I Ran a Race With Hyrox Using a Garmin Forerunner 970 on One Wrist and an Amazfit Cheetah 2 Pro on the Other, and Here’s How They Performed.
Last Friday, my Lifehacker colleague Beth Skwarecki and I ran the Hyrox race in 1:36:48. I consider it a pretty decent debut for a runner and weightlifter trying to find a happy medium. I also strapped a Garmin Forerunner 970 ($749.99) to my left wrist and an Amazfit Cheetah 2 Pro ($449.99) to my right, turning the race into an interesting experiment with my two favorite watches. Here’s how it went.
Beth goes into more detail elsewhere , but here’s a quick rundown of what Hyrox is: it’s a structured running race that combines functional training stations, repeated eight times. You run 1km, complete a training station, run another 1km, complete the next station, and so on. The stations alternate exercises like sled pushes, rowing, long jumps with burpees, walking lunges, and wall ball throws. To get the gist, check out Beth’s overview:
View this post on Instagram
How to set your watch for a Hyrox race
From the start, the Amazfit interface, specifically designed for Hyrox, is incredibly easy to use. The Cheetah 2 Pro comes with a built-in Hyrox race mode setting. Simply go to the training menu, select Hyrox, and you’re ready to go. The watch already knows what a race looks like and structures data collection accordingly from the moment you press the start button.
Despite Garmin’s dominance in the running watch market, the Hyrox system doesn’t natively support a race mode. To get the most out of the Forerunner 970, I had to download Roxfit , a handy third-party app that integrates with Garmin Connect and adds a Hyrox-specific structure to my workouts. It works, but it requires some setup, and if you miss a step (which I think I did), you’ll have to figure it out yourself mid-run.
I want to emphasize that Roxfit is your primary app, regardless of which watch you wear. It’s the official companion app for Hyrox races, and it’s where your official race results, split times, and post-event station information are stored—regardless of whether you’re using an Amazfit or not. Think of it not as a workaround for Garmin, but as a core part of the Hyrox ecosystem. The difference is that Garmin athletes also need to install it on their watch beforehand to get structured tracking during a race, while Amazfit athletes can use it solely as a post-event results hub, without relying on its additions to their watch’s built-in features.
How did this watch perform during the race?
As I’ve written before , these two watches are comparable in key metrics, such as heart rate. As for the user experience, during the race itself, the Amazfit’s built-in Hyrox mode almost immediately became the best. As you progress through the distance, the watch displays small icons on the screen indicating what’s coming next. I understand it may seem like a small thing, but when all your thoughts are focused on your fitness, these little graphical elements are a real lifesaver.
The Amazfit’s lap button interface also felt more intuitive during the run. The Hyrox requires you to manually switch between the running and station segments as you progress through the course, and on the Cheetah 2 Pro, this felt natural. The Garmin, despite being a more technically advanced device in many ways, felt less user-friendly when I was distracted.
The Zepp app is superior to Garmin Connect.
The Zepp app, developed in collaboration with Amazfit, is significantly better than Garmin Connect for analyzing Hyrox data. After a run, Zepp displays a convenient timeline with icons marking each station and each running segment in sequence. The data is organized according to the structure of the run itself, making it ideal for post-run analysis.
Garmin Connect, on the other hand, requires more manual work—something all Garmin fans are accustomed to. Since the watch recorded everything as running intervals rather than correctly distinguishing between runs and stations, post-run analysis meant comparing timestamps with the heart rate graph and trying to mentally reconstruct which segment corresponded to which. This leads me to my only significant complaint about my Garmin experience.
Despite my attempts to properly configure the Forerunner 970 for the run, Garmin registered every segment as a run. This was definitely some kind of error on my part, and I’m not going to blame the setup issue solely on the hardware. But that’s the point: Amazfit doesn’t allow you to make such a mistake.
Result
I’m a huge Garmin fan. My Forerunner 970 is one of my most frequently used watches, and in my previous comparison test of the two during a half marathon, the Garmin came out on top, largely due to the robust interface and the incredible depth of its post-race running dynamics analysis.
But Hyrox is a completely different race, with a specific structure and unique psychological challenges and demands during the race. The built-in Hyrox mode, on-screen station icons, more intuitive lap transitions, and an overall superior post-race app all point to Amazfit’s victory. The $300 price difference makes this race a clear winner.
One caveat: for future Hyrox runs, I’d like to pair the Amazfit with a chest heart rate monitor to ensure the optical wrist-based readings can handle the physical demands of running at the station. Wrist-based heart rate monitors can struggle with activities like sled pushing and rowing, which require significant wrist movement.
Garmin still holds a special place in my heart (and on my wrist!) for traditional running; but on Hyrox race day, with all its specific demands and organized chaos, the Amazfit wins hands down.