Garmin Fenix 8 vs Venu X1 vs Forerunner 970: Every Difference Compared!

The Venu X1 is, according to Garmin, the blend of a Forerunner 970, Fenix 8, and Venu 3 series device. They noted that it was the culmination of designing a device without being held to the norms/limits of a given model lineage (e.g. Forerunner or Fenix names). In the end, Garmin decided it needed to fall into one of the existing product families, thus earning the ‘Venu’ name, albeit, unlike any Venu/Vivoactive before it.

But in being this blend of three different devices, it can be confusing for consumers. Despite lacking a ‘Pro’ monitor (e.g. Venu Pro), it’s very much a pro-level Venu. It has virtually every feature of the Fenix 8, save a few. Thus, my goal here is to explain the differences, and in doing so, poured through more than 234 different settings/options/features, to figure out where they differ and where they align.

However, what’s probably the most notable thing here is that all three watch series now share the same codebase. As such, virtually every single setting is identical. That may sound logical/obvious, but that’s not at all how it was just a year ago – with Venu, Forerunner, and Fenix product teams all working from different sheets of music. As you might remember in my Forerunner 965 vs Garmin Epix comparison, it was mind-boggling how options/settings had different names, different components, etc… That’s all gone.

Which doesn’t mean there aren’t different features. After all, the Fenix 8 costs $200+ more than the others. But those features are toggled on specifically, such as Virtual Caddy in Golf, or an extra sport profile or two like Surfing or Duathlon. Sometimes, it’s extra hardware driving those enablements – such as is the case for diving and other high-speed watersports on the Fenix 8 (which has a higher water resistance rating, plus a depth sensor).

From a pricing standpoint you’ve got:

Forerunner 970: $749
Venu X1: $799
Fenix 8: $999+ (depending AMOLED/SOLAR/size/etc…)

In any case, let’s get into it.

(Note: In the case of all three watches, all three are using the latest public betas as of August 6th, 2025, which is the biggest consolidation of all these new features across all three watches. Otherwise, the software features wouldn’t account for the new features introduced on the FR970 & Venu X1. Garmin generally releases these public betas to production in the mid-to-late August timeframe.)

The Hardware Differences:

By far, the biggest differences between these watches is simply the hardware form factor. The Fenix 8 is the largest (no matter which size you get), while the Venu X1 is not only the smallest, but also the thinnest GPS watch Garmin has ever made. As one might guess, the larger the watch case, the larger the battery life. Though, aspects like the display size are inverted here, with the super-thin Venu X1 also has the largest wearable display Garmin makes today.

First up, let’s look at the case size options:

Forerunner 970: 47mm
Venu X1: 46mm
Fenix 8: 43mm, 47mm, and 51mm

Note that while I’m not comparing the Enduro 3 in this giant post, it’s basically treated as a Fenix 8 Solar-MIP unit in all software respects, with the only real differences being the lack of speaker/microphone, and lack of diving depth gauge. Otherwise, you can simply pretend it’s a cheaper Fenix 8 for $799.

Of course, each of those cases has a different weight (outlined in the chart below), but more importantly, with the Fenix specifically, there’s a gazillion different weight combinations based on which case materials and band and size you choose.

Next, from a display perspective, focused specifically on the AMOLED version:

Forerunner 970: 1.4” AMOLED display at 454x454px
Venu X1: 2” AMOLED display at 448x486px
Fenix 8: 1.4” AMOLED display at 454x454px (for the 47mm & 51mm, the 43mm is a 1.3” display)

As you can see, the display size is substantially bigger on the Venu X1. Note that all three units do support Garmin’s newish ‘Large Font Size’ option (you can enable it in the settings), which makes most of the watch user interface in bigger fonts – essentially to help those with more finely aged eyesight.

Now, in my usage of all three of these watches for extended periods of time, the single biggest factor here really is the battery. Sure, size and weight are a consideration, but the batter life gap between the Venu X1 and the others is huge. Specifically in that the Venu X1 (in an always-on configuration) barely squeaks into two days of battery life sometimes, despite turning down the settings (with with a few hours of GPS time per day). Likewise, on a 7hr hike this past weekend, I drained the battery from ~100% to 3%. This isn’t the watch you want for deep trekking.

Whereas for the Fenix 8 and Forerunner 970, they can hold their own for longer activities – for which I’ve done many upwards of 8-14 hours across those two watches, without any real issues. Sure, the FR970 gets less battery life, but it’s totally manageable for most scenarios, and the battery life claims hold up.

Now, part of the reason for these big differences is the newer display that Garmin is using on the Forerunner 970 & Venu X1. That display is substantially brighter than the Fenix 8 display (in terms of nits). Unfortunately, Garmin won’t disclose how many nits each display has (they are the only brand to not do this), but it’s largely assumed that the Fenix 8 display is a 1,000 nit display, and the Forerunner 970 & Venu X1 displays are likely 1,500-2,000 nit displays. Not, to be super-clear: There’s zero issues seeing either the Fenix 8 or FR970/Venu X1 displays in even the brightest of conditions. I live in the mediterranean on an island in bright sun conditions, it’s just factually not an issue.

Even on the lowest settings, the two newer watches are far brighter than the Fenix 8 on it’s default setting.

However, what’s ironic here is that due to Garmin’s haphazard implementation of display brightness on the Venu X1 & Forerunner 970, you can’t meaningfully turn down the brightness levels (to match that of the Fenix 8), and thus, it burns battery like crazy. Even setting it to the lowest brightness level (1/3rd), is barely different in terms of actual display brightness, and still brighter than the Fenix 8. Garmin has literally created a battery-life own-goal here by not allowing more user control. And in fact, it’s the single biggest reason I’d shy away from the Venu X1 right now (despite loving every other aspect of it).

Lastly, when it comes to the speaker, the Venu X1 is by far the loudest. I recorded myself on all three watches concurrently, and then played them back at max volume. The Fenix 8 was the quietest, followed a bit louder by the Forerunner 970, and then substantially louder was the Venu X1. Notably, in recent public beta firmware, the Forerunner 970 gained the Voice Notes feature.

Here’s a quick recap of the hardware differences:

Finally, while all three watches have Garmin’s latest optical heart rate sensor, the Garmin Elevate Gen5, it should be noted that the Venu X1 doesn’t have ECG hardware internals. I’ll cover that more in the next section around general features.

General/Daily Feature Differences:

When it comes to day to day differences (non-sports aspects), the three units are remarkably similar. Garmin has adopted slightly different user interface styling for each unit, owing to the company’s belief that a Fenix user wants a different UI than a Forerunner user and a different UI than a Venu user. However, for really the first time ever in Garmin’s history, the actual menus of all three devices are identical, even if the styling of the fonts/icons are slightly different.

For example, you can see this in the widget glances here, being slightly different, despite being identical in terms of the content (the Venu X1 has a more bubbly look, the Fenix 8 has a more industrial look, and the Forerunner 970 sorta splits the difference):

This in turn means that the features in most cases are identical as well, especially once Garmin publishes their Summer 2025 firmware update out of public beta and into production. That firmware update essentially merges the new features from the Venu X1 & Forerunner 970 onto the Fenix 8, and likewise, the pile of new Fenix 8 features into the Venu X1 & Forerunner 970. For example, you’ll find the new calculator app now on the Forerunner 970 & Venu X1, as with the other features like the new evening report:

Now, there are some minor differences that are driven by hardware that are worth mentioning. First is the biggie – there’s no ECG on the Venu X1. Despite having an Elevate Gen5 optical HR sensor, it lacks other hardware required to make ECG happen. First, is there’s no metal bezel to touch to complete the ‘current’ normally required for an ECG. While Garmin could have gotten around that by using the upper right button instead (as they did with the Venu 2 Plus for ECG), that would have increased components within the case substantially. Further, the Venu X1 then lacks the metal contacts on the underside of the sensor as well, also required for ECG. Point being, this isn’t going to be some software update to make it happen.

The next thing you might notice is that the flashlights are very slightly different. In the case of the Forerunner 970 & Fenix 8, there are two white LED’s and one red LED. These are used when you either double-tap (Fenix 8/FR970) or long-hold (Venu X1) to turn on the LED flashlight, and at the four white levels and 1 red level. Now, you may be wondering whether or not you’d notice a difference on the brightest white setting between the Venu X1 & the Forerunner 970/Fenix 8 (given it has half as many white LED’s)? The answer: Not really

Look, there’s obviously going to be more light coming out of the Fenix 8/Forerunner 970, but at no point in the last few months did it ever feel like I needed more light. We’re talking about a flashlight roughly akin to your phone’s flashlight, with the purpose generally for lighting up near-field stuff. And for many people, it’s often used on the lowest settings in the middle of the night, getting around houses/hotels/etc (where you don’t want to be blinded). Thus, while on paper there is some difference, in reality, you just can’t see it.

The last thing you’ll obviously notice is the lack of buttons on the Venu X1. It has two physical buttons, plus the touchscreen. Whereas the Forerunner & Fenix adopt Garmin’s standard 5-button layout. I’m genuinely surprised Garmin didn’t go with three buttons on the Venu X1 (as they have on their other Venu watches). The overwhelming trend in watches in recent years is adding buttons (see Samsung, Google, Apple, etc…) – not removing them. I suspect again, the ‘slim’ battle drove this decision. But it’s ultimately a key reason I’d choose the Forerunner or Fenix instead, I just want more buttons.

While Apple and Samsung both have their mid-tier watches with two buttons, it’s important to remember that second button is a Digital Crown (in Apple’s case), effectively acting as a third control interface. In any case, as for the Venu X1, I wouldn’t say that the two buttons was a problem per se, but rather, just my strong personal preference to have more buttons, especially for getting through menus and such, not been reliant on touch. I didn’t have any issues with any watch in wet/rainy weather conditions.

Beyond these points, virtually everything else is the same within the day to day usage of these watches.

Sport Feature Differences:

Perhaps no bigger beneficiary of the consolidated code base is the sports section. Previously, these product lines had countless little nuanced differences around how specific mapping, training, or sport profile features were implemented. Infuriating differences, but often only differences you’d find out the hard way.

Now, that’s all gone. In going through every single setting in every single menu, they’re identical.

Still, there are a handful of differences on which features they’ve enabled, starting specifically around sensor support. They are as follows:

Next, we get into the sport/workout activity profiles. All three watches have almost identical sets of sports profiles, except in two categories. First, all the stuff that’s the same:

Run, Walk, Hike, Track Run, Treadmill, Virtual Run, Indoor Track, Trail Run, Ultra Run, Adventure Race, Obstacle Racing, Triathlon, SwimRun, Bike, Bike Indoor, MTB, eMTB, Cyclocross, Road Bike, eBike, Gravel Bike, Bike Commute, Bike Tour, BMX, Pool Swim, Open Water, Strength, Cardio, Mobility, HIIT, Yoga, Pilates, Elliptical, Stair Stepper, Row Indoor, Walk Indoor, Climb Indoor, Floor Climb, Boxing, Mixed Martial Arts, Jump Rope, Ski, Snowboard, Backcountry Ski, Backcountry Snowboard, XC Classic Ski, XC Skate Ski, Snowshoe, Ice Skating, Snowmobile, SUP, Kayak, Row, Boat, Sail, Sail Expedition, Soccer/Football, American Football, Basketball, Baseball, Softball, Volleyball, Cricket, Lacrosse, Rugby, Field Hockey, Ice Hockey, Ultimate Disc, Gaming, Tennis, Pickleball, Padel, Racquetball, Squash, Badminton, Table Tennis, Platform Tennis, ATV, Overland, Motocross, Motorcycle, Rucking, Golf, Mountaineering, Bouldering, Fish, Hunt, Disc Golf, Horseback , Expedition, Archery, Inline Skating, Meditation, Breathwork, Track Me

And then, we’ve got the things that Garmin classifies as needing higher waterproofing levels (100m on the Fenix 8), which are unique to that watch:

Fenix 8 only: Sail Race, Surf, Kiteboard, Windsurf, Whitewater, Wakeboard, Wakesurf, Water Ski, Tube
*Note: FR970 does have Sail Race mode, but Venu X1 doesn’t.

Plus, the diving features that are unique to the Fenix 8 and it’s depth gauge:

Fenix 8 only: Snorkel, Scuba Dive, Apnea Dive
*Note: FR970 does have ‘Snorkel’ mode, but Venu X1 doesn’t.

Then, there are what I’ll classify as the outstanding oddballs.

Forerunner 970 has: Duathlon, Pool Triathlon, Brick (Venu X1/Fenix 8 don’t)
Fenix 8 has: Jumpmaster, Tempo Training (Golf mode)
Fenix 8 & Venu X1 have: Gaming (FR970 doesn’t)

When it comes to golfing, these are some differences to be aware of. The biggest one is that on the Venu X1 & Fenix 8, you get a much more detailed map of each hole, whereas the Forerunner 970 you just get the green:

Additionally, the Forerunner 970 lacks the PlaysLike, Virtual Caddie, and Wind Speed features (along with others). Here’s a full chart:

When it comes to all other sports general mapping and navigation features, all three watches are completely identical. Zero differences that I can find:

Lastly, it should be noted that the Venu X1 doesn’t have the custom Battery Manager modes that the Fenix & Forerunner have. Perhaps Garmin knows the battery on the Venu X1 is so crap (sorry, I meant ‘range limited’) that it ain’t gonna matter. Instead, they gave it a more basic ‘Battery Saver’ mode, that reminds you 25 times a day (starting around 48%) that you should turn it on.

Phew, got all that? Good, let’s start to wrap things up.

Accuracy Differences (GPS & Heart Rate):

The GPS and heart rate accuracy on all three watches is very similar, though obviously, they have substantially different antenna designs (and seemingly, different GPS chipsets). Most notably, the Venu X1 doesn’t have dual-frequency GNSS. That noted, as I’ve said for years, two things should be kept in mind:

1) I factually don’t care whether or not any GPS watch has dual-frequency, as long as it has equally good accuracy
2) Garmin’s non-dual-frequency watches from the last 3 years routinely beat almost all of it’s dual-frequency competitors, even in places like New York City

And, those two statements hold true with the Garmin Venu X1. Every bit of testing I’ve done in the mountains (French/Swiss Alps, Canadian Rockies, and Mallorca), dense trees, and downtown environments have shown virtually identical results. In fact, the only scenario where I’m seeing differing results is openwater swimming on the Forerunner 970 doesn’t seem to be as good as the Garmin Fenix 8 or Venu X1. It’s not horrible or anything, but just not picture-perfect.

Meanwhile, for heart rate accuracy, all units use the same Gen5 optical HR sensor, though, the Venu X1 lacks ECG. But ECG is an entirely different hardware piece than optical heart rate used for sport, so that’s irrelevant for optical HR accuracy. In almost all of my testing, I found all three units had strong and near identical optical HR accuracy across a wide variety of sports. The one area they would occasionally struggle is outdoor cycling, due to road vibrations. And generally speaking, the heavier a watch (e.g. a bigger Fenix), the more prone to wrist-bouncing/wiggling, and thus lower accuracy. But that’s nothing new.

You can see the full and actual accuracy results (GPS & heart rate) in all of my reviews for these products.

Point being, at the end of the day, accuracy of heart rate or GPS data isn’t a deciding factor in this specific competition. Instead, it’s probably battery life.

Battery Life:

This is the single biggest area of difference between the three units. First, let’s look at the baseline/official specs:

Now, this then gets subdivided into two basic categories: Daily usage, and GPS usage. While one can also look at non-GPS workout usage (like a gym), the battery hit/impact there is frankly pretty much the same as during normal 24×7 usage.

In my testing, I almost exclusively use the Always-on display configuration. This means the display dims when I put my wrist down (versus shutting-off entirely, which is the default). Other brands like Apple & Google have transitioned their smartwatches to have this as the default as well, though Garmin has not yet done so. It’s a two-second switch to make in the settings, but is my preference.

With the 47mm Fenix 8, I’m pretty consistently getting about 4-6 days of usage between charges, including usually 1-2hrs/day of GPS time (averaged over the course of a week). With the Forerunner 970, I’m in the 2-3 day range, likely owing to the brighter display. Again, this is with the always-on display enabled. But the Venu X1? It’s basically just beyond Apple Watch Ultra territory, I’m getting roughly 2 days of smartwatch usage. It’s not good.

But it’s not just daily usage that’s the problem, rather also GPS usage. On two recent hikes I did this past weekend, the Venu X1 almost ran out of battery after just 7hrs of hiking (with navigation enabled, but rarely on the map screen). It ended at 6%. The Fenix 8 & Forerunner 970? Far more, ending in the 70’s & 80% range respectively (all three units were at ~100% at the start, and all with near identical settings, and all actually using a chest strap too). You can actually see the moments it drops really fast, when it somehow ends back up on the map page (the Venu X1 will occasionally switch to the map page automatically for reasons I don’t understand).

And the next day too:

Or, a different hike from June:

This type of battery life burn from these units is very consistent with all my other GPS workouts, where the Venu X1 roughly average about 12-14%/hour. Whereas on the flip side, the AMOLED Fenix 8 (47mm) is around 3%/hour.

Now, as I outlined above, I think Garmin can fix a lot of this by giving us more/better options for the display brightness. But until they do that, if you need battery life, the Fenix 8 is where you want to be (or frankly, the Forerunner 965 for far cheaper).

Wrap-Up & Recommendations:

Ultimately, all three of these watches are really good, with near-identical software. However, the hardware differences between them will significantly drive your experience with them, especially around battery life, as well as features like ECG, or waterproofing.

For most sporty people, you could realistically choose any of the three and be happy, especially if you aren’t using the Always-on Display feature, and thus, getting more battery life (most applicable to the Venu X1). They all feature the same maps, roughly 95%+ the same sport profiles, and even areas that are technically spec different like the flashlight or GPS chipsets, aren’t meaningfully different in real world scenarios.

Whereas those wanting more battery life will near-certainly be pushed to the Fenix series. And while it’d be easy to assume this is some conspiracy to get you to spend more, all my discussions with Garmin at both product team and executive level, seem to point more to just not fully grasping how much of an impact the newer Venu X1 & Forerunner 970 display brightness is having on battery burn. I do think we’re going to see this change, and we’ll get back some of that battery life, through more granular control. And of course, those wanting diving features will need the Fenix 8. Or, those needing the Tubing profile.

But for most people, any of the three watches are great, and will also be heavily driven on your preferred design aesthetic.

As for me, I’ll be headed back to my Fenix 8 shortly after publishing the Venu X1 review. While I have no real grips with the Venu X1 (aside from a pile of mostly annoyance-but-not-critical level bugginess), it just lacks the battery life I want. It’s basically racing the Apple Watch Ultra 2 on my other wrist for which unit will die first every other day. And that’s not why I buy a Garmin watch. Likewise, I prefer more buttons, which the Venu X1 lacks compared to the Forerunner or Fenix series. And while I think the Foreurnner 970 is a great lighter watch than the Fenix 8, again, the real-world battery life in Always-on Display mode is downright rough for anyone doing daily outside GPS workouts.

But again, those are my preferences based on my workout amounts, etc… To each their own.

Thanks for reading!