features -> AW. If you want a great fitness watch with very good battery life and smart features depending on the model -> Garmin.
This is oversimplified but true imo. By the way, prudent question to ask yourself before overspending is what you actually want. Not what smartwatch / fitness watch you might want. Maybe you're fine with a Casio, maybe a G-Shock. Maybe a cheaper fitness watch like Amazfit. Decide what you want and buy accordingly. Even though I have an Ultra 3 and a FR570 I like to wear cheaper G-Shocks or mechanical watches a lot. You will know what you need - and don't worry there will always be a next better AW or Garmin, so you are not missing out if you don't buy the top tier model right now unless you do need specific features now in your everyday life.
agree, as a runner preparing for half marathon I wouldn't go without training metrics such as training readiness [Garmin Running Watch Comparison | Which Watch](https://www.garmin.com/en-US/which-watch/running/compare/)
The FR 570 is the successor of the 265 (which should be cheaper now), in my opinion the newer sensors are a plus for the 570, the phone functionality is more a feature to ignore as you still need a smartphone paired and connected.
first, you won't run any faster or better with a new garmin, so what do you expect from a new watch?
I would go with the fr 265 as sombody wrote the 255 is outdated. But I have to admit, every Garmin is outdated after release because of their policies, you won't get any funcional updates after release, only bug fixes. So the 265 was followed by the actual 570.
BUT, the only FR with maps and navigation (which was essential for me) is the fr 970 [Garmin Running Watch Comparison | Which Watch](https://www.garmin.com/en-US/which-watch/running/compare/) even the 570 lacks maps and navigation.
You could go with the FR 965 which is the previous model to the fr 970...
if you don't need navigation check with the 265 (cheaper) or 570 (newer one, mor features)
I’d go for the Venu 4 which basically is a FR570 but with both LED flashlight and ECG, but with only 2 buttons instead of 5. Dc.rainmaker about the FR570: combination of FR265+ Venu 3. FR570 although with latest HR sensor Elevate 5, no ECG.
Major differences: battery FR965 up to 23 days, versus up to 11 days FR570. Both have all Training metrics, such as Training readiness & load, both all health metrics but no ECG. FR570 comes with the latest, better HR sensor, the Elevate 5, versus the older Elevate 4 on board of the FR965. And off course FR965 has maps… not so on the FR570. Both Amoled display, both 5 buttons, as for GPS, both have multiband dual frequency GNSS.
You obviously can do without. Yet, if you are interested in supporting training build metrics, like training readiness, load, recovery etc, you could check watches like the Forerunners, FR265, 570, 965 or 970 (all 5 buttons watches which might be preferred to operate the watch (instead of touchscreen) when sweating heavily. Alternatively the Venu 4, but only 2 buttons. Off course the Fenix line is also interesting. Forget about Venu 2/3 or VIvoactive 5/6: lacking training metrics.
Imo you cannot go wrong at all with the FR70 at this price. Same HR sensor (Elevate 4, no 5 is latest) as the FR265, great battery up to 13 days, same general sports UI and metrics as the FR570/970 and Fenix 8. And like you said: longevity.
For 4-5x/week strength as your main use case, the honest answer is: FR570 over the Venu 4, and you probably don't need the 970.
What Garmin actually does better than your Apple Watch Series 5 for lifting: continuous overnight HRV measured properly (RMSSD, not Apple's spot checks), training readiness that accounts for sleep debt, and body battery that tracks cumulative load including after heavy leg days. The sleep data alone is worth it if you train that often.
What Garmin doesn't do well: it still undercounts strength training load. Your readiness score after a brutal squat session will often look better than it should because the watch is calibrated for cardio HR zones, not muscular fatigue. Teh recovery signal is better than Apple but not perfect for hybrid athletes.
You already have the Edge 840 doing the cycling metrics perfectly. The 570 fills the health and recovery gap without overlap. I use athletedata.health on top to get actual daily coaching from all the data points together, which is the piece Garmin Connect still doesn't do. 7-day free trial, no credit card: https://www.athletedata.health
For 4-5x strength per week as the primary use case, Garmin is actually the honest answer here. But I'd set expectations correctly.
Garmin's strength tracking improved a lot in the last 2 years. The rep counting via FR570 or Fenix 8 works better than most people expect for compound movements. It's not perfect, but its useful enough. The muscle map feature is a decent visual summary.
The thing it doesn't do well: it can't tell you how hard your lifting sessions actually stressed your body for recovery purposes. Your training readiness score is calibrated mostly on cardio. A brutal leg day that tanks your HRV overnight won't register as hard effort the way a long run does.
So the FR570 or Fenix line gives you solid movement tracking, good sleep and HRV data, and readable step/calorie tracking. The readiness numbers just need to be taken with context for a strength-first athlete.
For strength training 4-5 days plus cycling with a Garmin: the FR570 is the right call over the Venu 4.
The core issue you're describing is that Garmin's training readiness and body battery are calibrated primarily for cardio. Heavy lifting sessions show up as minimal stress in those scores because the watch doesn't understand muscular load well. The FR570 doesn't fully solve this but it has better rep-set detection in strength mode and the health data platform is identical to the Fenix line.
Venu 4 is a lifestyle watch with fitness features. FR570 is a fitness watch with lifestyle features. Small but meaningful difference if strength training is your primary use.
One honest limitation to flag: no Garmin truly bridges the gap between lifting load and cardio readiness in a unified way. The readiness score after a heavy leg day will often read higher than it should because the HRV signal the night before doesn't always capture muscle damage. Worth knowing going in so you don't over-rely on the metric.
If the ecosystem continuity with your Edge 840 matters, Garmin is the natural choice anyway.
For your use case, the 570 is the right call. It has everything you need for running progression, strength tracking, sleep, stress, and HRV-based recovery. The 970 adds maps and a few extras but nothing that changes the health and training insight picture for someone starting out.
The more important thing to know: Garmin does running and cardio very well, but strength training is its weak point. When you log a gym session, it feeds into your training load in a limited way. You can do a serious strength session and have your body battery still show 80% because Garmin did not fully account for it. As you start running more alongside lifting, this creates a real gap where the watch recommendations do not reflect how your body is actually recovering.
If you want both your running and your gym work to inform a single recovery and coaching signal, athletedata.health was built for exactly this. It connects Garmin with your other training data to give you one honest read on readiness. There is a 7-day free trial, no credit card required.
For weight lifting, cycling, and running, the FR570 is probably the best balance. It handles cardio zones well, has solid training load tracking, and will cover the running and cycling metrics you care about. No need to spend up to the 970 unless you really want maps.
One thing worth knowing before you commit: Garmin is strong at the aerobic side but weak on interpreting strength training. Your lifting sessions feed into training load in a limited way, so you can finish a hard squat day and still see your body battery sitting high because Garmin did not fully register the leg stress. That creates mismatches between what the watch says and how your body actually feels going into the next session.
If that integration between your gym work and your cycling and running recovery matters to you, athletedata.health was built specifically for this. It connects Garmin, Apple Health, and other platforms to give you one coaching signal across everything. 7-day free trial if you want to check it out.
ive got a forerunner 265 and its been solid for running, cycling and gym. the 570 adds multi-band GPS which is nice if you run in cities but honestly the 265 does everything most people need. get the 265 and put the difference towards shoes.
biggieocta
