Garmin Venu 4 Edges Apple Watch 12 in 5,520-Step Accuracy Test

Q: If both watches nailed heart rate perfectly, does Garmin's slight edge in step tracking justify its steep price tag?

Not by itself. In this test, Garmin’s edge was real but tiny: it missed the manual step count by two steps, while the Apple Watch overcounted by 11. On a 5,520-step walk, that is a negligible difference for most people, especially since both watches matched heart rate exactly and were also very close on distance. The stronger case for Garmin’s price is not this one walk alone, but the broader package. The Venu 4 is positioned as a long-term fitness watch with multi-band GPS, deep training metrics, Garmin Connect, and multi-day battery life in normal use. For runners and users who want a more fitness-focused platform, those extras can justify paying around $549.99, or closer to $499 on sale. But the same comparison also weakens the argument that Garmin is worth a steep premium on accuracy alone. Apple was nearly as good on steps, strong on distance, identical on heart rate, and actually used less battery during this specific workout. The Apple Watch Series 12 also starts at a lower price in many configurations and adds a broader smartwatch and health feature set for iPhone users. So the answer depends on what the buyer is paying for. If the goal is simply accurate everyday walking and heart-rate tracking, Garmin’s slight step advantage does not justify the higher price by itself. If the buyer values Garmin’s training ecosystem, longer day-to-day battery life, and fitness-first design, the premium makes more sense.

Q: Why did Garmin's battery drain four times faster than Apple's during a workout despite boasting an eight-day overall lifespan?

Garmin’s workout battery drained faster because its long advertised lifespan refers to light everyday smartwatch use, not to a GPS-tracked workout with power-hungry sensors and display demands active. In this test, the Venu 4 was likely running a heavier workout load than the Apple Watch. Garmin’s own figures show a sharp drop from roughly 8–12 days in normal use to about 15–20 hours in GPS mode, and as low as 12–17 hours in multi-band GPS. The Venu 4 is built around dual-frequency GNSS, a bright AMOLED screen, barometric altimeter, and extensive fitness metrics, all of which can raise drain during an outdoor session. If features such as always-on display, higher brightness, Pulse Ox, Wi‑Fi, or multi-band GPS were active, consumption would rise further. By contrast, Apple’s quoted outdoor-workout battery life is specifically optimized for exercise use, and Apple also offers aggressive workout power management, including fewer GPS and heart-rate readings in Low Power Mode. Even without that mode explicitly enabled, Apple’s system appears to have been more efficient over this short walk. So the result is not really contradictory. Garmin can still last far longer over several days of ordinary wear, but it may burn battery faster during a sensor-heavy workout. The Tom’s Guide result reflects mode-specific power use, not overall endurance.

3 articles · Updated · Tom's Guide · Sep 22

A 5,520-step walk test found both watches highly accurate, with Garmin Venu 4 missing the manual count by 2 steps and Apple Watch 12 overcounting by 11.
Distance tracking was also close to the control 2.95 miles, with Apple logging 2.91 miles and Garmin 2.89, while both matched exactly on heart rate at 131 bpm average and 160 bpm max.
Elevation and pace helped tip the result: Apple logged 448 feet of climb versus the 410-foot control, while Garmin posted 417 feet and was also closer on pace.
Battery use cut against Garmin despite the win, with Venu 4 dropping 4% during the roughly 50-minute workout versus 1% for the Apple Watch 12.
The overall verdict favored Garmin by a narrow margin, though the test concluded both $549 models are reliable fitness trackers for outdoor workouts.