I'm wearing the Garmin Venu X1 right now – here's how it compares to the Apple Watch Ultra 2

The Garmin Venu X1 has only just launched, and at the time of writing this sentence, I've been wearing it for... *checks wrist*... about 56 minutes. Already, I've tested its voice command, call functionalities, LED flashlight, and many of its other functionalities, and I look forward to diving into all its features, including sleep and workout tracking, in much more detail over the coming weeks.

The Garmin Venu series has always been about versatility, and a marriage of exercise and communications features. The Garmin Venu 3 is currently top of our best Garmin watches guide, with all the GPS and activity tracking smarts Garmin is known for, combined with lifestyle features such as the ability to sync with apps such as Spotify and Ring doorbell, microphone and speaker, notifications, and much more. It's essentially Garmin's answer to the Apple Watch.

The Venu X1 is Garmin's answer to the Apple Watch Ultra 2, currently top of our best Apple Watches guide as the best Apple Watch to buy overall.

Just as the Ultra series has a bigger screen than its contemporaries and a titanium case, so too does the Venu X1. Its new 51mm squircle shape, similar price point and voice command features (allowing for Siri integration) only serve to strengthen the comparison. So, below you can see me wearing the two side-by-side, comparing the features, design, specs and capabilities of the watches.

Garmin Venu X1 vs Apple Watch Ultra 2: Specifications compared

Right away, you can see similarities here. Both are similarly sized and shaped, with the Garmin Venu X1's 51mm screen slightly larger than the Apple Watch Ultra 2's 49mm, although the Ultra 2 is arguably better quality. Garmin isn't telling what brightness the Venu X1 screen is capable of, but chatter online suggests up to 2,000 nits, comparable with the Apple Watch Ultra 2.

The biggest differences from a specs perspective, and likely to prove the deciding factor in many cases, are battery life and waterproofing. The Garmin Venu X1 offers far superior battery life to the Apple Watch Ultra 2, coming in at up to eight days (on Battery Saver mode, my X1 says nine) compared to just 36 hours. Whether the X1's battery life will stand up to its bold claims remains to be seen.

In waterproofing, the Garmin Venu X1 has Garmin's standard 5ATM rating, meaning it's perfectly fine to swim with, but not dive with. The Apple Watch Ultra 2's WR100 rating means it's serviceable as a working dive computer, and is able to transform into one with the included Depth app and the additional Oceanic+ app created in tandem with Apple.

Finally, there's weight. While the Garmin Venu X1 does include titanium in the construction of the case and backing, the bezel is polymer, allowing for the watch to be thinner and 20g lighter than Apple's. The Ultra 2 is a lot thicker and heavier, but feels more premium, which is good considering its high price point. The Venu X1's plastic bezel does feel a bit toy-ish at this price, but it's not low quality – it's just unexpectedly light.

Below, you can see a comparison of the best prices for both watches in your region:

Garmin Venu X1: First impressions compared to the Apple Ultra 2

Wow, this thing is light and comfortable on my wrist. Yes, the screen is enormous, but the watch is the thinnest Garmin device I've ever tried, and it's lovely and sleek. The lack of weight combined with the slender profile makes me think this will be very comfortable to sleep in – who needs the Garmin Index Sleep Monitor?

Below is a thickness comparison between the Garmin Venu X1 and Apple Watch Ultra 2, so you can see the massive difference between the two.

The Venu is a lot lighter as well, and after swapping the watches around, you can certainly feel those extra 20 grams. I've never been a lover of Garmin's Velcro bands for daily wear; they're useful for exercise, but I do prefer the Ultra 2's alpine band (pictured).

With only two buttons compared to Garmin's usual five, there is no digital crown, unlike the Apple Watch, so any scrolling has to be done via the touchscreen. While most operations, including starting and stopping workouts, can be performed via either the buttons or voice command, at least one touch-screen tap or swipe is likely to be used in most processes. The end result could be the screen getting a little smeary and sweaty without easy navigation via a crown.

However, I'm nitpicking: this looks like a fantastic watch on first impressions. It feels less premium than the Apple Watch Ultra 2, but is thinner, lighter, and will likely last a lot longer before needing to charge. Expect a more thorough comparison after a full review.

You might also like...

• I test smartwatches for a living, but I'm sick of screens on my wrist – here are 5 discreet fitness trackers I'd recommend
• I loved the Whoop MG, but didn't love the price: that's why I'm excited about this mysterious new fitness band from a major Garmin rival
• Nooo! Samsung confirms it's 'considering' following Garmin by adding a premium subscription tier to its Health app