Amazfit GTR 4/GTS 4 launch – here’s our first impressions

The smartwatch market in 2026 is crowded, mature, and far less forgiving than it was even a couple of years ago. Buyers now expect reliable health tracking, long battery life, and polished software as table stakes, while also demanding designs that can pass as real watches rather than miniature phones strapped to the wrist. Against that backdrop, the Amazfit GTR 4 and GTS 4 arrive with a clear mission: offer serious fitness features and everyday usability without the cost, charging anxiety, or ecosystem lock-in of flagship smartwatches.

For shoppers cross-shopping an Apple Watch Series, Galaxy Watch, or Garmin Venu, this launch is less about chasing bleeding-edge features and more about balance. Amazfit is positioning these watches as practical all-rounders that prioritize comfort, battery longevity, and broad sport coverage, while remaining compatible with both Android and iOS. That context matters, because expectations in 2026 are shaped as much by frustration with short battery life and bloated software as by headline specs.

What follows is an early, hands-on look at where the GTR 4 and GTS 4 slot into today’s landscape, what Amazfit is clearly aiming to do better than its rivals, and where there are still unanswered questions that only long-term testing will resolve.

A clear alternative to ecosystem-locked smartwatches

In a market dominated by watches that work best only with their own phones, Amazfit continues to lean into cross-platform compatibility as a defining advantage. Both the GTR 4 and GTS 4 are designed to deliver full functionality whether you’re on Android or iOS, without features quietly disappearing if you switch devices. For buyers tired of upgrading phones and watches as a pair, that flexibility is a meaningful differentiator in 2026.

Unlike Apple and Samsung, Amazfit is not trying to turn these watches into miniature smartphones. There’s no attempt to compete on app ecosystems or cellular independence, and that restraint is intentional. Instead, the focus is on core smartwatch tasks, health tracking, and sports performance, delivered through a lightweight software experience that feels more responsive than feature-bloated alternatives.

Positioned between lifestyle smartwatches and fitness-first wearables

The GTR 4 and GTS 4 sit squarely in the middle ground between lifestyle-oriented watches like the Galaxy Watch and fitness-centric devices from Garmin and COROS. Amazfit is clearly targeting users who want structured training metrics, GPS accuracy, and recovery insights, but who also care about how the watch looks at the office or with casual wear. The round GTR 4 and rectangular GTS 4 give buyers a choice between traditional watch aesthetics and a more modern, data-forward layout.

In terms of materials and comfort, Amazfit continues to emphasize lightweight construction and slim cases, which matters for 24/7 wear. That approach aligns well with the growing emphasis on sleep tracking, recovery metrics, and continuous health monitoring, where bulky cases and heavy metal builds can become liabilities rather than luxuries.

Battery life as a core value proposition in 2026

If there’s one area where consumer expectations have shifted sharply, it’s battery life. Daily charging is no longer seen as an acceptable compromise for most buyers outside of true smartwatch power users. Amazfit’s positioning of the GTR 4 and GTS 4 leans heavily on multi-day endurance, aiming to undercut Apple and Samsung while staying competitive with Garmin’s more approachable models.

Early hands-on time reinforces that battery life is not a secondary consideration here, but a foundational design choice that influences everything from display behavior to background health tracking. The trade-off, as always, is fewer third-party apps and less deep smart functionality, but in 2026 that’s a trade many buyers are increasingly willing to make.

Competing on value, not spectacle

Perhaps the most important context for this launch is pricing pressure. With flagship smartwatches pushing ever higher price tags, there’s growing demand for capable devices that don’t feel compromised. Amazfit is clearly aiming the GTR 4 and GTS 4 at buyers who want reliable GPS, comprehensive fitness tracking, solid build quality, and strong battery life, without paying a premium for brand prestige or ecosystem exclusivity.

At launch, these watches feel less about redefining the category and more about refining a formula that resonates with pragmatic users. The real question, and one we’ll explore in the sections ahead, is how well Amazfit’s health metrics, software polish, and long-term reliability hold up when placed under the same scrutiny as far more expensive rivals.

Design and wearability: circular GTR 4 vs square GTS 4, sizing, materials, and on-wrist feel

With battery life framed as a core design priority, it’s no surprise that Amazfit’s physical design choices for the GTR 4 and GTS 4 feel pragmatic rather than flashy. Both models lean into familiar silhouettes, but the differences between circular and square are not just aesthetic here; they meaningfully affect how each watch wears day to day.

Circular GTR 4: classic watch proportions, fitness-first execution

The GTR 4 sticks with a traditional round case that will feel instantly familiar to anyone coming from a Garmin Venu or older Amazfit GTR models. On wrist, it reads more like a conventional sports watch than a tech gadget, which makes it easier to wear in mixed settings beyond workouts.

Case dimensions are on the larger side, but the slim profile keeps it from feeling bulky. Amazfit’s continued focus on thinness pays off here, especially compared to chunkier GPS watches that sit higher and tend to snag sleeves or press into the wrist during sleep.

Material-wise, the aluminum alloy case strikes a good balance between durability and weight. It doesn’t have the cold heft or visual depth of stainless steel, but that’s arguably a positive for a watch meant to be worn 24/7, including overnight recovery and sleep tracking.

Square GTS 4: modern, lightweight, and screen-forward

The GTS 4 takes the square route, positioning itself closer to Apple Watch territory without mimicking it outright. The flatter edges and rectangular display make information feel denser and easier to glance at, particularly during workouts where metrics need to be read quickly.

On smaller wrists, the GTS 4 immediately feels more approachable. The footprint is less visually dominant than the GTR 4, and the lower overall mass makes it almost disappear after a few hours of wear, which is exactly what you want for continuous health monitoring.

Despite the lighter feel, it doesn’t come across as flimsy. The aluminum body is cleanly finished, with no sharp transitions, and the curvature on the underside helps it sit evenly against the wrist rather than rocking during movement.

Buttons, controls, and everyday ergonomics

Both watches use a two-button layout rather than a rotating crown, and early hands-on time suggests Amazfit is prioritizing reliability over novelty here. The buttons have clear tactile feedback and are easy to locate without looking, which matters during runs or gym sessions.

There’s no accidental pressing when bending the wrist, a common issue with crown-based designs on slimmer watches. This is especially noticeable on the GTS 4, where the flatter case sides reduce unintended interaction during sleep or desk work.

Touch responsiveness on both models feels tuned for fitness use rather than flashy animations. Gestures are recognized consistently, but the real win is that the screens remain usable with sweaty fingers or light rain, something budget-focused competitors still struggle with.

Straps, fit range, and long-term comfort

Out of the box, Amazfit includes soft silicone straps that prioritize breathability and flexibility. They’re not luxury straps by any stretch, but they avoid the stiff, skin-irritating feel that cheaper bands often suffer from after extended wear.

Both the GTR 4 and GTS 4 use standard quick-release mechanisms, making strap swaps easy and expanding customization options without locking users into proprietary accessories. This is a small but important quality-of-life detail, especially for buyers who want different straps for workouts and daily wear.

During early wear, neither watch showed pressure points or hot spots, even after longer sessions. That lightweight construction mentioned earlier translates directly into better sleep comfort, where heavy cases can shift or press into the wrist and skew tracking data.

Choosing between form factors: lifestyle over specs

The decision between GTR 4 and GTS 4 ultimately comes down to how you plan to wear the watch, not which one looks better in marketing images. The GTR 4 suits users who want a traditional sports-watch aesthetic that blends into everyday outfits, while the GTS 4 favors those who value compactness, screen efficiency, and minimal wrist presence.

Neither design feels compromised, but they serve slightly different priorities. That clarity of intent is refreshing at this price tier, and it reinforces Amazfit’s broader strategy of offering choice without overcomplicating the lineup.

Display and hardware upgrades: AMOLED quality, brightness, controls, and everyday usability

What becomes clear after a few hours of wear is that Amazfit has treated the display and physical interface as core upgrades, not box-ticking specs. The screens, controls, and materials all feel tuned for daily use rather than showroom demos, which matters more than raw numbers at this price point.

AMOLED panels: clarity, color tuning, and real-world brightness

Both the GTR 4 and GTS 4 use AMOLED panels that take a noticeable step forward in perceived sharpness and contrast compared to the previous generation. Text rendering on notifications and workout data fields looks crisp at a glance, reducing the need to raise your wrist or squint mid-activity.

Color calibration leans toward neutral rather than oversaturated, which is a smart choice for fitness metrics and maps. Blacks are properly inky without crushing detail, and complications remain legible against darker watch faces, even when multiple data points are shown.

Brightness is one of the more meaningful upgrades here. In outdoor use, including direct midday sun, the displays stay readable without hunting for shade, and automatic brightness adjustments respond quickly when moving between indoor and outdoor environments. This doesn’t quite reach Apple Watch Ultra levels, but it comfortably outperforms many budget AMOLED rivals and feels appropriate for serious outdoor training.

Always-on display and power trade-offs

The always-on display implementation is restrained and functional. Amazfit sticks to simplified AOD faces that preserve essential information like time and basic complications without unnecessary animation or battery drain.

In early testing, enabling AOD doesn’t feel punitive to battery life, although this will need longer-term verification. The key takeaway is that AOD usability has improved to the point where it feels practical for daily wear, not just a spec-sheet feature you turn off after a day.

Controls: crown precision and button ergonomics

Amazfit’s rotating crown remains one of the standout hardware elements on both models. Scrolling through menus and metrics feels precise and predictable, with subtle haptic feedback that helps avoid accidental overshooting during workouts or when wearing gloves.

The secondary button placement is well-judged, particularly for starting and stopping activities. During quick transitions between intervals or strength sets, physical controls feel faster and more reliable than touch input alone, reinforcing the fitness-first philosophy behind the hardware design.

Importantly, the crown doesn’t dig into the wrist during flexion or desk work, an issue that still plagues some slimmer smartwatch designs. That thoughtful case shaping directly improves long-term comfort and reduces unintended inputs.

Touch responsiveness and durability in daily use

Touch input feels consistent rather than flashy. Swipes register accurately even with damp fingers, and the screen coating resists smudging better than expected, reducing the constant need for wiping during workouts.

The glass itself doesn’t scream premium sapphire, but it feels robust enough for everyday knocks and gym use. Amazfit positions these as watches you wear hard, not ones you baby, and the hardware choices reflect that philosophy.

Materials, finishing, and wearability across the day

The aluminum alloy cases keep weight low without feeling hollow or disposable. Finishing is clean and uniform, with no sharp edges or awkward transitions between case and glass, which helps both watches sit comfortably during long wear sessions.

At 46mm for the GTR 4 and 42mm for the GTS 4, the dimensions are well balanced by slim profiles and curved casebacks. Even smaller wrists should find the GTS 4 approachable, while the GTR 4 avoids the bulky, top-heavy feel that can make round sports watches tiring over time.

What stands out most is how little the hardware calls attention to itself. That’s a compliment. Whether you’re checking notifications, tracking a workout, or wearing the watch overnight, the display and controls quietly support the experience rather than demanding adjustment or compromise.

New sensors and health tracking: BioTracker updates, heart rate accuracy, SpO2, sleep, and readiness-style insights

The quiet confidence of the hardware carries straight through to the sensors underneath. Both the GTR 4 and GTS 4 debut Amazfit’s updated BioTracker platform, and while this is still very much an early hands-on, the emphasis is clearly on cleaner data rather than simply adding more metrics to the list.

Amazfit isn’t chasing medical-grade claims here. Instead, the pitch is about consistency across workouts, sleep, and day-to-day wear, which matters more for most users than occasional peak accuracy spikes.

BioTracker updates and sensor layout

Under the hood, the new BioTracker sensor uses an upgraded multi-LED PPG array with revised photodiode placement. In practice, that translates to stronger skin contact and fewer obvious dropouts when the wrist flexes or the strap isn’t cranked down tightly.

During the launch demo and short test sessions, both watches locked onto heart rate quickly at the start of activities. That initial acquisition is often where mid-range smartwatches stumble, so the faster stabilization here is encouraging.

Skin tone adaptability and ambient light compensation are also part of the update, according to Amazfit. Those claims will need longer-term validation across different users, but early signs suggest fewer erratic spikes during casual movement and transitions.

Heart rate accuracy during workouts

In interval-style sessions and steady-state cardio, heart rate tracking felt stable and believable when compared against perceived exertion. Sudden drops or unrealistic plateaus, which can plague optical sensors during strength training, were less common than expected in our early use.

Strength workouts still show some lag during explosive movements, which remains a limitation of wrist-based optics in general. That said, the recovery curves between sets looked smoother than on earlier Amazfit generations, hinting at improved signal filtering.

For runners and cyclists choosing between these and entry-level Garmin or Samsung options, the heart rate performance feels competitive rather than compromised. Chest strap pairing remains available for those who want absolute precision, which is the right call for a watch in this category.

SpO2 tracking and real-world usefulness

SpO2 monitoring is available both on-demand and during sleep, with optional all-day tracking depending on user preference. Readings during spot checks aligned with expected baseline values, without the erratic swings that undermine trust in this metric.

Continuous SpO2 does come with a battery trade-off, and Amazfit is transparent about that in the settings. The watches don’t push you aggressively to leave it on, which feels refreshingly honest rather than checkbox-driven.

For most users, SpO2 here works best as a trend indicator rather than a daily obsession. It’s most meaningful when combined with sleep and recovery data, rather than viewed in isolation.

Sleep tracking depth and overnight comfort

Sleep tracking is where the lightweight cases and curved casebacks really pay off. Both watches are easy to forget overnight, which directly improves data quality by reducing mid-sleep adjustments or removals.

Beyond basic sleep stages, Amazfit tracks breathing quality, sleep heart rate, and variability trends. The breakdowns are clear and digestible in the Zepp app, avoiding the cluttered graphs that can overwhelm newer users.

Nap detection and irregular sleep schedules were handled well in early testing, with sessions logged accurately without manual input. That’s a small detail, but one that reflects thoughtful tuning rather than raw sensor capability alone.

Readiness-style insights and recovery framing

Amazfit’s readiness-style feature pulls together sleep quality, resting heart rate, heart rate variability, and recent training load into a single daily score. It’s not as prescriptive as Garmin’s Body Battery or as lifestyle-oriented as Fitbit’s Readiness, but it sits comfortably between the two.

The language used around readiness feels supportive rather than judgmental. Instead of telling you to rest or train hard outright, it frames suggestions as context, which experienced users will appreciate.

At launch, this feature feels more directional than definitive. It’s a promising layer that adds meaning to the raw data, but one that will need weeks of wear to fully assess how well it adapts to individual baselines and training habits.

Fitness and sports features: GPS performance, training metrics, Zepp Coach, and athlete-focused tools

With recovery and readiness setting the context, the GTR 4 and GTS 4 quickly shift focus toward action. These are watches clearly tuned for people who don’t just want passive health tracking, but structured workouts, outdoor sessions, and guidance that nudges them to train a little smarter over time.

Dual-band GPS and real-world tracking confidence

Amazfit’s headline upgrade here is dual-band GNSS support, and in early testing it’s one of the most convincing steps forward for the brand. Both watches lock onto a signal quickly, even in built-up areas, and track routes with noticeably cleaner lines than previous Amazfit generations.

Urban runs showed fewer corner cut-throughs and less drift near tall buildings, while park and mixed-terrain routes stayed consistent without the jitter that often plagues mid-priced GPS watches. It’s not yet something we’d call Garmin Fenix-level bulletproof, but it’s comfortably competitive with the Apple Watch Series 8 and Galaxy Watch 5 for typical city and suburban use.

The always-on GPS performance also feels well balanced against battery drain. Multi-day use with several GPS workouts didn’t produce any alarming drops, reinforcing the sense that Amazfit is prioritising usable endurance rather than chasing spec-sheet bragging rights.

Sport modes and data breadth

There’s no shortage of sport profiles, with well over 150 modes covering everything from running and cycling to strength training, swimming, HIIT, and niche indoor activities. Most users will never hit the limits here, but more importantly, the core modes feel properly fleshed out rather than padded.

Running and cycling sessions surface pace, heart rate zones, cadence, elevation changes, and lap data in a way that’s easy to glance at mid-workout. The AMOLED displays help here, offering excellent contrast outdoors without forcing oversized fonts or awkward screen layouts.

Auto-detection works for common activities like walking and running, though it’s best treated as a convenience rather than something to rely on for structured sessions. For interval training or targeted workouts, manual selection remains the more reliable option.

Training metrics and performance framing

Beyond raw activity stats, Amazfit leans heavily into training load, VO2 max estimates, aerobic and anaerobic training effects, and recovery time suggestions. These metrics are presented clearly in the Zepp app, with enough explanation to be useful without overwhelming newer users.

The watches do a good job of linking effort to consequence. Hard sessions increase load and recovery time in a way that feels proportional, while easier workouts still register as productive rather than being dismissed as noise.

What’s notable is the restraint in how this data is framed. Unlike some platforms that aggressively push “productive” or “unproductive” labels, Amazfit keeps the tone neutral, letting users interpret trends over time rather than reacting emotionally to a single session.

Zepp Coach and guided training plans

Zepp Coach is Amazfit’s answer to adaptive training guidance, and at launch it feels more mature than earlier iterations. Users can select goals like finishing a certain distance or improving general fitness, and the system builds a plan that adjusts based on completed workouts and recovery status.

During hands-on testing, plans adapted sensibly to missed sessions and lighter days, rather than rigidly sticking to a calendar. That flexibility makes Zepp Coach more approachable for real-world schedules, especially for runners who don’t train with military consistency.

It’s still not a replacement for a dedicated coach or Garmin’s more advanced race prediction ecosystem, but for beginner to intermediate athletes, it strikes a strong balance between structure and freedom.

Athlete-focused tools and everyday usability

Additional touches like virtual pacer support, track running mode, and strength training rep detection show that Amazfit is thinking beyond casual fitness. Strength tracking isn’t flawless, but exercises and rep counts were generally accurate enough to reduce post-workout editing.

The lightweight aluminium cases and curved backs also matter here. During longer workouts and sweaty sessions, neither watch felt top-heavy or abrasive, and the included straps handled moisture without becoming uncomfortable.

Taken together, the GTR 4 and GTS 4 feel like watches designed to support consistent training rather than occasional activity. They don’t try to out-Garmin Garmin, but they close the gap meaningfully while maintaining a friendlier price point and a less intimidating learning curve.

Software experience and Zepp OS: navigation, app ecosystem, smart features, and phone compatibility

All of that training depth would fall flat if the day-to-day software didn’t hold up, and this is where Zepp OS on the GTR 4 and GTS 4 quietly does a lot of heavy lifting. Amazfit isn’t chasing a smartwatch-as-phone replacement narrative here, but the overall experience feels more refined and less compromised than earlier generations.

Navigation and everyday UI flow

Zepp OS feels fast and predictable on both watches, helped by responsive touch input and clearly defined gesture shortcuts. Swiping down for quick settings, up for notifications, and sideways through widgets becomes second nature within minutes, without the sense that features are buried behind awkward menus.

The rotating crown on the GTR 4 in particular adds real usability value rather than feeling decorative. Scrolling through longer lists like workouts, historical stats, or app menus is smoother and more precise than relying on touch alone, especially mid-workout or with sweaty hands.

Visually, the interface prioritises clarity over flourish. Animations are restrained, text is legible even at a glance, and complications load quickly, which reinforces the idea that these watches are built first as tools rather than fashion-led smart accessories.

Widgets, watch faces, and personalisation

Customisation remains one of Amazfit’s strengths, with a wide range of watch faces available directly through the Zepp app. Many faces allow modular data placement, letting users prioritise metrics like heart rate, readiness, weather, or training load without visual clutter.

The widget system continues that flexibility. You can stack frequently used data screens in a logical order, from recovery and sleep insights to calendar previews and music controls, making the watch feel tailored rather than generic.

It’s worth noting that while the AMOLED displays on both models are excellent, some third-party faces still vary in polish. Official faces tend to be better optimised for battery life and readability, which is something buyers will want to factor into daily use.

App ecosystem: practical, not expansive

Zepp OS has an app store, but expectations need to be realistic. This is not a Wear OS or watchOS-style ecosystem with hundreds of must-have downloads, and Amazfit isn’t pretending otherwise.

What’s here focuses on utility rather than novelty. Apps like calculators, hydration reminders, to-do lists, simple navigation tools, and interval timers integrate cleanly into the system without slowing things down or draining battery aggressively.

Third-party developer support is growing, but slowly. For users who rely on niche smartwatch apps, this remains a limitation, though fitness-first buyers are unlikely to feel short-changed by the available selection.

Smart features and daily convenience

Smart notifications are reliable and consistent across both Android and iOS, with clear formatting and minimal lag. Messages, calls, and app alerts come through cleanly, though replies remain limited to preset responses on Android and unavailable on iOS.

Music storage and playback are a standout feature at this price. Offline playlists synced directly to the watch work smoothly with Bluetooth headphones, making phone-free runs and gym sessions genuinely practical.

Voice assistant support via Amazon Alexa is included, though functionality depends heavily on phone connectivity. It’s useful for quick tasks like setting timers or checking weather, but it’s not positioned as a core interaction method.

Phone compatibility and platform balance

One of Amazfit’s biggest advantages is its genuinely platform-agnostic approach. Both the GTR 4 and GTS 4 offer near-identical experiences on Android and iOS, avoiding the feature fragmentation that often plagues non-Apple watches on iPhone.

The Zepp companion app is cleanly designed and relatively intuitive, with clear sections for health data, training analysis, and device settings. Syncing during hands-on testing was stable, with data transferring quickly after workouts and overnight sleep sessions.

There are still ecosystem trade-offs. You won’t get deep integrations like Apple Health exclusives or Samsung’s ecosystem tie-ins, but for users who want a balanced, brand-neutral smartwatch that doesn’t punish iPhone owners, Amazfit’s approach feels refreshingly fair.

Battery awareness baked into the software

Battery management is tightly integrated into Zepp OS, with clear estimates and mode toggles that actually make sense. Switching to battery saver doesn’t cripple the watch entirely, and even in full-featured mode, background processes feel well controlled.

This matters because the long battery life isn’t just a hardware win. The software avoids the constant background syncing and visual excess that quietly erode endurance on more app-heavy platforms.

In daily use, Zepp OS reinforces the core identity of the GTR 4 and GTS 4: fitness-forward watches with smart features that support, rather than dominate, the experience.

Battery life and charging: early real-world impressions versus Amazfit’s claims

Coming straight off Zepp OS’s battery-aware design, endurance is where the GTR 4 and GTS 4 are clearly positioned to differentiate themselves from mainstream smartwatch rivals. Amazfit is making confident claims here, and after several days of mixed use, those numbers don’t feel like fantasy marketing.

This is still early testing rather than a full drain cycle review, but first impressions already give a clear sense of where real-world expectations should land.

What Amazfit promises on paper

Amazfit rates the GTR 4 for up to 14 days of typical use, stretching to around 24 days in battery saver mode. The smaller, lighter GTS 4 is quoted at up to 8 days of typical use and roughly 16 days with heavy restrictions enabled.

For GPS-heavy users, Amazfit claims up to around 25–30 hours of continuous tracking depending on accuracy mode. These figures immediately place both watches closer to Garmin’s fitness-first models than to Apple Watch or Galaxy Watch competitors.

Early daily use: notifications, workouts, sleep tracking

Across the first few days of hands-on use, battery drain has been predictably steady rather than spiky. With continuous heart rate tracking enabled, sleep tracking active, regular notifications, and one GPS workout per day, the GTR 4 dropped at a pace that suggests well over a week is realistic.

The GTS 4 drains faster, as expected given its slimmer case and smaller battery, but not dramatically so. Based on current consumption, five to six days of genuinely active use feels achievable without resorting to aggressive power saving.

GPS usage and training impact

Extended GPS sessions are where smartwatches often stumble, but Amazfit’s multi-band GPS implementation hasn’t shown alarming drops so far. A one-hour outdoor run typically shaved around 4–6 percent off the GTR 4 in accuracy-focused modes, which aligns well with Amazfit’s endurance claims.

The GTS 4 loses slightly more per session, though not enough to change day-to-day usability for runners or gym users. Crucially, GPS use doesn’t seem to trigger background drain afterward, something that still affects more app-heavy platforms.

Always-on display and screen behavior

Enabling always-on display predictably shortens battery life, but the hit feels controlled rather than punitive. On the GTR 4, AOD usage appears to shave a couple of days off the headline figure rather than halving it outright.

The AMOLED panels themselves remain efficient, with adaptive brightness behaving sensibly indoors and outdoors. There’s no sense that screen management is undermining the otherwise strong endurance story.

Charging speed and day-to-day practicality

Charging is handled via Amazfit’s familiar magnetic puck, and while it’s not especially premium, it’s reliable. A full charge from near empty takes just under two hours, which feels acceptable given how infrequently you’ll need to do it.

More importantly, short top-ups are genuinely useful here. Plugging in during a shower or post-workout cooldown can easily buy another full day of use, reinforcing the low-maintenance appeal of both watches.

How this stacks up against Apple, Samsung, and Garmin

Compared to Apple Watch Series models or Samsung’s Galaxy Watch line, the difference is night and day. Not thinking about charging every evening fundamentally changes how the GTR 4 and GTS 4 fit into daily routines.

Against Garmin, the comparison is closer, but Amazfit still holds its own considering the brighter displays and broader smartwatch features. If long battery life is a priority and you don’t want to live in power-saving modes, these early impressions suggest Amazfit’s claims are grounded in reality rather than optimism.

Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Support on Ko-Fi

GTR 4 vs GTS 4: key differences and which model makes sense for which type of user

With battery life and core tracking largely aligned, the real decision between the GTR 4 and GTS 4 comes down to form factor, ergonomics, and how you actually wear a smartwatch day to day. Amazfit hasn’t positioned these as “better” and “worse” options, but as two interpretations of the same platform aimed at different wrists and preferences.

Design language and case shape

The GTR 4 sticks closely to traditional watch design, using a 46mm round case with a prominent bezel and a physical rotating crown. On the wrist, it reads more like a conventional sports watch, especially in darker finishes or paired with leather on the Classic variant.

The GTS 4 goes the opposite direction with a slim rectangular case that’s closer in spirit to an Apple Watch, but lighter and less visually busy. It disappears under cuffs more easily and feels more understated, particularly in everyday, non-sport settings.

Dimensions, weight, and wrist comfort

Size and mass are where the two diverge most clearly in real-world wear. The GTR 4 weighs noticeably more and has more presence, which some users will appreciate for stability during runs or outdoor activities.

The GTS 4 is significantly lighter and thinner, and during sleep tracking or long workdays, that reduction in bulk is immediately noticeable. For smaller wrists or users sensitive to weight overnight, the GTS 4 is simply easier to live with.

Display experience and interaction

Both watches use bright AMOLED panels with excellent visibility outdoors, but the experience differs due to shape. The GTR 4’s circular 1.43-inch display feels natural for watch faces and fitness data, especially when glancing mid-workout.

The GTS 4’s larger rectangular panel shows more information at once, which benefits notifications, maps, and training metrics. Scrolling through data-heavy screens feels more efficient here, even without a rotating crown.

Controls and day-to-day usability

The rotating crown on the GTR 4 isn’t just cosmetic. It genuinely improves navigation through menus, especially when your hands are sweaty or you’re wearing gloves, and it reduces reliance on swipes during workouts.

The GTS 4 relies on touch and a side button, which works well but feels more familiar than distinctive. If you value tactile control and one-handed operation, the GTR 4 has the edge.

Battery size and endurance differences

Battery performance follows the physical constraints of each design. The GTR 4’s larger case allows for a bigger battery, translating to longer gaps between charges under identical usage.

The GTS 4 still performs well by smartwatch standards, but you’ll recharge it more often, particularly if you use GPS and always-on display regularly. It’s not inconvenient, but it’s a trade-off worth acknowledging.

Straps, materials, and personalization

Both models use standard quick-release straps, but the GTR 4’s wider 22mm lug spacing opens up more third-party options, especially for sport and leather bands. It also carries a slightly more premium feel in metal finishes.

The GTS 4 uses narrower straps that suit its lighter profile and keep the overall package balanced. It feels more like a fitness-first wearable that can dress up, rather than a watch trying to replace a traditional timepiece.

Which one should you actually buy?

The GTR 4 makes the most sense for users who want a classic watch silhouette, longer battery life, and physical controls that feel purpose-built for training. It’s particularly well suited to runners, outdoor athletes, and anyone who prefers their smartwatch to look like a watch first.

The GTS 4 is a better fit for users prioritizing comfort, sleep tracking, and all-day wear, or those coming from rectangular smartwatches who don’t want to adapt to a round interface. It’s also the more discreet choice for mixed fitness and lifestyle use, especially on smaller wrists.

Early pros, cons, and unanswered questions after our first hands-on

Stepping back after handling both watches side by side, a clearer picture starts to form of where Amazfit has genuinely moved things forward, and where the GTR 4 and GTS 4 still feel like works in progress rather than finished statements.

What impressed us straight away

The biggest immediate win is GPS performance. With dual-band GNSS onboard, initial outdoor tracking locked on quickly and stayed stable in dense urban surroundings, which is a noticeable step up from earlier Amazfit generations.

Heart rate tracking during steady-state runs and gym sessions looked more consistent than before, with fewer sudden spikes or dropouts. It’s not a lab-grade assessment yet, but the early data trends in the right direction compared to older BioTracker sensors.

Battery life also remains a core strength. Even with frequent notifications, daily workouts, and occasional GPS use, the GTR 4 in particular feels like it will comfortably outlast mainstream rivals from Apple and Samsung by several days.

Design and comfort wins that matter long term

Both watches are impressively light for their size, and that shows during all-day wear and sleep tracking. The GTS 4 almost disappears on the wrist, while the GTR 4 balances its larger case well thanks to curved lugs and sensible weight distribution.

Screen quality is another quiet success. The AMOLED panels are sharp, bright outdoors, and restrained indoors, avoiding the over-saturated look some competitors lean into.

Physical controls on the GTR 4 deserve special mention here again, as they make mid-workout interactions far less disruptive. It’s a small thing, but it adds up quickly if you train regularly.

Software strengths, with familiar limitations

Zepp OS continues to be clean and responsive, with fast menu navigation and minimal lag during our hands-on time. Core features like workouts, recovery metrics, sleep data, and readiness-style insights are easy to find and logically organized.

However, the app ecosystem still feels thin compared to Wear OS or watchOS. You get the essentials, but if you rely on third-party fitness platforms or niche apps, you’ll still be working within Amazfit’s walled garden.

Notifications are reliable but basic. You can read them clearly, but interaction remains limited, reinforcing that these are fitness-first watches rather than full smartwatch replacements.

Early drawbacks we can’t ignore

While Amazfit promises improved health algorithms, metrics like stress, recovery, and sleep stages still need longer-term validation. Early impressions are positive, but consistency over weeks matters more than a few good sessions.

The interface customization options, particularly watch faces, are plentiful but uneven in quality. Some designs look excellent, while others feel cluttered or poorly optimized for glanceability.

Music support remains functional rather than polished. Offline playback works, but syncing and controls don’t feel as seamless as on higher-priced competitors.

Durability and training depth still under evaluation

The aluminum and polymer construction keeps weight down, but it doesn’t project the same rugged confidence as a Garmin Forerunner or Fenix. How well these watches hold up to repeated outdoor abuse is something only extended testing will answer.

Sport mode depth is broad, but not always deep. Advanced metrics for runners and cyclists are present, yet power users may still find gaps once they dig into post-workout analysis.

Water resistance and swim tracking look solid on paper, but open-water accuracy and stroke detection consistency need more real-world sessions before we’re convinced.

The big unanswered questions

Long-term sensor accuracy remains the most important unknown. Heart rate, SpO2, and sleep tracking all look improved, but only sustained comparison against known benchmarks will confirm whether Amazfit has truly closed the gap.

Zepp OS update cadence is another question mark. Features live or die by software support, and it’s not yet clear how aggressively Amazfit will iterate once these watches are in users’ hands.

Finally, value will depend on pricing stability. If the GTR 4 and GTS 4 stay competitively priced, they undercut many rivals while offering excellent battery life, but any significant price creep would put them in tougher territory against more mature ecosystems.

Initial verdict: who the Amazfit GTR 4 and GTS 4 are best for (and who should look elsewhere)

Taken as a whole, the GTR 4 and GTS 4 feel like Amazfit’s most confident “middle ground” smartwatches yet. They’re clearly not chasing Apple or Samsung head-on, nor are they trying to be hardcore Garmin replacements, but they land convincingly in between.

After hands-on time, the strengths and trade-offs are becoming clearer, and that makes it easier to say who these watches genuinely make sense for right now.

Best for: fitness-focused users who want long battery life without going full Garmin

If you train regularly but don’t want a bulky, plasticky sports watch, the GTR 4 and GTS 4 hit a sweet spot. They’re light, comfortable for all-day wear, and slim enough to work as everyday watches rather than purely training tools.

Battery life is a major draw here. Multi-day endurance with continuous health tracking still feels refreshing in a market where daily charging has become normalised.

For runners, gym-goers, and casual cyclists who want GPS, heart rate, SpO2, sleep tracking, and a wide range of sport modes, these watches cover the essentials with minimal friction.

Best for: Android and iOS users who don’t want ecosystem lock-in

Unlike Apple Watch or Galaxy Watch, the Amazfit ecosystem is largely platform-agnostic. Notifications, fitness tracking, and core features work similarly whether you’re on Android or iOS, which is a genuine advantage for users who switch phones or don’t want to commit to a single brand.

Zepp OS feels fast, stable, and efficient, even if it lacks the app depth of Wear OS or watchOS. For many buyers, that trade-off is acceptable when it means better battery life and fewer background annoyances.

If you mainly want a smartwatch to track health, show notifications, control music, and log workouts, the experience is focused and largely distraction-free.

Best for: style-conscious buyers choosing between round and square

The choice between GTR 4 and GTS 4 is more about aesthetics than functionality. The GTR 4’s round case and rotating crown lean traditional, while the GTS 4’s square design feels more modern and information-dense.

Both use aluminum cases with polymer backs, keeping weight down and comfort high, especially during sleep tracking. Strap compatibility and quick-release bands also make it easy to dress them up or down.

They don’t have the luxury finishing of premium watches, but at this price point the materials and overall wearability feel well judged.

Who should look elsewhere: power users and data obsessives

If you live inside training load charts, recovery readiness scores, and deep performance analytics, Garmin still holds the edge. While Amazfit offers a wide array of metrics, the depth and long-term interpretation aren’t as refined yet.

Serious runners, triathletes, and cyclists using power meters or advanced training plans may find the post-workout analysis a little shallow once the initial feature list excitement fades.

This isn’t a failure so much as a clear positioning choice, but it’s important to be honest about where the ceiling currently sits.

Who should look elsewhere: smartwatch-first buyers

If you want third-party apps, mobile payments everywhere, voice assistants that actually feel useful, and seamless phone integration, Apple Watch and Galaxy Watch remain the safer bets.

Music syncing, notifications, and smart features all work on the GTR 4 and GTS 4, but they feel functional rather than delightful. The focus here is efficiency, not ecosystem magic.

Users who expect their watch to replace frequent phone interactions may find Zepp OS too restrained.

The bottom line

At launch, the Amazfit GTR 4 and GTS 4 come across as confident, well-balanced smartwatches that prioritise battery life, comfort, and broad fitness tracking over flashy smart features. They’re especially compelling for users who want reliable health and workout data without committing to daily charging or a closed ecosystem.

There are still open questions around long-term sensor accuracy, software updates, and training depth, but early impressions suggest Amazfit has tightened the gaps that mattered most. If pricing holds and software support stays consistent, these watches feel less like compromises and more like smart, deliberate choices in a crowded market.

Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.