Heart rate differential between 7X and Apple Watch

Well, get chest strap for a while. I used it long time ago. I was often going for a bike ride, get clothes on and then figured out that I forgot to put chest strap. Then I switched to optical sensor on the watch itself. I know it's less accurate but good enough for me. 

howardsolomon said:

For 1,000 dollars, I’d like for the 7x to be more accurate!

We all know how expensive these watches are. We don’t need to be constantly reminded virtually every time some body posts a complaint or comments.  However, that said, irrespective of the price of the watch the limitations are down to the optical heart rate technology. While this has been improved tremendously over the years there are some people and some situations where it will not work. 

As for the continual posts suggesting that the Apple Watch is great it takes only a short search on the interweb to find similar complaints from some people about the Apple Watch. 

You’re taking my comment slightly out of context. I’m delighted w the 7x. I’m not comparing it against my Apple Watch at all, with the exception of HR. And of course, why wouldnt I or anyone else want to see it improved though your point about limitation of technology is well taken. FWIW I like Apple Watch too. They are just vastly different devices in my opinion. 

I keep seeing comments like this about the Apple Watch, but I don't see it. MacRumors which has an active forum and I don't currently see anyone complaining about the Heart Rate sensor. I own a Tactix Delta and an Apple Watch 7. The 7 is much more accurate (for me anyway).

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/7748825

As.I said, it doesn’t take much to search the interweb - apple watch heart rate monitor problems. I accept this link refers to an older post but the point is still extant; there are people out there having similar issues with the Apple Watch’s HRM currently.

So far my Fenix 7 seems more accurate than my old Fenix 6.  But that doesn't mean much because the Fenix 6 HRM was so bad it was almost worthless.  Apple watch still has a  superior HRM to the 7 but I'm just happy it's not worthless like the 6 was. Agree for $1,000 it should be better but Garmin just isn't quite there yet with their HRM. At least on their Fenix line as I haven't tried their other products. 

Bonjour, je commence à avoir des doutes sur le capteur.

Exemple : je cours à 10km/h le capteur m'indique 155bpm.

Autres  exemples : je cours à 7,5 km/h, le capteur indique également 155 bpm. J'ai mon ancienne montre Forerunner 945LTE, je n'ai pas ce problème.

Fenix 7S Solar saphir.

I started using an EPIX Gen 2 (same sensor), and I must say I'm quite unpleasantly surprised at how inaccurate is the heart rate measurement.
A year and a half ago, I purchased Venu 2 - it was the first Garmin watch with the same sensor (new back then) Elevate 4.0, and it got my heart rate pretty accurately and pretty quickly - very noticeable during quick peaks in sprinting and floor climbing.
Even the strength trainings were alright.
I decided to upgrade to EPIX Gen 2 a month ago, and it's really bad. It just always misses the peaks.
For example, even when my heart is literarily exploding, it shows 120-ish, while I know it reached my maximum of around 160+.
That's really a bad gap.

Considering the fact that the heart rate is the single most important parameter used to calculate not only the training load but also calories spent, recovery (especially at high altitude), and a lot of others, it's honestly unacceptable to pay a premium sports watch and not receive a better accuracy.
I know the solution is either a chest strap or an arm strap, but when paying such a price, you would expect it to do the job on your wrist.
In the end, Apple really nailed it with their latest sensor, it's just a lot more accurate considering the fact that it's predominantly a smartwatch and certainly a loss less of a sports watch compared to the Garmin, which is ridiculous. 

Yosif Starkov said:

In the end, Apple really nailed it with their latest sensor, it's just a lot more accurate considering the fact that it's predominantly a smartwatch and certainly a loss less of a sports watch compared to the Garmin, which is ridiculous. 

Just an FYI, you're comparing a previous-generation Garmin HR sensor to "the latest" Apple Watch HR sensor, which hardly seems fair to me.

A more relevant comparison would be the new Elevate 5 sensor (found in the Fenix 7 Pro / Epix 2 Pro models) to the current AW sensor. And by nearly all accounts I've read, it's every bit as good as the newest AW sensor, perhaps even better.

and in my own experience, while I don't have an AW to compare it to, I can report that my Elevate 5 sensor HR readings are basically identical to a chest strap, with a couple seconds of delay of course which is unavoidable with wrist-based measurements. I will always prefer a chest strap versus OHR, but the newest Elevate 5 sensor is good enough to where if I forget to wear my chest strap it's not really problematic in any meaningful way.

Anyways, to repeat what philipshambrook posted in here a year ago, every single sensor from every single company is going to have some people and/or some circumstances where it performs poorer for them than a different sensor would. That true for garmin, for apple, and for everyone else. OHR is an imperfect science, impacted by a lot of variables. No OHR sensor will EVER work perfectly for all people all the time.