Watch Active 2 vs Galaxy watch 3 Samsung Showdown By URTechSupport

So, I've actually had the pleasure of using a couple of different smartwatches this year. I've used the versa 3, but I've also been fortunate enough to use a couple of Samson watches. I've used the Samsung Galaxy active 2, which I loved. It was a really great watch and I put up against the verse of three, and I chose the active two, but I was also able to fortunately enough use the galaxy watch three, which is basically a remix of the old Samson gear, s3 watches that came out a while back. I had the gears three frontier editions. That was one of the first smartwatches I owned.

So it dawned upon me that if a user, an average user such as yourself was going into a store- and you saw the two Samsung watches in front of you- which one should you choose to be fortunate enough to use both- I can actually give you some advice on that. So that's why I'm going to make this video so without further ado, let's get started, and I'll tell you which watch is for whom. So the first thing I really want to talk about is going to be the biggest difference that you're going to see between these two watches, and it's going to come down to the actual design of the watches themselves. The watches are both still circular in design. It seems that Samson really likes rocking that circular design and that's definitely not a problem with me.

I think both watches look amazing with that circular design, but it does seem, like both watches, are built for a different consumer base. If you look at the active 2, it's definitely more of a sporty design and a minimalistic design with basically just all screen and the built-in rotating bezel and a rotating bezel is actually something that Samson's infamously famous for it's a way to really navigate through the watch simply without having to use the actual touch screen itself. The buttons on the active 2 also aren't as pronounced as on the watch.3. they're a little more pressed in to the watch itself, just adding to the overall more sporty type of watch aesthetic, whereas when you're dealing with the watch, 3 you're getting kind of a more traditional looking type watch, this watch looks like a regular watch that just happens to be a smartwatch with technology components. It looks like something you pick up from a jewelry store.

Everything on it is a little more pronounced. The frame itself is a little thicker. It has the physical rotating bezel on the watch, which again is a joy to use itself. The watch feels a little heavier. It feels more substantial than the active two does it just feels, like your quintessential, regular, very stylish watch that you would pick up that just happens to be a smartwatch as well now size wise with the watch 3 you're able to get a 41 millimeter and a 45 millimeter variant and with the active 2 you're getting a 40 and 44.

Now both screens are exactly the same size across the board, you're getting a 1.2-inch screen on the smaller variants or a 1.4 inch super AMOLED screen on the larger variants. Now the watch 3 has a stainless steel and a titanium option, and the active 2 has an aluminum and a stainless steel option. I think both screens look perfect. It doesn't matter the actual size of the screen itself. The display, the displaying of information messages, emails text, just general information, that's displaying across either one of these watch screens, if you're going with a smaller 40 millimeters or the 41 or 45 or 44 you're, able to read everything.

Just fine. The screens are big enough to accommodate enough text space that you're, not squinting, you're, not really struggling to read anything. I find that across the board, both watches screens display information perfectly so real, quick guys if you're enjoying the video like, I know you are because it's a great video go ahead and hit that subscribe button down below with that like button, it definitely helps us out now back to that awesomely great video. In the end, I think it comes down to preferences when we're talking about these two watches. It really does come down to what the user or what the buyer is going to prefer.

The active 2 is a little more of a minimalistic type, sportier type watch than you're getting with the s3, which is a more utilitarian. I guess basically a more traditional type of watch. So if you were to look at the active 2 you're looking at something that doesn't have any bezel around it, it's a little smaller, it's a little sportier and something that's definitely geared towards the fitness person, but can also double as a regular, every day. Smartwatch that you use and carry around with you, whereas the s3 is really geared towards that watch. Had that person who just wants a really stylish watch that just happens to have a bunch of technology, that's inside preference wise when it came down to it.

I preferred the s3 only believe it or not, because of that rotating bezel. I didn't much like the internal or in screen rotating bezel, that the active 2 had versus the physical rotating bezel that the s3 had. Furthermore, I found it a little easier to navigate through the s3, get to the menus that I needed to faster, and I was on the active 2, but it's not like the active 2 was slow. It was just a preference thing and I actually just prefer the way the s3 looks over the way the active 2 looks. I prefer the bigger, more traditional type watch.

Look that the s3 has versus the sportier sleek minimalistic. Look that the active 2 has now feature wise. These are the things that are pretty much identical. When you're looking at the active 2 versus the watch 3 when the actor 2 was first released, it was definitely missing. Some features like fall detection or the ability to take an ECG, but with a recent update, those features have now been added, so apples to apples.

These watches match up fairly well when it comes to the ability of taking certain readings or getting certain health information. It's exactly the same. Both watches support, Bluetooth, 5.0, both watches, are ip68 water and dust resistance. Both are rocking the same ti zen operating systems, information notification, GPS NFC with Samsung pay all of those work exactly the same across the board. On both watches now, like I said feature-wise, I didn't see much of a difference between the two watches themselves.

They handled notifications coming in from the phone extremely well. They stayed connected to my phone without an issue. GPS worked great. I was able to track my movements, my workouts, my jogs was able to track a Nary of different workouts on both watches from weight lifting to cardio to legs, to sleep tracking. Both did an amazing job of just tracking everything and providing all the information both connected to Samson health without any issue.

So you can download that application, and it uploads all of your health and tracking information there. There is no difference between what these watches can actually track. Any information that they can provide. The other thing to take notice is that both these watches have the ability to load media directly into the watch themselves, which means independently of your phone. You can actually upload music, so if, for instance, you were going on a jog, you can upload a playlist directly into the watch pair Bluetooth set of headphones, and you wouldn't necessarily need to bring your phone with you on the jog.

You just listen to your music directly from the watch now in this retrospect. The watch 3 has a slight advantage over the active 2, where it has more internal memory use. The watch 3 has about 8 gigs of internal memory versus only 4 gigs available on the active 2. These numbers, of course, are not hard fast numbers, because some of that memory is actually used up for the operating system, updates, etc. But it is something to keep in mind if you're, one of those people that, like to upload media directly into your device.

Now when it came to day-to-day use, battery performance wise, both watches, performed pretty adequately and both watches perform pretty close to each other. For some weird reason, even though they both have the exact same battery inside and they both have the exact same kind of battery predictions, I was able to squeeze a little more battery out of the active 2 than I was out of the s3. I'm not sure exactly why that was. I don't think I was using the s3 any more than I normally would use my watches. So I didn't put it through any kind of more difficult, rigorous testing than I did with the active tools the active 2.

I was able to squeeze out about three and a half days when the s3 I was charging after two and a half days so probably a whole other day. I got out of the active two remember your mileage may vary depending on how frequently you use your watch. Battery life for smartwatches is kind of important to a lot of people, because people just don't want to be charging their watches as often as they would charge their mobile devices, but granted that throughout the day, I'm pretty sure you can find a couple of minutes to charge these things up. As you go along the day, so I don't believe battery issues should really be a problem in the long run, but they perform pretty adequately, but the active 2 outperformed it just a little better. For me in my use case anyway, now definitely from a value proposition wise.

The galaxy watch is about 400. The watch active 2 is about 300. You can find both of these at a great discount, but either way you look at it. The watch three is always going to be about 50 or 100 dollars more than the active 2. So this one is actually a no-brainer.

The watch active 2 is going to give you everything that the watch active 3 has, at a cheaper price feature wise anyway same operating system, a little less memory, but it's able to track all the same things that the watch three can track. It has basically the same kind of interface different watch faces. It gives you all that packaged in a cheaper price. So, if you're looking for a value perspective, the watch active 2 is definitely the way to go, but I think when it really comes down to it, people made shoes the watch 3 because of the design perspective it really just comes down to preference, build design. The way to watch feels I think these play a really important role other than the features of course in why someone would choose one smartwatch over the other and when it comes down to look, feel and design.

Those categories for me to watch three definitely wins those categories while still giving you the ability to track just about anything. You want to track on these watches that awesome physical rotating bezel versus the digital bezel for me kind of won out. I really liked the way the bands felt a little more premium. I like the way the watch had a little more weight to it. All that coupled together was worth the extra hundred dollars for me, but I can definitely see people going the active 2 route because you're getting all those great features in a completely different sportier design that may actually suit somebody else's needs a lot better.

So anyway, guys that's going to do it. For the video, like I said, the active 2 is probably going to be your best budget, wise bang, for your buck watch that you can choose out of the two, but I prefer ds3 because of all the other things that I said about it. Let me know what you think in the comment section down below which watch you're going for which watch? Did you end up picking? Are you satisfied with your choice, all that good stuff in the comment section right down below the video, because it helps other people out that are trying to make this decision and while you're down there, if you enjoyed the video, you know what to do, go ahead and hit that, like button subscribe button and bell for notification, the bell is actually pretty important, because it's the only way you guys are going to know and release some cool, helpful content like this one until next time, guys I'm going to put my independent review for both watches up here? So you can check those out independently and, as always, make sure to stay safe. And until I see you guys next time, peace out.

Source : URTechSupport