Does the base digital watch face use more power versus a very basic Connect IQ face? I have a 920XT, but I assume that the other Connect IQ capable watches also restrict real-time seconds for custom faces. I'm curious whether a simple analog face updating hand position every minute will consume much less power than the stock face showing battery percent, drawing each second, showing frequently updated steps, etc. Even a small difference may add up if you're going off the grid for a while and won't have a chance to charge.
I was just thinking about my own simple analog face (https://apps.garmin.com/en-US/apps/848441dd-166a-4958-b446-edc53b52bb14). Thanks for the info - I'm going backpacking this weekend and want to do everything possible to not run out of battery. I'll have to look into the different GPS and tracking settings to see how long I can record for.
If you are recording something, the watchface isn't running at all and using none of the battery.
With the vivoactive (and probably others), you can actually charge the device while you are in an activity - you change the "USB Mode" on the device from "mass store" to "Garmin, slip the charging cradle under the device while it's on your wrist, and use something like a cell phone charger (that uses batteries) to kept it as charged as possible.
I would expect the default face to have lower power consumption than even a ConnectIQ face that did absolutely nothing. The default face on our devices runs directly on the display controller hardware, allowing the main core to almost shutdown entirely. Pushing display data over to the controller even once per minute increases the overall power drain on the unit.
If the code that runs in the ConnectIQ watch face's onUpdate routine is simple, it should get very close to the same amount of battery life as the default face.
