Once again, I went down the rabbit hole. This time detailing all the differences between Apple’s two latest models – the Apple Watch Ultra 2 Black and Apple Watch Series 10. In total, I’ve gathered roughly 40 differences between them. Some of these are big-ticket (or obvious) ones, like battery capacity differences and extra buttons. While others are more subtle, such as the differences in the speakers and microphones. Or how the internal chipsets differ.
In total, the above video walks you through each of those things, including bits like comparing speakers side-by-side, as well as showing real-world footage of the display differences and whether or not the upgraded Series 10 display is all that meaningful compared to the existing (but smaller) Ultra 2 display.
Of course, I know many of you prefer a text-based list. And given I had to write-up the list first to shoot the video, I actually wrote this post, and then built the video atop it. In the video I do give a bit more nuance on some things, but most of the stuff is pretty self-explanatory.
Before we get into the hardware differences, a quick note on pricing and models:
Apple Watch Series 10 Aluminum (42mm): $399USD Apple Watch Series 10 Aluminum (46mm): $429USD Apple Watch Ultra (Titanium): $799USD (Cellular Included)
If you want the cellular editions, they are:
Apple Watch Series 10 Aluminum (42mm cellular): $499 Apple Watch Series 10 Aluminum (46mm cellular): $529 Apple Watch Series 10 Titanium (42mm cellular): $699 Apple Watch Series 10 Titanium (46mm cellular): $749
Note that for the Apple Watch Ultra editions, you can choose from three included stock bands (all of which are quite good), and in the case of the base Apple Watch Series 10 editions, you also get quite a bit more flexibility than I’d realized. That includes not just the base silicon bands, but even fabric ones too – all for that $399 price point.
Ok, with that, let’s get into the fun stuff.
The Hardware Differences:
For this section, I’m going to focus on the hardware pieces first. And again, some of these are huge, some of them are small, and a lot of them are just half-way in between.
– Ultra 2 has a 49mm case size, Series 10 has a 42mm and 46mm case size
– Ultra 2 stock case is titanium, whereas Series 10 base case is aluminum (and Series 10 Titanium is $699)
– Ultra 2 has dedicated ‘Action’ button for dedicated quick actions
– Ultra 2 has ‘Precision Start’ for workout modes, versus 3-second countdown in Series 10
– Ultra 2 has cellular built-in all models, whereas Series 10 only in certain models
– Ultra 2 gets ~2 days battery life, Series 10 gets ~1 day (or 36hrs vs 72hrs in low power mode)
– Ultra 2 has GPS battery life of 12+ hours, Series 10 is 7 hours
– Ultra 2 has depth gauge to 40m/131ft, Series 10 to only 6m/20ft
– Ultra 2 hs depth gauge certified for scuba diving (and meets EN13319 standard), Series 10 does not
– Ultra 2 has water resistance to 100m, versus 50m for Series 10
– Ultra 2 has 86dB emergency siren, Series 10 does not
– Ultra 2 has multiband/dual-frequency GPS/GNSS, Series 10 has regular GPS/GNSS
– Ultra 2 has the S9 SIP (chipset), whereas Series 10 has the S10 SIP
– Ultra 2 has three microphones, versus Series 10 has one microphone
– Ultra 2 has dual speakers, Series 10 has a single speaker (but there’s no audible difference in my tests)
– Ultra 2 has sapphire crystal display, and Series 10 base has Ion-X glass, though Series 10 Titanium has sapphire crystal
– Ultra 2 display max brightness is 3,000 nits, Series 10 max brightness is 2,000 nits
– Ultra 2 has a LTPO2 OLED display, Series 10 has LTPO3 OLED display
– Ultra 2 has a fully flat screen display top, whereas Series 10 has glass curves on edges
– Ultra 2 case weight is 61.4g/61.8g (natural/black), versus 36.4-41g (46mm), and 29.3-344g (42mm)
– Ultra 2 case thickness is 14.4mm, versus 9.7mm for Series 10
– Ultra 2 case has button guard around Digital Crown & Button, Series 10 does not
– Ultra 2 has been validated to MIL-STD 810H standards, Series 10 has not
– Ultra 2 has a ceramic & sapphire crystal back case, Series 10 has a metal and sapphire crystal back case
– Ultra 2 Black has protective DLC coating on the titanium, whereas neither Ultra 2 (original) nor Series 10 has DLC
– Ultra 2 fast charges to 80% in 1 hour, but Series 10 does 80% in 30 minutes
Most of these are self-explanatory, but a few might need some additional explanation/expansion:
– Chipset: S9 SIP vs S10 SIP: Today, practically speaking, this has absolutely zero difference in functionality between the two units. Speed is identical, and even Apple will say these act the same. However, it wouldn’t take much to imagine a case where in 2025, Apple rolls out some new Apple AI feature to watches that might only work on the S10 or future S11 chipset. But as always, don’t buy a watch for future promises, and in this case, don’t buy a watch for something Apple hasn’t even talked about.
– 1 Mic vs 3 Mics: Interestingly, this ties into the one above it. In the case of the Series 10 it uses that S10 SIP to do audio voice isolation during calls from the watch with one microphone. Whereas in the Ultra edition, it does that at a hardware level with the three microphones. End result is the same, just different ways of doing it.
– 1 Speaker vs 2 Speakers: The Series 10 got an upgraded speaker setup this year, including the ability to playback music. However, despite only having 1 speaker, it’s just as loud as the Ultra 2 in my side-by-side tests. I noticed no difference in quality either.
– Multiband/Dual-Frequency GPS vs Regular GPS: There’s nobody that will dive into GPS accuracy testing as deeply (or stupidly) as I do. Yet thus far, I’m not seeing any meaningful difference between the two models in real-world tests. Undoubtedly, there may/will be some situations that multiband handles better, but even in some tall building tests and cliff tests, I haven’t had any issues with the Series 10 accuracy. As we’ve seen over the last few years, antenna design and firmware/algorithms can and will often beat less sophisticated multiband setups. Both Apple and Garmin have proven this time and time again.
– LTPO OLED Display differences: The new LTPO3 OLED on the Series 10 has a better off-angle viewing angle than older/past units (especially Series 4/5/6 units), but you’d be very hard pressed to see any real-world difference between Ultra 2 and Series 10. You can see this below. Additionally, while the Ultra 2 has a 3,000 nit display versus the 2,000 nit display on the Series 10, both are well beyond overkill for even the brightness of sunny days.
Looking at the screen, this is where you get into the nitty gritty detailed differences. Apple noted in their keynote that the Series 10 has ‘the largest active display area ever’ on a watch. And that’s true. But only just barely. It’s technically got a 3% larger ‘Active’ display area, with ‘Active’ being the most important word here. That’s specifically talking about the portion of the display that the watch can leverage and light up. Obviously, 3% isn’t really noticeable per se.
The official dimensions for the units are:
Series 10 (42mm): 374 by 446 pixels (989 sq mm display area) Series 10 (46mm): 416 by 496 pixels (1220 sq mm display area) Ultra 2 (49mm): 410 by 502 pixels (1185 sq mm display area)
In the video I have approximately 1 million shots of the two side by side from all angles. Literally, that’s the entire video.
When it comes to battery life, the TLDR is the Ultra 2 will get you 2 days, whereas the Series 10 will get you 1 day. At least in normal smartwatch mode. It’s as simple as that. But the more important piece is the differences in GPS battery life. Here’s the specs per Apple:
Apple Watch Series 10: 7 hours outdoors GPS (they don’t publish low power claims/specs)
Apple Watch Ultra 2: 12 hours outdoors GPS, 17 hours low power GPS, 35 hours outdoor GPS lower power + fewer readings
In my testing, these specs do indeed hold up. In fact, I’ve consistently gotten better results in my testing than Apple’s specs. Not by much, but slightly. For the Series 10, I’m getting closer to 8 hours of GPS time, and for the Ultra 2, I was in the 14hr+ range even without turning on low-power GPS.
The Software Differences:
There are very few differences here, but there are a couple:
– Ultra 2 has Modular watch face, Series 10 does not
– Ultra 2 watch face has night mode (goes to a red coloring), Series 10 does not
– Ultra 2 allows up to 7 data fields per sport mode setting, whereas Series 10 allows 6. Note this includes the time in the upper right corner
– Ultra 2 has Precision Start (using the Action button), though I’d argue that’s a software feature and not really a hardware feature, hence why I’m including it in both places
And…that’s it. Virtually everything else is identical.
Things That Are the Same:
One could basically surmise that everything else is the same, and that’s essentially true. Nonetheless, I want to call many of these out, just to illustrate that they are indeed, the same:
– Both run WatchOS 11
– Both have features like DoubleTap
– Both have offline Siri introduced with the S9 chipset
– Both have the same optical HR sensor
– Both have Blood Oxygen capability enabled if bought outside US
– Both have Blood Oxygen capability disabled if bought inside the US
– Both have ECG, Sleep Apnea features, wrist temperature, and all other health metrics
– Both have all the same sport modes (as listed in the Workout app)
– Both can do snorkeling via the Depth gauge (and Oceanic+ app), but only Ultra 2 does diving
– Both have the Compass app, Backtrack, Offline Maps, etc (these are all WatchOS features)
– Both can play back music on their speakers (at seemingly identical dB levels in testing)
– Both have a minimum display brightness of 1 nit
– Both have 64GB of internal storage
– Both have a 4-core Neural engine (S9 for Ultra 2, S10 for Series 10)
– Both have a water temperature sensor
– Both units come with a wide variety of stock/base bands, even fabric ones as default options
Got all that? Good.
For those asking my preference between the two, the answer is relatively simple: The Apple Watch Ultra 2 (Black). The reasoning is also simple: I just want the battery to last longer, and wearing the Ultra 2 means it lasts basically two days for me, versus barely making it a single day on the regular Apple Watch Editions. Everything else is just minor differences to my personal needs.
With that, thanks for reading!
Found This Post Useful? Support The Site!
At the end of the day, I’m an athlete just like you looking for the most detail possible on a new purchase. These posts generally take a lot of time to put together, so if you're shopping for the Apple Watch Series 10, Apple Watch Ultra 2 Black or Apple Watch Ultra 2 or any other accessory items, please consider using the affiliate links below! As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. It doesn’t cost you anything extra, but your purchases help support this website a lot.
And of course – you can always sign-up to be a DCR Supporter! That gets you an ad-free DCR, access to the DCR Quarantine Corner video series packed with behind the scenes tidbits...and it also makes you awesome. And being awesome is what it’s all about!
A lot of people who use these for sports or outdoors will want the titanium 10 with tougher screen and the price difference between that and the Ultra is $100. Makes it a tougher decision.
I agree. If you’re gentle with watches, then S10 Aluminum is the way to go for most people not needing multi-day usage (if you can get to a charger for 30min, including off a battery pack or car, they are the same). But, if you want the sapphire screen (more useful to me than Titanium even), you’re $100 difference. If you want LTE, and don’t care about Titanium, it’s a $200 difference, and Amazon had the U2 for $730 a few days ago. On Black Friday, the U2 price could go down to 679. Then it gets closer. For me, though, the weight and bulk of the Ultra is an issue. Even for running, I like something light and low profile. So it’s S10 for me.
I do something similar atm. An S9 for sleeping and a S10 throughout the day.
For the price of an AWU or an Enduro 3, cheaper than the new Fenix 8.
But oh boy, it is cumbersome to do so for me at a mental level. Just having one watch is less mental load. Just if Garmin would have motorcycle incident detection…
I just don’t understand the software difference between these two, the screen size and hardware are practically the same and therefore no reason for the differences.
Software differences are a watch face and number of fields which have to do with the flatness of the screen on the Ultra. I much prefer it to the curved screen of the 10 and below for reasons like that as well as being easier to tap when moving. That and precision start which uses the action button are really hardware and software differences.
> That and precision start which uses the action button are really hardware and software differences.
Except Precision Start doesn’t actually use the action button. Precision Start just means that when you select an activity in the workout app, it’s initially paused, as opposed to starting automatically after a 3 second countdown. Whether you use the action button to open the Workout app (and optionally open an activity in the app) is independent of whether you choose to use Precision Start.
Clearly Apple wants Precision Start to be an AW Ultra-only feature to differentiate the Ultra from the other models
> I just don’t understand the software difference between these two, the screen size and hardware are practically the same and therefore no reason for the differences.
They want to give you additional reasons to buy the more expensive watch (or to rationalize your purchase after the fact). Simple as.
I might just go back and read the reviews as I don’t see the need for the 10 titanium with cellular if a consumer can get the ultra for $50 more given the technical enhancements it has over the 10.
This is a tough one. I like the big flat screen on the Ultra when hiking or road bike riding which are the only two activities I monitor. I’m surprised there is little to no GPS difference. I do like the much brighter screen on the Ultra for outdoor activities. Can you see a difference between the ultra and 10 outdoors for screen brightness? I had the Ultra 1 and did see a difference in brightness between it and the 2. But a thin light titanium 10 is appealing too now that the screen is bigger than the 9.
Yup, it’s somewhere with DHL, set to be delivered I think tomorrow. I’ve got some dumb adventure ideas planned for next week, into backcountry realm, to try it out.
As an avid runner, what is the best watch for a runner? Could you demonstrate all the various running features of the watch that would be beneficial and compare?
For me as a runner the action button is something i can’t do without. Doing repeats without a proper lap button is just an exercise in frustration.
If not for that the AW10 would probably be a better fit. I don’t run longer than marathons so the smaller battery isn’t an issue.
Apple still hasn’t expanded map coverage on watch by much. Only USA parks from maps. None of the rest of the world or even footpaths outside of USA parks. Will we ever see anything like Garmin provides???
You might want to upgrade and take another look. After I installed WatchOS 11/iOS 18/macOS 15, I checked Maps and to my surprise there were trails. (I live near a big Pennsylvania state forest, and there are plenty of actual trails.) There are weird things missing (most smaller loops and connector trails), but it’s an improvement over the way it was before, with absolutely no trails. Except for one small patch in my area, there still aren’t any topo lines, but they do use relief shading elsewhere.
As of this morning (September 19), Amazon is selling the Ultra 2 with the original titanium case (not black) and a choice of several straps for $689. (MacConnection actually has it at $649, but only with a S/M trail loop.) Hope this helps some of you (including Ray — with the right links inserted…).
Thanks Ray! I’m very interested in any info you could share (perhaps in your upcoming Ultra 2 Black review) on:
– When should we expect other app developers besides Oceanic to release scuba dive computer apps for AW Ultra? I’d love one with a more customizable UI to show the same things I can see on my Shearwater Teric’s main screen, including persistent digital compass.
– Is scuba air integration on Apple’s roadmap? It would be great to learn that the hardware is already in existing AW Ultras to work with the industry-standard PPS transmitter used by AquaLung, Shearwater, Oceanic, etc. dive computers, just waiting to be enabled in software. Or maybe this could be added to the AW Ultra 3.
– How feasible would it be to add satellite emergency messaging (as on latest iPhones) to Apple Watch? Do antenna size and transmit power limitations mean it will never happen? Or could it be enabled in future AW models? This would be a killer feature.
Nope. There’s really no mainstream watch that’s doing that accurately today, per the FDA.
Samsung added it for some countries on some of their watches, but can’t gain FDA approval, as it’s not accurate enough. In my testing, I found the same. Mostly hot-mess material.
Interesting and thanks for the comparison. One little surprise was t your mention that you’re getting better battery life in GPS tracking mode. This doesn’t align with your primary review of the Ultra 2: “ In looking at my data, I’d say the battery burn rates for my activities are in line with the estimates for normal usage. I haven’t re-tested all of the different low-power scenarios on the Apple Watch Ultra 2, but have plans to do so over the coming weeks.”.
Only calling it out as your review directly influenced the watch I ended up buying (not the Ultra 2!) based on that comment… do you track this sort of data in a table anywhere?
What’s the sampling rate for RHR on Apple Watches (any of them) these days? I have an old S4 which samples erratically, meaning when I wear it my phone says there’s an uptick in my RHR compared to when it gets the data from Garmin Connect (and my FR745).
I don’t know how often it samples, but the recording rate is still pretty erratic. I checked yesterday’s data in Health from my Ultra. I wear it for sleep tracking, so during sleep it seems to record once every two minutes, although there were twice a minute recordings and larger gaps interspersed. After I woke up there’s one big 18 minute gap during the time I was walking the dog (so you’d think the watch would pick up on the activity and record faster). Then I popped the watch on its charger and did a ride in Zwift (the weather has been lousy this week), so subsequent data is marked as coming from Garmin. Data is more closely spaced, some twice a minute, some once a minute, nothing worse. After I put the Ultra back on, it again becomes erratic, 3-6 minute gaps become common, and one 16 minute gap when I was walking the dog again. There doesn’t seem to be any pattern.
Thanks Paul! That’s interesting. I recently found an article that explained the way the 4 big companies measure resting heart rate. I’ve known for a long time that Garmin show you the lowest possible average for 30 mins in a 24 hour period, so in my case it shows 42 give or take a few beats and usually it shows me that first thing in the morning. If I wear the Apple Watch for a few days, it gives me something in the low 50‘s (and warns me of an “abnormally low rate” ~39).
It seems the Apple Watch hasn’t changed that logic, so would continue to read higher.
Interesting.
I’ve been sleep tracking with the Ultra for about 7 months now, and I almost always get a “Low Heart Rate” notification in the morning. I should really set the minimum below 40, but it’s interesting when they occur (usually close to when I get up, but not always), so I haven’t.
I haven’t much experience with Garmin’s HR tracking outside of activities, since I don’t often wear my Epix 2 outside of recording actual activities with it, where it’s 1 per second. This morning I did wear my Epix for a couple of hours while my Ultra charged, and on Connect it looks as if it’s recording once every 2 minutes. But with such little data it’s hard to say more.
I think 40 is the lower bound for low heart rate tracking (I may be wrong)? It’s always surprising and interesting when that happens. With the Garmin I can never see what the lowest HR was… about 10 years ago I slept with a chest strap on one night when I got a polar M400 to see what that looked like. I went down to 37.
Very surprised that your epix only seems to record every couple of minutes (assuming it’s a modern epix, not the square one from way back when) I thought all modern Garmins had continuous recording. Actually, now I looked closely at Connect and Apple Heath, you’re right it does seem to put readings in 2 minute buckets. Interesting, I learnt something today. Thanks!
I thought I saw someplace in Health where you could change that from 40. Ah, there it is, in the Watch app on my iPhone you can change it, but no lower than 40. The other options are 45, 50, and off. So I guess it remains at 40.
The original Epix (I have one) didn’t have a built in HR sensor. (If Garmin made a modern Fenix or Epix without an HR monitor, it’d probably be the one I get, since I have other HR monitors.) What I don’t know about the Epix or the Ultra is how often it’s actually taking a reading, but it doesn’t seem to be recording all of those readings. During an activity, sure, the Epix is recording at 1 s intervals (again, it may be reading faster than that), but not during down times, apparently.
My Epix Gen 2 (non-pro) appears to take ‘general’ HR much more frequently: I have HR as one of the complications/data fields on the watch face and it updates every ~1s or so.
But I don’t know whether all of these HR data points are a) recorded and b) taken into account for any of Garmin’s metrics.
I ordered the Apple Watch 10 in titanium with the metal band. But when I went inside the Apple Store to pick it up I was walking by the watches and was stunned how much better the Ultra 2 looks in person. It makes the Apple Watch 10 look very cheap. I immediately cancelled my order and got the ultra 2 instead. It’s so much more masculine and was actually cheaper with the Milanese band vs the metal band for the Apple Watch 10. It’s not close seeing these two side by side in person!
Would love to know if the Ultra handles temperature differences with HR any better than the Series 10. I have a Series 8 and it does not like to pick up my HR once the temp gets below about 3C – and living in Canada, that’s a decent part of the year, especially if you workout in the early morning.
It also seems to me like the Ultra has a more reflective screen – but I could be wrong?
Lastly, for the love of god, please tell me they’ve added some sort of speed metric – not just HR and calories – to cross-country skiing mode (these California developers are killing me)! And a MTB-specific mode – effort, calories are way different than when you ride a road or gravel bike.
I have an (original) Ultra with WatchOS 11. The default first page in the XC ski profile in Workout is time, distance, calories, HR. Second is rings (wtf?), third is some kind of split page for “laps”, which at least has speed, and fourth looks like page with elevation. Just playing around with WorkOut (which I never use) it looks like there’s now a way to do some customization, so you can change the pages, include speed, and get rid of calories. But I’ll be using my Epix 2 as usual if we get enough snow for me to ski this winter.
No special modes for gravel or MTB, just “Outdoor Ride”.
Ultra 2 is a much much more versatile watch for active/athletic folks. There is no watch like it. I run 30 miles a week, row, surf etc etc. The bigger flatter display can’t be beat. The chunkier more prolific buttons on side are worth the money when trying to do things with it while in motion. The display quality is way better. For people saying “battery life” only deltas you should do a physical compare at a store. You may not go with the ultra but you will clearly see why it’s more money.
I thought the same and bought one (could t try it on in store b/c a 3rd party reseller). I immediately hated it because it was too heavy and big for my arm. For context, I’m 5’7” and not particularly small-boned. I’ve had heavy watches in the past (Suunto Ambit, old Garmins) and ended up having to get rid of them because they rubbed on my wristbone and caused abrasions. So keep that in mind for smaller wrists – I never would have thought it was an issue, but it was a dealbreaker for me, despite the other benefits.
I swim, bike and run. Then, I come here and write about my adventures. It’s as simple as that. Most of the time. If you’re new around these parts, here’s the long version of my story.
You'll support the site, and get ad-free DCR! Plus, you'll be more awesome. Click above for all the details. Oh, and you can sign-up for the newsletter here!
Here’s how to save!
Wanna save some cash and support the site? These companies help support the site! With Backcountry.com or Competitive Cyclist with either the coupon code DCRAINMAKER for first time users saving 15% on applicable products.
You can also pick-up tons of gear at REI via these links, which is a long-time supporter as well:
Alternatively, for everything else on the planet, simply buy your goods from Amazon via the link below and I get a tiny bit back as an Amazon Associate. No cost to you, easy as pie!
You can use the above link for any Amazon country and it (should) automatically redirect to your local Amazon site.
Want to compare the features of each product, down to the nitty-gritty? No problem, the product comparison data is constantly updated with new products and new features added to old products!
Wanna create comparison chart graphs just like I do for GPS, heart rate, power meters and more? No problem, here's the platform I use - you can too!
Think my written reviews are deep? You should check out my videos. I take things to a whole new level of interactive depth!
Smart Trainers Buyers Guide: Looking at a smart trainer this winter? I cover all the units to buy (and avoid) for indoor training. The good, the bad, and the ugly.
Check out
my weekly podcast - with DesFit, which is packed with both gadget and non-gadget goodness!
Get all your awesome DC Rainmaker gear here!
FAQ’s
I have built an extensive list of my most frequently asked questions. Below are the most popular.
You probably stumbled upon here looking for a review of a sports gadget. If you’re trying to decide which unit to buy – check out my in-depth reviews section. Some reviews are over 60 pages long when printed out, with hundreds of photos! I aim to leave no stone unturned.
I travel a fair bit, both for work and for fun. Here’s a bunch of random trip reports and daily trip-logs that I’ve put together and posted. I’ve sorted it all by world geography, in an attempt to make it easy to figure out where I’ve been.
The most common question I receive outside of the “what’s the best GPS watch for me” variant, are photography-esq based. So in efforts to combat the amount of emails I need to sort through on a daily basis, I’ve complied this “My Photography Gear” post for your curious minds (including drones & action cams!)! It’s a nice break from the day-to-day sports-tech talk, and I hope you get something out of it!
Many readers stumble into my website in search of information on the latest and greatest sports tech products. But at the end of the day, you might just be wondering “What does Ray use when not testing new products?”. So here is the most up to date list of products I like and fit the bill for me and my training needs best! DC Rainmaker 2023 swim, bike, run, and general gear list. But wait, are you a female and feel like these things might not apply to you? If that’s the case (but certainly not saying my choices aren’t good for women), and you just want to see a different gear junkies “picks”, check out The Girl’s Gear Guide too.
Ray, you are absolutely the best! Thank you.
Excellent comparison!
Thanks Ray.
This is the post/video I had been waiting for. For me, I think the price difference is too big for an extra days battery life.
A lot of people who use these for sports or outdoors will want the titanium 10 with tougher screen and the price difference between that and the Ultra is $100. Makes it a tougher decision.
I agree. If you’re gentle with watches, then S10 Aluminum is the way to go for most people not needing multi-day usage (if you can get to a charger for 30min, including off a battery pack or car, they are the same). But, if you want the sapphire screen (more useful to me than Titanium even), you’re $100 difference. If you want LTE, and don’t care about Titanium, it’s a $200 difference, and Amazon had the U2 for $730 a few days ago. On Black Friday, the U2 price could go down to 679. Then it gets closer. For me, though, the weight and bulk of the Ultra is an issue. Even for running, I like something light and low profile. So it’s S10 for me.
Yea, I’ll buy two ten instead one ultra.. same battery capacity and two watches
I do something similar atm. An S9 for sleeping and a S10 throughout the day.
For the price of an AWU or an Enduro 3, cheaper than the new Fenix 8.
But oh boy, it is cumbersome to do so for me at a mental level. Just having one watch is less mental load. Just if Garmin would have motorcycle incident detection…
I just don’t understand the software difference between these two, the screen size and hardware are practically the same and therefore no reason for the differences.
Software differences are a watch face and number of fields which have to do with the flatness of the screen on the Ultra. I much prefer it to the curved screen of the 10 and below for reasons like that as well as being easier to tap when moving. That and precision start which uses the action button are really hardware and software differences.
> That and precision start which uses the action button are really hardware and software differences.
Except Precision Start doesn’t actually use the action button. Precision Start just means that when you select an activity in the workout app, it’s initially paused, as opposed to starting automatically after a 3 second countdown. Whether you use the action button to open the Workout app (and optionally open an activity in the app) is independent of whether you choose to use Precision Start.
Clearly Apple wants Precision Start to be an AW Ultra-only feature to differentiate the Ultra from the other models
> I just don’t understand the software difference between these two, the screen size and hardware are practically the same and therefore no reason for the differences.
They want to give you additional reasons to buy the more expensive watch (or to rationalize your purchase after the fact). Simple as.
I have never figured out the logic behind the countdown for starting runs. it seems asinine.
Some people like the precision either way. It’s not complicated. I don’t care myself.
Thank you for confirming offline maps is a WatchOS feature and not an Ultra 2-only feature. Just saved me from upgrading my SE2.
Pricing. 6 variations of 10, one of ultra? Not that I’m going to buy one, or that I know the apple.ecosystem. Just stood out to me.
Correct, just one price for Ultra ($799). You can get different bands, but same unit just two color options.
I might just go back and read the reviews as I don’t see the need for the 10 titanium with cellular if a consumer can get the ultra for $50 more given the technical enhancements it has over the 10.
The Ultra comes in one size, two colors, and all have cellular so not much reason for a lot of different models.
This is a tough one. I like the big flat screen on the Ultra when hiking or road bike riding which are the only two activities I monitor. I’m surprised there is little to no GPS difference. I do like the much brighter screen on the Ultra for outdoor activities. Can you see a difference between the ultra and 10 outdoors for screen brightness? I had the Ultra 1 and did see a difference in brightness between it and the 2. But a thin light titanium 10 is appealing too now that the screen is bigger than the 9.
Are you planning a review of the new in reach messenger plus?
Yup, it’s somewhere with DHL, set to be delivered I think tomorrow. I’ve got some dumb adventure ideas planned for next week, into backcountry realm, to try it out.
So you have not tested the M+ before official release?
Nope, nobody had.
Looking at the video the Ultra 2 doesn’t look as black as i would like it and doesn’t seem even? Like some areas a little lighter than others?
It depends how the light reflects on it, but it’s about as black as Apple makes products, which means it always has that hint of grey/etc to it.
As an avid runner, what is the best watch for a runner? Could you demonstrate all the various running features of the watch that would be beneficial and compare?
The running features are identical between them, save getting a single extra data field on the screen on the Ultra.
So essentially, if you need more than 7-8hrs of GPS battery life, you’d want Ultra.
For me as a runner the action button is something i can’t do without. Doing repeats without a proper lap button is just an exercise in frustration.
If not for that the AW10 would probably be a better fit. I don’t run longer than marathons so the smaller battery isn’t an issue.
Apple still hasn’t expanded map coverage on watch by much. Only USA parks from maps. None of the rest of the world or even footpaths outside of USA parks. Will we ever see anything like Garmin provides???
You might want to upgrade and take another look. After I installed WatchOS 11/iOS 18/macOS 15, I checked Maps and to my surprise there were trails. (I live near a big Pennsylvania state forest, and there are plenty of actual trails.) There are weird things missing (most smaller loops and connector trails), but it’s an improvement over the way it was before, with absolutely no trails. Except for one small patch in my area, there still aren’t any topo lines, but they do use relief shading elsewhere.
Is there an dc rainmaker open house this winter?
I keep looking at the Ultra 2 as I Love the watch faces but now with the watch 10 out I hope with its large screen it will get similar faces.
Does the Ultra 2 have air integration for scuba diving?
As of this morning (September 19), Amazon is selling the Ultra 2 with the original titanium case (not black) and a choice of several straps for $689. (MacConnection actually has it at $649, but only with a S/M trail loop.) Hope this helps some of you (including Ray — with the right links inserted…).
Why spend so much on a titanium 10 when you can spend $50 more and just get the ultra?
Ultra 1 can be had for a price of AW10. How AW10 and AWU1 compare?
Thanks Ray! I’m very interested in any info you could share (perhaps in your upcoming Ultra 2 Black review) on:
– When should we expect other app developers besides Oceanic to release scuba dive computer apps for AW Ultra? I’d love one with a more customizable UI to show the same things I can see on my Shearwater Teric’s main screen, including persistent digital compass.
– Is scuba air integration on Apple’s roadmap? It would be great to learn that the hardware is already in existing AW Ultras to work with the industry-standard PPS transmitter used by AquaLung, Shearwater, Oceanic, etc. dive computers, just waiting to be enabled in software. Or maybe this could be added to the AW Ultra 3.
– How feasible would it be to add satellite emergency messaging (as on latest iPhones) to Apple Watch? Do antenna size and transmit power limitations mean it will never happen? Or could it be enabled in future AW models? This would be a killer feature.
So, no blood pressure for any of those?
Nope. There’s really no mainstream watch that’s doing that accurately today, per the FDA.
Samsung added it for some countries on some of their watches, but can’t gain FDA approval, as it’s not accurate enough. In my testing, I found the same. Mostly hot-mess material.
Interesting and thanks for the comparison. One little surprise was t your mention that you’re getting better battery life in GPS tracking mode. This doesn’t align with your primary review of the Ultra 2: “ In looking at my data, I’d say the battery burn rates for my activities are in line with the estimates for normal usage. I haven’t re-tested all of the different low-power scenarios on the Apple Watch Ultra 2, but have plans to do so over the coming weeks.”.
Only calling it out as your review directly influenced the watch I ended up buying (not the Ultra 2!) based on that comment… do you track this sort of data in a table anywhere?
Brilliant site as always, keep up the good work 👍
What’s the sampling rate for RHR on Apple Watches (any of them) these days? I have an old S4 which samples erratically, meaning when I wear it my phone says there’s an uptick in my RHR compared to when it gets the data from Garmin Connect (and my FR745).
I don’t know how often it samples, but the recording rate is still pretty erratic. I checked yesterday’s data in Health from my Ultra. I wear it for sleep tracking, so during sleep it seems to record once every two minutes, although there were twice a minute recordings and larger gaps interspersed. After I woke up there’s one big 18 minute gap during the time I was walking the dog (so you’d think the watch would pick up on the activity and record faster). Then I popped the watch on its charger and did a ride in Zwift (the weather has been lousy this week), so subsequent data is marked as coming from Garmin. Data is more closely spaced, some twice a minute, some once a minute, nothing worse. After I put the Ultra back on, it again becomes erratic, 3-6 minute gaps become common, and one 16 minute gap when I was walking the dog again. There doesn’t seem to be any pattern.
Thanks Paul! That’s interesting. I recently found an article that explained the way the 4 big companies measure resting heart rate. I’ve known for a long time that Garmin show you the lowest possible average for 30 mins in a 24 hour period, so in my case it shows 42 give or take a few beats and usually it shows me that first thing in the morning. If I wear the Apple Watch for a few days, it gives me something in the low 50‘s (and warns me of an “abnormally low rate” ~39).
It seems the Apple Watch hasn’t changed that logic, so would continue to read higher.
Interesting.
I’ve been sleep tracking with the Ultra for about 7 months now, and I almost always get a “Low Heart Rate” notification in the morning. I should really set the minimum below 40, but it’s interesting when they occur (usually close to when I get up, but not always), so I haven’t.
I haven’t much experience with Garmin’s HR tracking outside of activities, since I don’t often wear my Epix 2 outside of recording actual activities with it, where it’s 1 per second. This morning I did wear my Epix for a couple of hours while my Ultra charged, and on Connect it looks as if it’s recording once every 2 minutes. But with such little data it’s hard to say more.
I think 40 is the lower bound for low heart rate tracking (I may be wrong)? It’s always surprising and interesting when that happens. With the Garmin I can never see what the lowest HR was… about 10 years ago I slept with a chest strap on one night when I got a polar M400 to see what that looked like. I went down to 37.
Very surprised that your epix only seems to record every couple of minutes (assuming it’s a modern epix, not the square one from way back when) I thought all modern Garmins had continuous recording. Actually, now I looked closely at Connect and Apple Heath, you’re right it does seem to put readings in 2 minute buckets. Interesting, I learnt something today. Thanks!
I thought I saw someplace in Health where you could change that from 40. Ah, there it is, in the Watch app on my iPhone you can change it, but no lower than 40. The other options are 45, 50, and off. So I guess it remains at 40.
The original Epix (I have one) didn’t have a built in HR sensor. (If Garmin made a modern Fenix or Epix without an HR monitor, it’d probably be the one I get, since I have other HR monitors.) What I don’t know about the Epix or the Ultra is how often it’s actually taking a reading, but it doesn’t seem to be recording all of those readings. During an activity, sure, the Epix is recording at 1 s intervals (again, it may be reading faster than that), but not during down times, apparently.
My Epix Gen 2 (non-pro) appears to take ‘general’ HR much more frequently: I have HR as one of the complications/data fields on the watch face and it updates every ~1s or so.
But I don’t know whether all of these HR data points are a) recorded and b) taken into account for any of Garmin’s metrics.
Hi Ray,
I have noticed on my Apple Watch Ultra 2 often it loses the heart rate. Have you received any similar comments. Any suggestions. Thanks
Subscribe
This guide is exactly what I was looking for.
I ordered the Apple Watch 10 in titanium with the metal band. But when I went inside the Apple Store to pick it up I was walking by the watches and was stunned how much better the Ultra 2 looks in person. It makes the Apple Watch 10 look very cheap. I immediately cancelled my order and got the ultra 2 instead. It’s so much more masculine and was actually cheaper with the Milanese band vs the metal band for the Apple Watch 10. It’s not close seeing these two side by side in person!
Would love to know if the Ultra handles temperature differences with HR any better than the Series 10. I have a Series 8 and it does not like to pick up my HR once the temp gets below about 3C – and living in Canada, that’s a decent part of the year, especially if you workout in the early morning.
It also seems to me like the Ultra has a more reflective screen – but I could be wrong?
Lastly, for the love of god, please tell me they’ve added some sort of speed metric – not just HR and calories – to cross-country skiing mode (these California developers are killing me)! And a MTB-specific mode – effort, calories are way different than when you ride a road or gravel bike.
I have an (original) Ultra with WatchOS 11. The default first page in the XC ski profile in Workout is time, distance, calories, HR. Second is rings (wtf?), third is some kind of split page for “laps”, which at least has speed, and fourth looks like page with elevation. Just playing around with WorkOut (which I never use) it looks like there’s now a way to do some customization, so you can change the pages, include speed, and get rid of calories. But I’ll be using my Epix 2 as usual if we get enough snow for me to ski this winter.
No special modes for gravel or MTB, just “Outdoor Ride”.
Ultra2 looks best to me
Ultra 2 is a much much more versatile watch for active/athletic folks. There is no watch like it. I run 30 miles a week, row, surf etc etc. The bigger flatter display can’t be beat. The chunkier more prolific buttons on side are worth the money when trying to do things with it while in motion. The display quality is way better. For people saying “battery life” only deltas you should do a physical compare at a store. You may not go with the ultra but you will clearly see why it’s more money.
I thought the same and bought one (could t try it on in store b/c a 3rd party reseller). I immediately hated it because it was too heavy and big for my arm. For context, I’m 5’7” and not particularly small-boned. I’ve had heavy watches in the past (Suunto Ambit, old Garmins) and ended up having to get rid of them because they rubbed on my wristbone and caused abrasions. So keep that in mind for smaller wrists – I never would have thought it was an issue, but it was a dealbreaker for me, despite the other benefits.
Great report! Sure helped me decide that I don’t really need all the Ultra 2 extras!