Compare Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Withings ScanWatch Nova

GPS accuracy was one of the strongest areas, with repeated praise for near-flawless tracks, reliable distance, and strong multi-band performance.

GPS-linked tracking drew repeated complaints about connection gaps and missing map routes, reinforcing the lack of robust built-in GPS.

Heart-rate accuracy was widely praised, often compared favorably with chest straps, though gym and cycling edge cases remained.

Heart rate accuracy received strong support from one reviewer who compared it favorably with a chest strap.

Fitness tracking accuracy was rated very highly, with several reviewers calling the broader tracking experience impeccable or second to none.

Fitness tracking accuracy was mixed, ranging from good workout measurements to specific inaccuracies in automatically logged activities.

Sleep tracking accuracy was mixed: some found it reasonably accurate, while others found it less robust or weak at REM-stage tracking.

Sleep tracking accuracy was mixed, with one review finding it pretty accurate and others doubting accuracy or reporting missed sleep periods.

Workout tracking variety was a major strength, with praise for many sports modes, multisport/triathlon support, and broad training coverage.

Workout variety was mixed: one reviewer found options limited, another called workout tracking less comprehensive, while another appreciated broad automatic activity support.

Coaching features were a major strength, especially training readiness, daily suggested workouts, triathlon plans, and adaptive guidance.

Coaching-style insights were considered useful when they translated health data into behaviors or an actionable overview.

Health tracking accuracy was mixed: general metrics were useful, but reviewers criticized illness detection and Garmin’s sleep-stage limitations.

Health tracking accuracy was one of the most praised areas, with reviewers describing accurate sensors, useful health data, and results comparable to other devices.

Wellness insights were highly useful for some reviewers, especially Body Battery, sleep score, readiness, race projections, and evening reports.

Wellness insights were praised when they made health data actionable, contextual, or useful for spotting broader health risks.

Step counting accuracy had limited positive evidence, with one controlled walk test missing by only about 40 steps.

Step counting accuracy was praised as user-friendly and accurate, including one comparison favoring it over a previous Fitbit.

Battery life split reviewers: it easily beat daily-charge smartwatches for some, but many noted regression from the 265 and short always-on runtimes.

Battery life was one of the strongest points, with reviewers repeatedly reporting weeks of use and little battery anxiety.

Charging speed had limited positive evidence, with one reviewer saying a morning-shower charge could refill the watch.

Charging speed was viewed positively, with reviewers describing full recharges from under an hour to a respectable two hours.

Charging convenience was mixed: the connector clicks in reliably, but the lack of wireless charging disappointed an Apple Watch switcher.

Charging convenience split reviewers: the newer cradle was praised by one reviewer, but several others called the charger cheap, inelegant, or lacking wireless convenience.

Comfort was mostly praised for lightness and long-wear feel, though larger-case sleep comfort bothered some reviewers.

Comfort was a major strength across reviews, especially for all-day and overnight wear, with lighter models and comfortable bands helping.

Materials quality was viewed as improved thanks to the aluminum bezel, though reviewers still described the watch as mid-range or partly plastic.

Materials quality was praised through references to robust glass, rotating bezel construction, and premium materials.

Fit was praised for secure wrist placement, good sizing, ample strap holes, and minimal movement during workouts.

Fit was mixed: some reviewers achieved a good or problem-free fit, while one struggled with the metal strap being too tight or too loose.

Water resistance had limited but positive real-world evidence from swimming in pools, lakes, and the ocean without issues.

Water resistance was viewed as capable but not class-leading, with one reviewer comparing it unfavorably to Apple Watch Ultra 2 and another noting a significant 10ATM bump.

Size options were praised because the 42mm and 47mm choices helped smaller wrists and broadened appeal.

Size evidence was limited to the Brilliant version being suitable for smaller wrists.

Style and design were widely praised for a more colorful, expressive, premium-looking Forerunner, though one reviewer found it visually familiar.

Style and design were the most consistent strengths, with reviewers praising its analog look, elegance, premium feel, and compliment-worthy appearance.

Build quality was generally praised for the aluminum bezel, low weight, and sturdy polymer construction, though it remains mid-range rather than luxury.

Build quality came across as premium, with reviewers praising the solid construction, price-appropriate finish, and premium materials.

Durability evidence was positive overall, with reviewers reporting pristine bezels, scratch resistance, and little wear after weeks or months.

Durability evidence was limited but positive, with one reviewer saying the watch still looked pristine after travel and rough handling.

Band feedback was mostly positive for comfort, breathability, drying, and odor resistance, with one reviewer noting an imperfect flush fit.

Bands were often praised for comfort, flexibility, quality, and included tools, though some reviewers found adjustment imperfect or only liked the metal band best.

Display quality was a clear highlight: reviewers liked the larger, sharper, vivid AMOLED screen and premium visual feel.

Display quality was generally legible and improved, but its small size and smartwatch limitations caused mixed reactions.

Outdoor visibility was excellent, with reviewers praising bright-sun readability and clarity in varied outdoor conditions.

Outdoor visibility was mixed: some reviewers found the OLED readable in sunlight, while others struggled with direct sun or reflections.

Brightness was one of the strongest points, with reviewers repeatedly praising the brighter AMOLED panel and outdoor readability.

Brightness handling was praised for automatic adjustment, although the evidence is limited to the small OLED display.

ECG functionality was one of the most criticized omissions because the Gen 5 sensor made reviewers expect ECG at this price.

ECG functionality was usually praised as easy, useful, or medically meaningful, though one reviewer noted setup delays and another found it movement-sensitive.

Strength-workout auto-detection received limited but positive evidence: one reviewer found the watch good at detecting sets and related gym data.

Reviewers liked that activity detection can work reliably and conveniently, but several also found false or incomplete auto-detected sessions.

Cross-platform compatibility was good with iPhone syncing, while phone-dependent assistant behavior and iPhone reply limits kept it from being seamless.

Cross-platform support was supported by one positive app review noting iOS/Android availability and integration with major health platforms.

Smartwatch features improved meaningfully with mic, speaker, reports, voice tools, and music/payment basics, though the watch is still sports-first.

Smartwatch features were consistently limited, with reviewers framing the Nova as a health-focused hybrid rather than a full smartwatch.

Button controls were strongly praised, especially for wet hands, sweaty workouts, swimming, and glove use.

Control feedback was mixed: the crown interface could feel intuitive, but the crown or bezel placement could also be awkward to manipulate.

Third-party app support was useful but limited: Connect IQ adds apps and data fields, but trails watchOS and Wear OS.

Third-party app support was a weakness, with reviewers telling app-focused buyers to look elsewhere or comparing it unfavorably with full smartwatches.

Watch face quality received limited positive evidence for clean defaults and strong customization of stats, color, and layout.

Watch face quality was mixed, with easier time reading and a premium analog face offset by weak lume in some reviews.

Pairing reliability was mixed: one reviewer had smooth iPhone syncing, while another saw repeated phone disconnections.

Pairing and syncing were praised as simple and seamless in the supporting reviews.

Smartphone notifications were a drawback in one review because alerts lingered during workouts and vibration controls were limited.

Notifications were a major tradeoff: some reviewers had no issues or found them readable, but several disliked the limited, non-interactive alert experience.

The companion app earned praise for deep data and customization, but some reviewers noted subscriptions or a learning curve.

The companion app was repeatedly praised as clear, efficient, user-friendly, powerful, and good at presenting health and activity data.

The user interface was generally easier, cleaner, and more useful, though some Garmin newcomers still found it clunkier than Apple.

The user interface was split between intuitive simplicity and the limitations of a passive, small-display interface.

Reviewers saw Garmin’s ecosystem as a strength versus many sports-watch rivals, though not as broad as full smartwatch platforms.

Withings' broader app and device ecosystem was praised for combining watch data with scales and other health products in a useful dashboard.

Customization was praised for watch-face colors, layouts, widgets, data fields, and Garmin’s flexible display options.

Customization evidence was limited but positive, with one reviewer valuing the ability to reorder workout options and screens in the app.

Software smoothness was praised in reviews that found the interface faster, more modern, snappy, and polished.

Software smoothness was supported by seamless watch-app syncing in two reviews.

Bluetooth reliability had negative evidence from one reviewer who repeatedly saw phone disconnect and reconnect messages.

Connected workout tracking could drop the watch connection and leave gaps, creating a Bluetooth-related caveat during GPS-linked activities.

Menu navigation was praised for being intuitive, easier to navigate, and enjoyable to interact with after Garmin’s UI refresh.

Menu navigation was praised as easy and intuitive through the rotating crown.

Mapping and navigation drew the most consistent criticism: breadcrumb routing helped, but reviewers wanted full offline maps at this price.

Mapping evidence was negative in one review, where the app produced a black-screen map for a recorded route.

Call handling was useful but not essential; reviewers said calls worked and audio was acceptable, though one noted volume limits.

Call handling is basic but useful as a screening alert, rather than a full phone-call experience from the watch.

Value for money was the main controversy: reviewers loved the watch but often said the price and omitted maps/ECG hurt its case.

Value was mixed: reviewers often called it expensive, but some felt the design, build, battery life, and health tools could justify the price.

Recovery insights were a standout for several reviewers, helping them judge readiness, avoid overtraining, and interpret rest.

Blood oxygen tracking was generally useful and easy once working, though one reviewer needed several attempts to get an SpO2 reading.

Temperature tracking was viewed as medically useful by several reviewers, though one reviewer questioned its wrist accuracy and another found it irrelevant day to day.

Calorie estimates earned praise in one review as more accurately rendered than the reviewer's previous Fitbit experience.

Reliability was mostly strong for GPS and training use, but one reviewer reported heat-related unresponsiveness.

The operating-system experience felt more modern and coherent, though one Apple switcher still found Garmin clunkier.

Touchscreen responsiveness was consistently praised as fast, responsive, and useful when buttons were not needed.

Voice assistant quality was mixed: offline voice commands worked well for timers and activities, but phone-assistant behavior was less convincing.

Safety features were supported by health-risk warning potential, especially around continuous tracking while awake or asleep.