Table of Contents
Garmin makes excellent running watches, but they aren’t the only brand runners love. Coros is a worthy competitor with a devoted following. Its fans say that the Pace series of watches are just as good as Garmin’s Forerunners, but at drastically lower prices. So I’m comparing the Coros Pace 3 ($229) with Garmin’s Forerunner 265 and 265S (that's the same watch, in different sizes—both cost $449).
I’m going to grade on a slight curve, since these watches are in such wildly different price ranges. If they’re truly comparable, I’ll give the win to Coros for getting the job done while saving you money. But if the Garmin turns out to be a better watch, it’s going to get the crown—we’re looking for a great watch here, not only a good bargain.
Where these watches fit into their respective product lines
The Garmin Forerunner 265 is my pick (so far) for the all around best running watch out there. It has more training and recovery features than the Forerunner 55 or 165, but lacks some of the fancier features (like maps) of the Forerunner 965. The Forerunners are only one of Garmin’s many lines of watches; they also have lifestyle watches like the Vivoactive 5, and fancier and more specialized sport watches like the Fenix. In short, for this comparison I’ve picked a solid Garmin running watch with some nice features that isn’t the bottom or the top of the line.
I’m going to consider the Garmin Forerunner 265 and 265S to be the same watch for our purposes today; they have the same features aside from being different sizes (think S for Smaller). When I’ve had to choose a specific watch for a comparison point below, I used the 265S, as it’s more similar in size to the Pace 3. (If you want a deep dive on all the differences between the 265 and 265S, like the subtle difference in battery life, I have done that too.)
Coros, meanwhile, is a smaller company, and only offers three lines of watches: Pace, Apex, and Vertix. The Pace is more of a running and general sport watch, while the Apex and Vertix have special features for mountain climbing and for skiing, to name a few. The Pace line is the lowest priced of the three, and is what I’ve encountered most often among runners who prefer Coros to Garmin. Coros also offers a Pace Pro that is an upgrade from the Pace 3—larger, with a different type of screen—but you’ll hear more about that in a future article.
With that in mind, let’s compare the Forerunner 265(S) to the Coros Pace 3. The Coros is the teal-colored watch in all the photos below, and the black watch is my own trusty Forerunner 265S. Both are solid running watches, each with a devoted fan base. Both share the same essential features, and not to spoil my own comparison or anything, but both are excellent watches; there’s not really a bad choice to be made here. But I did manage to select a winner, so read on.
Size and comfort
Both of these watches are similar in physical size and are similarly comfortable to wear. Both are about 42 millimeters wide, and weigh 39 grams with their included silicone band. (The Pace 3 I tested came with a silicone band; it can also be purchased with a nylon band that reduces the weight to 30 grams.) Both watches take standard quick-release bands—18 mm for the Forerunner 265S (20 mm for the full size 265), and 22 mm for the Pace 3.
The Forerunner is a bit thicker, measuring about 13 millimeters thick not counting the sensor, where the Pace 3 is 12 millimeters. The difference is noticeable, but barely. Both watches are small and lightweight. The full size Forerunner 265 is larger: 46 millimeters across, and weighing 47 grams rather than 49.
Controls
The Garmin has five buttons, while the Coros has two (one of which is also a dial). Here’s what the controls do, Garmin first:
Buttons on the Garmin Forerunner 265(S)
Top left: Single press to turn the screen on or off; long press to get shortcuts to your wallet, sleep mode, flashlight, and more.
Middle left: Single press to scroll up; long press for settings.
Bottom left: Single press to scroll down; long press for music controls.
Top right: Start an activity; also used as an “OK” button in menus.
Bottom right: Lap button during activity; also used as a “back” button in menus.
Buttons on the Coros Pace 3
Top right: press to start an activity or access settings (it’s all one big menu). Turn to scroll through menus. This is also your “OK” button.
Bottom right: Lap button during activity; “back” button in menus. Long press for shortcuts to alarms, music, and more.
Display: Memory LCD vs. AMOLED
The biggest visual difference between these watches is in the display. The Forerunner 265(S) has the newer AMOLED style of screen, which you'll find in most new Garmin sports watches these days. It's bright, sharp, and offers higher resolution, and more vibrant colors.
The Coros Pace 3, on the other hand, has the older (yet beloved by many) MIP or Memory LCD style screen, which is reflective rather than glowy. It's always on, but needs a source of light to be readable. In bright sunlight it practically glitters. The watch is equipped with a backlight (which comes on when you raise your wrist to look at the watch, or when you press a button) so you can see it in the dark as well.
Fans of the reflective screen like that it’s more battery-efficient, and that it’s always on. (There’s also a misconception that reflective screens are better in sunlight. While they are indeed great in sunlight, AMOLED is also very visible and readable in bright sunlight, so this isn’t a reason to prefer one display over the other.)
I’ll talk more about battery life in a minute, but the overall battery usage is very similar between the two watches, so that shouldn’t be a deciding factor. In fact, the only meaningful difference I noticed is that the reflective screen can be a bit harder to read in medium-light situations, where you have neither sunlight nor the backlight to help out. (Adjusting your backlight gesture settings can fix this, though.)
Functionally, they screens are equivalent—both types of display give good visibility. Aesthetically, you can’t deny that the AMOLED is sharper and the colors are more vibrant. In my gradebook, the Pace 3 gets an A here, and the Forerunner an A+.
Which has better battery life?
Both watches look almost identical on the back, with a slightly raised optical heart rate sensor in the center, and a charging port to the side. Both watches charge with a special cable that clicks into place. They even look similar, but the Coros has three pins while the Garmin has four. (They are easy to get mixed up, if you happen to have both on your desk. I keep nearly grabbing the wrong one.)
Both get about two weeks on a charge—which is why I don’t worry much about the supposed battery-saving properties of the Memory LCD screen. Coros says the Pace 3 gets 15 days on a charge (with all-day stress monitoring, but not counting activities). Garmin says the Forerunner 265 gets 15 days in smartwatch mode (not counting activities—and its version of stress monitoring is built in anyway).
My own testing agrees with those numbers, although I didn’t manage to do a perfect head-to-head comparison. I got roughly 13 days, with near-daily GPS activities, from the Forerunner 265S, and more than 13 days with the Coros Pace 3, but that was during a time I was only tracking a few activities per week (since I was tapering for a weightlifting meet). My gut tells me the Pace 3 might be just slightly more battery efficient, but ultimately we’re looking at two watches that each last about two weeks on a charge. I’m calling this one a draw.
Which has a better app experience?
Coros users think the Garmin app sucks, and vice versa. Honestly, I like them both! The Garmin app greets you with large cards for the day’s workouts (planned or already done) and a selection of metrics that you can choose and rearrange as you like. The Coros app presents everything a bit more densely, letting you see more information at a glance.
Both apps track similar information, and provide similar displays. I’ve always loved the way Garmin displays heart rate variability, showing whether you’re in your normal range (good) or if you’ve dropped below it (meaning that you’re dealing with more stress or fatigue). Coros does this as well. Both apps display a wealth of statistics for any run or activity you’ve done. Both have a training calendar to view your upcoming workouts.
Bottom line, I’m hard pressed to find any meaningful differences between the two. (You may notice in the screenshots that the two watches make different interpretations of the same data, like Coros saying that my fitness is “maintaining” while Garmin says I’m “strained,” but that’s likely due to the fact that the Garmin has a lot more baseline data on me, while Coros only has a few weeks’ worth. I expect that with more time the algorithms would agree.)
When it comes to finding training plans or working with a coach, Garmin’s popularity may make it a bit easier to play well with others. But if you’re coaching yourself, this doesn’t matter as much. I do like that you can find a training plan on the Coros website and preview the entire thing (Garmin’s built-in plans only show you about a week at a time), but on the other hand, you can set up a Garmin plan from your phone, which is much more convenient.
I’m calling this one a draw as well; the difference here comes down to your personal taste.
Which offers better, more accurate activity tracking?
I took both watches out for several runs (wearing one on each wrist like a dork, a look I fully embrace). Both do an excellent job of tracking heart rate—I used a chest strap monitor to compare—and both are excellent at location tracking as well.
Location
I’m not sure why I was surprised that the Coros was so good at location tracking. I guess I figured there must be some major downside to the price. Both have multi-band satellite tracking, specifically:
Coros Pace 3: GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, Beidou, QZSS.
Garmin Forerunner 265S: GPS, GLONASS, Galileo
I found myself squinting at the GPS tracks for each watch, trying to figure out if one was more accurate than another. (I left both on their default settings; the Forerunner has a few options that let you trade accuracy for battery life.) As far as I can tell, they’re both spot-on.
Treadmill running
Each watch has a different way of dealing with treadmill metrics. On the Garmin, you can choose to “save and calibrate” at the end of your run. You enter the total distance as displayed on the treadmill, and it adjusts everything accordingly. On the Coros watch, there’s no such correction after the fact—but you can set your treadmill speed before or during the run. This is great if you’re doing a half-hour run at 6.2 miles per hour exactly, and unusable if you’re doing quick intervals or adjusting the speed frequently during your workout. Verdict: neither watch handles treadmill runs well. I suppose I prefer the Garmin approach since it’s more flexible.
Heart rate
Comparing the two watches across several workouts, I found very occasional times when the Garmin kept pace with my heart rate and the Coros lagged a bit, and very occasional times when the opposite happened. No optical (wrist-based) sensor will be 100% perfect, so that’s to be expected. What I was hoping for, as a tiebreaker, was a pattern where one of the watches would show those errors more often. That didn’t happen. This, then, is another draw. (And as always: if you want the best possible heart rate accuracy, get a chest strap.)
Which has better smartwatch features?
So how good are these devices as a watch? First, let’s talk watch faces. The Garmin has a small selection of built-in watch faces, with highly configurable data for each. You can create your own face (but the options are limited), or hit the ConnectIQ Store for user-created ones. So there may be a lot of options, but honestly they aren’t great. I find myself gravitating toward the same few faces. They’re fine.
The Coros, on the other hand, has a much more extensive library of faces you can browse on your phone. Many are creative: there’s a retro ’90s face with color blocks and squiggles, for example, which I unironically love. That was my preferred face for a while, until I found one with futuristic-looking stripes of data (the one in the sunny photo above, in the section about the displays). But then I noticed that the data on that face was wrong! It didn’t show the correct step count or calorie count. I never figured out why. Weird. Among the faces that do work well (most of them), there’s a major downside—the data for each face is built into the design. You can’t say “I want this one, but with my step count in place of the heart rate.” That’s a given on Garmin; it’s not an option here.
On both watches, you can swipe upwards to see what Coros calls your “daily data”, and what Garmin calls your “glances.” These can include your training status, HRV, sunset/sunrise time, and more. They are customizable on either watch, but on Coros devices you have to do your edits in the phone app. (You can edit the Garmin’s directly from the watch.) They’re also more readable on the Garmin, with text describing each widget. On the Pace 3 you have to recognize some slightly inscrutable icons to understand what you’re looking at.
Here are some of the other main features:
Music: Both watches can play music to Bluetooth headphones, if you load the music onto the watch first. With the Garmin, you can download music from apps like Spotify over wifi (if you have a Spotify Premium account). With the Coros, you need to connect the watch to a computer and sideload MP3 files. The Coros Pace 3 has 4 GB of storage, and the Garmin Forerunner 265(S) has 8 GB.
Navigation: The Coros has breadcrumb navigation with checkpoints, back-to-start navigation, and deviation alerts. The Garmin also has breadcrumb navigation, and back-to-start. It also has a bunch of additional navigation features that, if I'm being honest, I don’t fully understand. Neither one has built-in maps or the ability to download them, although you can download breadcrumb routes.
Notifications: Both can show you notifications from your phone, but only the Garmin can show images (for example, if someone texts you a photo) and only the Garmin can let you send a brief response from a menu. Both of those features are Android-only, though, so for iPhone users the functionality of both watches is similar.
If there are specific features that are important to you, take a look at the watches’ specs. In general, both watches do the same basic stuff, but you’ll often find that Garmin’s version is just a little more robust or a little more feature-rich. Garmin edges out a win on this account.
And the Winner Is...
I’m keeping my promise. The Coros Pace 3 is the better deal, but the Garmin Forerunner 265/265S is the better watch. It has a sharper, brighter, more vibrant screen. It has more storage space. It handles things like music and training plans just a little more thoughtfully. After spending a few weeks with the Pace 3, I’m going to miss it—but I don’t regret that the one I bought for myself was the Forerunner.
All that said, I still think the Pace 3 is a great watch, and if you want the best bang for your buck (and don’t mind an LCD screen), it’s an excellent pick. You’ll get all the good training features, plus a few things like training status that Garmin doesn’t give you on its lesser models. And if you’re really torn and want the nicer screen at a lower price point, Garmin’s Forerunner 165 splits the difference. But, bottom line, if you want to know which is the better watch of the two I've compared here, it's the Forerunner 265S.
Beth Skwarecki is Lifehacker’s Senior Health Editor. She has a bachelor’s degree in biology, has written two books, and is a certified personal trainer. She’s been writing about health, fitness, and science for over a decade, and can front squat 225 pounds.
