Apple Watch Ultra 4 and Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 delivered closely matched distance and heart-rate readings in a half-marathon comparison, leaving phone compatibility as the reviewer’s main buying distinction rather than a decisive tracking victory.
Tom’s Guide reported that Apple’s watch recorded 13.23 miles and Samsung’s recorded 13.21 miles. The reviewer said both followed the course closely and triggered automatic laps near its distance markers. These are findings from one runner’s race, not an Eastern Herald device test.
The Galaxy Watch Ultra2 returned an average heart rate of 160 beats per minute, against 159 for Apple’s watch. An Oura Ring 5, used by the reviewer as a reference, returned 163. That leaves a one-beat difference between the watches, but does not establish which measured the runner’s actual heart rate more accurately.
No chest strap was worn. Agreement between two wrist devices and a ring is useful context, but it is not independent validation against an established reference measurement. The comparison also does not report repeated races or a wider group of runners, limiting how far its results can be generalized.
Elevation offered another qualified result. Samsung’s watch recorded 342 feet of climbing against the course’s published 311 feet. The reviewer did not reproduce the more pronounced elevation concerns a colleague had previously reported, but the article supplies no equivalent Apple elevation figure for a direct comparison.
The latest race results arrive after months of Apple Watch Ultra 4 speculation. In its September 9 launch announcement, Apple described a new Health Sensing System and readiness score. Those manufacturer claims are separate from the measurements in this single-run comparison.
Samsung’s announcement lists dual-frequency GPS, an 800 mAh battery and a 47mm case for its Ultra2. Its compatibility specifications require Android 13 or later and a supported phone with Google Mobile Services. Features can vary with the paired handset and market.
For a buyer using an iPhone, that platform restriction matters more than the tiny gap between the race recordings: the Galaxy model is not an iPhone companion. Apple’s watch requires an iPhone. Tom’s Guide also found both watches bulky on a smaller wrist, despite readable screens and useful physical controls.
The report supports a narrow conclusion: both devices tracked this runner’s half marathon similarly. It does not settle a universal accuracy ranking or provide a measured battery-drain comparison from the race. Those gaps matter when comparing two premium watches for training beyond a single event.
