Ever wondered if your smartwatch is secretly padding your step count, making you feel more active than you really are? Let's uncover the truth behind two top contenders in the fitness tech world.
The latest Google Pixel Watch 4 has burst onto the scene and quickly climbed to the top of our rankings for the best smartwatches out there. At the same time, the Garmin Venu 4 has also earned its place among the elite, and having covered the finest Garmin devices for years, I'm genuinely excited about its capabilities. These aren't just basic step trackers; they're designed for round-the-clock wear, monitoring heart rate, sleep patterns, and even menstrual cycles to support a holistic approach to health.
As someone who dives deep into fitness gear, my evaluations always kick off with the fundamentals. Does the device reliably detect the type of exercise you're engaging in? Is the interface intuitive for quick checks on your sleep quality first thing in the morning? And crucially, how precise are they at tallying those steps?
But here's where it gets interesting – and a tad controversial: slight discrepancies in accuracy could sway your loyalty. To put them to the test, I attached both the Google Pixel Watch 4 and the Garmin Venu 4 to my wrist and embarked on several walks totaling 14,000 steps, meticulously counting each one manually with a clicker. Back home, I compared their readings against my personal tally to see which one nailed it closest. Keep reading for the full breakdown. For deeper dives, check out our dedicated reviews of the Google Pixel Watch 4 and the Garmin Venu 4.
Embarking on 14,000 Steps: My Hands-On Comparison
I distributed the steps across multiple outings, tracking them in real-time. Both devices employ the same mechanism for step counting: an internal accelerometer that gauges the motion of your arm during movement.
Each full arm swing typically registers as two steps. This method holds up regardless of whether you wear the watch on your dominant or non-dominant hand, or even if your hands are tucked away in pockets or occupied with items – the sensor captures your body's overall motion effectively.
And this is the part most people miss: understanding how these sensors work can reveal why minor errors creep in. For beginners, an accelerometer is like a tiny motion detector inside the watch that vibrates or shifts with your movements, converting that into step data. It's incredibly reliable for everyday walking, but factors like uneven terrain or varied gaits might cause small inaccuracies.
Here's a snapshot of the outcomes from my four walks:
| Walk Number | Manual Count | Google Pixel Watch 4 | Garmin Venu 4 |
|-------------|--------------|----------------------|---------------|
| Walk One | 4,209 | 4,218 | 4,228 |
| Walk Two | 2,688 | 2,702 | 2,704 |
| Walk Three | 4,842 | 4,865 | 4,862 |
| Walk Four | 3,147 | 3,186 | 3,210 |
| Total | 14,886 | 14,971 | 15,004 |
As the data illustrates, both watches delivered remarkably accurate results across my approximately seven-mile journey. The Google Pixel Watch 4 slightly overestimated by 85 steps, while the Garmin Venu 4 added 118 – a mere 33-step gap over 15,000 steps, which is negligible in most scenarios.
Get instant notifications for the latest tech news, in-depth reviews, unbeatable deals, and practical advice.
This confirms that both are highly dependable for step tracking. To put it in perspective, the typical person covers about 2,000 steps per mile, so a deviation of 100 steps or so isn't significant overall. Still, the Google Pixel Watch 4 edged out as marginally closer to my manual counts.
Yet, for a true showdown, we'd need to explore beyond mere steps – and this is where opinions might diverge sharply. Both devices boast an array of sensors and tracking tools for promoting wellness, including heart rate monitors (HRM), electrocardiograms (ECG), blood oxygen saturation (SpO2), and skin temperature readings. Imagine how these can alert you to potential health insights during a hike or after a long night.
From a smartwatch perspective, the Pixel Watch 4 shines brightly, essentially acting as a seamless extension of your smartphone. It integrates Google's Gemini AI assistant, which you can summon by simply lifting your wrist, and it adapts workout suggestions based on your recent sleep quality and recovery status. The Garmin Venu 4, conversely, incorporates some of Garmin's premier training tools, such as Training Readiness scores, Body Battery levels, and overall Health Status assessments. Note that accessing certain advanced workout features on the Pixel Watch 4 requires a paid Fitbit Premium subscription, which could add up for budget-conscious users.
Pricing plays a big role here: The Garmin Venu 4 starts at $549 for its standard 41mm and 45mm models, jumping to $599 with a leather strap option – that's a $100 increase from the previous Venu 3's $450 launch price. The Google Pixel Watch 4 is more accessible at $349 upfront. Is the extra investment for Garmin's specialized fitness insights justifiable, or does Google's value-for-money approach win out? This is a point of heated debate among tech enthusiasts.
We're planning extensive further trials and head-to-head analyses of these newcomers, but if step accuracy is your primary concern, both excel admirably, sparing you the hassle of mental tallies during strolls.
Stay updated with Tom's Guide via Google News or by adding us as a preferred source for fresh news, analyses, and reviews. Hit that Follow button!
More from Tom's Guide:
- I clocked 11,000 steps with the Google Pixel Watch 4 and Samsung Galaxy Watch 8 – here's the winner
- Apple Watch 10 vs. Pixel Watch 4: Which smartwatch reigns supreme?
- After two weeks with the Google Pixel Watch 4, it's the most innovative smartwatch I've tested – here's why
Jane McGuire serves as Tom's Guide's Fitness Editor, overseeing all things fitness-related, from running equipment to yoga accessories. A passionate runner with five years of experience testing and critiquing gear, she knows exactly what makes a top-notch running watch or pocket-friendly shorts. Outside of pavement-pounding, catch her exploring the Surrey Hills with her camera, capturing endless shots of her adorable pup.
What are your take on this face-off? Do tiny differences in step accuracy matter to you, or do premium features and price tag tip the scales? Is Garmin's training focus worth the higher cost over Google's AI-enhanced convenience? Jump into the comments and let's discuss – I can't wait to hear your perspectives!
