Tertius News is an AI-native newsroom: an AI model reads the linked source articles below and extracts what each outlet reported, so you can compare their coverage side by side. How this works →

I wore the Pixel Watch 5, Galaxy Watch 9, and Garmin Cirqa during a 5K run and then walked 5,000 steps with each - Here's how they performed

A journalist compared the Pixel Watch 5, Galaxy Watch 9, and Garmin Cirqa during a 5K run and a 5,000-step walk, finding notable differences in heart rate tracking, GPS, and step accuracy. In a separate test, the Garmin Cirqa outperformed the Apple Watch Ultra 3 in step counting despite a significant price gap.

By Tertius News AI Desk 2 outlets · 2 articles Version 1 Coverage Aug 22–23, 2026 Published 2d ago

Fitness Trackers Put to the Test: 5K Run and Step-Counting Showdown

Wearables from Google, Samsung, and Garmin have been put through their paces in a series of hands-on tests, revealing significant differences in how they track heart rate, GPS, and steps. The comparisons, conducted by fitness-focused journalists, offer a detailed look at the strengths and weaknesses of the latest devices.

5K Run: Heart Rate and GPS Deviations

In a recent test, an Android Central journalist ran the Emerald City 5K while wearing the Pixel Watch 5, Galaxy Watch 9, and Garmin Cirqa. The race was just over 5 kilometers (3.1 miles), and all three devices measured heart rate, but the Galaxy Watch 9 showed notable deviations from the other two.

The Samsung watch took nearly four minutes to catch up to the Cirqa and Pixel Watch in heart rate, then rose above both for more than 10 minutes. The journalist noted that their heart rate wasn't so elevated right at the start, suggesting the Galaxy Watch 9's readings were delayed or inaccurate initially. Later in the run, the Pixel Watch 5 and Garmin Cirqa diverged, with the Pixel Watch dropping to about 135 bpm while the Cirqa remained steadier. The Pixel Watch eventually caught up, and the two stayed in sync for much of the run, until the end when the Pixel Watch fell just below the Galaxy Watch 9 and Cirqa.

In a second, shorter run, the Galaxy Watch 9 again logged lower heart rate data throughout the 12-minute session, hinting at a persistent issue with its heart rate accuracy during exercise.

GPS tracking also varied by device. The Galaxy Watch 9 and Garmin Cirqa (via a connected phone) tracked the run route, but the Pixel Watch 5 did not record any GPS data. The journalist attributed this to a possible GPS connection issue before the run started.

Despite the heart rate and GPS hiccups, the Galaxy Watch 9 logged the closest distance to the official race distance of 3.146 miles: it recorded 3.15 miles. The Pixel Watch 5 logged 3.19 miles, and the Garmin Cirqa logged 3.29 miles.

Step Counting: 5,000-Step Walk

After the run, the same journalist walked 5,000 steps with each device and compared the readings to a manual count. The Garmin Cirqa was the most accurate, over-counting by just 12 steps. The Pixel Watch 5 over-counted by 26 steps, and the Galaxy Watch 9 over-counted by 79 steps. Notably, the Cirqa does not display a step count while tracking, so a midpoint figure was not available during the walk.

Separate Test: Garmin Cirqa vs. Apple Watch Ultra 3

In a separate comparison, Tom's Guide tested the Garmin Cirqa against the Apple Watch Ultra 3 over a 12,000-step walk. The Cirqa, priced at $199, is Garmin's first screenless tracker, positioning it against devices like the Fitbit Air and Whoop 5.0. The Apple Watch Ultra 3 costs $799.

Using a manual clicker from Amazon to count steps, the journalist split the walk into three segments. The Garmin Cirqa counted 103 steps more than the manual count, while the Apple Watch Ultra 3 missed 242 steps. The journalist customized the Cirqa's side button to start a walk, changing it from the default Timed Activity setting.

The Apple Watch Ultra 3 showed overall daily steps rather than per-workout steps, requiring a third-party app to see per-workout data. This could explain some of the discrepancy, but the Cirqa's closer count was still notable given its much lower price.

Recommendations and Takeaways

Based on these tests, the Android Central journalist recommends the Garmin Cirqa for low-key fitness tracking and the Pixel Watch 5 for a smartwatch experience. The Cirqa's accuracy in step counting and its screenless design make it a solid choice for those focused on basic fitness metrics, while the Pixel Watch 5 offers a more comprehensive smartwatch experience despite its GPS issue.

The tests highlight that fitness trackers can vary significantly in heart rate and GPS accuracy, and even the most expensive devices may not always be the most precise. For those considering a new wearable, these hands-on comparisons offer valuable insights into real-world performance.

How each outlet told it

Android Central as of Aug 22, 2026, 7:16 PM UTC

Framing: Headline emphasizes a three-device comparison during a 5K run and a 5,000-step walk, highlighting the author's personal testing. It leaves out the specific results and the fact that the Cirqa is screenless. — measured: 'which is a win in my book' – acknowledges good performance but also notes limitations.

Facts Included:

The test involved running a 5K and walking 5,000 steps with Pixel Watch 5, Galaxy Watch 9, and Garmin Cirqa.
During the 5K, the Galaxy Watch 9 took nearly four minutes to catch up to the Cirqa and Pixel Watch in heart rate, then rose above for 10 minutes.
The Galaxy Watch 9 logged the closest distance (3.15 miles) to the official 3.146 miles, Pixel Watch 3.19, Cirqa 3.29.
Pixel Watch 5 did not track GPS route during the run, likely due to GPS connection issue.
During the 5,000-step walk, the Garmin Cirqa was closest to the manual count (over by 12 steps), Pixel Watch over by 26, Galaxy Watch over by 79.
The Cirqa does not show steps while tracking, so no midpoint figure available.
The author ran a second, shorter run where Galaxy Watch 9 logged lower heart rate data.
The author recommends Cirqa for low-key fitness tracking and Pixel Watch 5 for smartwatch experience.

Read the source article →

Tom's Guide as of Aug 23, 2026, 6:47 AM UTC

Framing: Headline emphasizes a direct comparison between Apple Watch Ultra 3 and Garmin Cirqa, noting the price difference. It leaves out the fact that the Cirqa won by a small margin and that the devices target different consumers. — measured: 'I’m impressed' – expresses a balanced, positive tone about the Cirqa's performance despite its lower price.

Facts Included:

The test involved walking 12,000 steps with the Apple Watch Ultra 3 ($799) and Garmin Cirqa ($199).
The Garmin Cirqa counted 103 steps more than manual count, while the Apple Watch Ultra 3 missed 242 steps.
The author used a manual clicker tool from Amazon to count steps.
The Garmin Cirqa is Garmin's first screenless tracker, compared to Fitbit Air and Whoop 5.0.
The author customized the Cirqa's side button to start a walk, changing from Timed Activity setting.
The Apple Watch Ultra 3 shows overall daily steps rather than per-workout steps, requiring a third-party app.
The test was split into three walks.

Read the source article →

What was claimed, and who backed it

Each row is one claim, attributed to the outlet whose wording states it most clearly. Confidence rates how directly the source text states the claim — explicit and unhedged rates high; hedged, pieced-together, or internally inconsistent statements rate lower. It does not measure whether the claim is true. Status counts the distinct outlets we found asserting it — so a single-source claim can still show high confidence, and a multi-source claim can show medium. Every one of those outlets is named beside the status, so you can check the count against the list. For claims extracted before we began storing that list, the row says so: it names the outlet the claim is quoted from and states that we have not recorded which outlets backed it. Outlets wrote at different times, so a figure that evolves — a casualty count, for example — can legitimately differ between rows; check the "as of" time next to each claim's source.

Claim	Confidence	Status
ClaimThe Garmin Cirqa is Garmin's first screenless tracker.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Tom's Guide as of Aug 23, 2026, 6:47 AM UTC
ClaimThe Garmin Cirqa costs $199.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Tom's Guide as of Aug 23, 2026, 6:47 AM UTC
ClaimThe Apple Watch Ultra 3 costs $799.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Tom's Guide as of Aug 23, 2026, 6:47 AM UTC
ClaimIn a 12,000-step walking test, the Garmin Cirqa counted 103 steps more than the manual count, while the Apple Watch Ultra 3 missed 242 steps.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Tom's Guide as of Aug 23, 2026, 6:47 AM UTC
ClaimThe author used a manual clicker tool from Amazon to count steps.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Tom's Guide as of Aug 23, 2026, 6:47 AM UTC
ClaimThe Apple Watch Ultra 3 shows overall daily steps rather than per-workout steps, requiring a third-party app to see per-workout step data.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Tom's Guide as of Aug 23, 2026, 6:47 AM UTC
ClaimThe author split the 12,000-step test into three walks.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Tom's Guide as of Aug 23, 2026, 6:47 AM UTC
ClaimThe author customized the Garmin Cirqa's side button to start a walk, changing from the default Timed Activity setting.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Tom's Guide as of Aug 23, 2026, 6:47 AM UTC
ClaimThe Garmin Cirqa is set to take on the Fitbit Air and the Whoop 5.0.	ConfidenceMedium	StatusSingle-source via Tom's Guide as of Aug 23, 2026, 6:47 AM UTC
ClaimThe author ran the Emerald City 5K, which was just over 5 kilometers (3.1 miles).	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Android Central as of Aug 22, 2026, 7:16 PM UTC
ClaimThe Pixel Watch 5, Galaxy Watch 9, and Garmin Cirqa are wearables from Google, Samsung, and Garmin respectively.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Android Central as of Aug 22, 2026, 7:16 PM UTC
ClaimThe Galaxy Watch 9 took nearly four minutes to catch up to the Cirqa and Pixel Watch in heart rate during the 5K, then rose above for more than 10 minutes.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Android Central as of Aug 22, 2026, 7:16 PM UTC
ClaimThe Galaxy Watch 9 logged the closest distance (3.15 miles) to the official 3.146 miles in the 5K, while the Pixel Watch logged 3.19 miles and the Garmin Cirqa logged 3.29 miles.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Android Central as of Aug 22, 2026, 7:16 PM UTC
ClaimThe Pixel Watch 5 did not track GPS route during the run, likely due to a GPS connection issue.	ConfidenceMedium	StatusSingle-source via Android Central as of Aug 22, 2026, 7:16 PM UTC
ClaimDuring the 5,000-step walk, the Garmin Cirqa was over by 12 steps, the Pixel Watch by 26 steps, and the Galaxy Watch by 79 steps.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Android Central as of Aug 22, 2026, 7:16 PM UTC
ClaimThe Garmin Cirqa does not show steps while tracking, so no midpoint figure was available.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Android Central as of Aug 22, 2026, 7:16 PM UTC
ClaimThe author ran a second, shorter run where the Galaxy Watch 9 logged lower heart rate data throughout the 12-minute run.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Android Central as of Aug 22, 2026, 7:16 PM UTC
ClaimThe author recommends the Garmin Cirqa for low-key fitness tracking and the Pixel Watch 5 for a smartwatch experience.	ConfidenceMedium	StatusSingle-source via Android Central as of Aug 22, 2026, 7:16 PM UTC
ClaimThe Galaxy Watch 9 and Garmin Cirqa tracked GPS data during the run, while the Pixel Watch 5 did not.	ConfidenceHigh	StatusSingle-source via Android Central as of Aug 22, 2026, 7:16 PM UTC

Transparency & Audit Trail

2 outlets · 2 articles consulted: Android Central, Tom's Guide 19 claims extracted Version 1 Written 2026-08-23