I hiked 7 miles with the Garmin Instinct 3 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch 9 — and the winner is clear as day

(Image credit: Dan Bracaglia/Tom's Guide) Which is the better smartwatch for hikers, the Samsung Galaxy Watch 9 or the Garmin Instinct 3? The latter may be built for logging outdoor adventures, but both watches use similar tracking tech, offer a dedicated hiking mode, and also cost about the same.To find out, I wore the Garmin Instinct 3 on my right wrist and the Samsung Galaxy Watch 9 on my left wrist, fired up a hiking workout on both, and started the ~1,700-foot climb to Snow Lake, a scenic high-altitude alpine lake located in the Cascade Mountains, an hour east of Seattle. I also logged the trek using the Strava app on my iPhone 16 as a control.I hiked 7 miles with the Garmin Instinct 3 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch 9 So, which smartwatch, the Samsung Galaxy Watch 9 or the Garmin Instinct 3, proved to be the more reliable hiking companion? Find the results for each watch, along with Strava, below. Swipe to scroll horizontally Header Cell - Column 0 Galaxy Watch 9 Garmin Instinct 3 Strava Distance 6.49 miles 6.55 miles 6.70 miles Climb 1,866 feet 1,693 feet 1,674 feet Steps Not provided 16,096 steps 15,048 steps Average pace 34 mins 20 secs per mile 24 mins 15 secs per mile 25 mins 23 secs per mile Average heart rate 133 bpm 130 bpm n/a Max heart rate 174 bpm 173 bpm n/a Calories burned (total) 1,442 calories 1,332 calories n/a 1. Samsung overcounted my climb and undercounted my distance (Image credit: Dan Bracaglia/Tom's Guide)The Galaxy Watch 9 overcounted my uphill efforts by a whopping 180 feetAccording to AllTrails, the Snow Lake Trail is 6.7 miles, which is exactly what Strava logged. The Instinct 3 came pretty close, depriving me of 0.15 miles of effort, while the Galaxy Watch 9 undercounted by 0.21 miles.AllTrails additionally lists 1,686 feet of elevation gain for the hike, a tally that both Strava and Garmin came incredibly close to nailing; the former undercounted by just 12 feet and the latter overcounted by a mere 7 feet.The Galaxy Watch 9, meanwhile, overcounted my uphill efforts by a whopping 180 feet.2. The Galaxy Watch 9 didn't count my stepsWhile distance and elevation are the two metrics I care about most when tracking a hike, along with moving pace (more on that below), it's always nice to get a sense of my step count. Unfortunately, the Galaxy Watch 9 neglected to count my steps, which is odd, given it has no trouble doing so when you track a normal walking workout.Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips.3. Samsung doesn't record a 'moving pace' (Image credit: Dan Bracaglia/Tom's Guide)Most smartwatches in 2026 are smart enough to notice that you've stopped moving and automatically pause your workoutMy brother, who was visiting from the U.S. East Coast, joined me on this hike. Our plan was to make it to the lake, cool off, enjoy the tranquility (along with a cheeky beverage), and then head back down.During our mid-hike break, I left all three workout sessions running. Most smartwatches in 2026 are smart enough to notice that you've stopped moving and automatically pause your workout until you're in motion again.Post-outdoor workout, the best smartwatches provide two pace metrics, one reflecting your average moving pace and the other showing your average elapsed pace with pauses included in the calculation. As you might guess, the former is more useful and reflective of your actual efforts.Unfortunately, the Samsung Galaxy Watch 9 only provided one average pace metric without specifying which, but the answer seems obvious. For what it's worth, Garmin and Strava both noted a similar average elapsed pace to Samsung's: 34 mins 10 secs per mile for Garmin and 33 mins 06 secs per mile from Strava. (Image credit: Dan Bracaglia/Tom's Guide)4. Heart rate and calorie data matches up nicelyNow for the good news. The Galaxy Watch 9's heart rate data is a near match with Garmin's, a result I love to see. Both smartwatches also calculated a similar number of calories burned during my 3.5-hour excursion.Winner: Garmin Instinct 3 (Image credit: Dan Bracaglia/Tom's Guide)The Garmin Instinct 3 long ago established itself as my go-to smartwatch for logging outdoor adventures thanks to its reliability, ridiculously good battery performance, bright screen, and rugged design. And it once again excelled on all fronts in this hiking comparison versus the Samsung Galaxy Watch 9.Not only did Garmin calculate more precise distance, climb, and pace data than Samsung, it also logged my steps, something the Galaxy Watch 9 failed to do, all while using way less battery. In other words, the Garmin Instinct 3 wins this comparison.Which smartwatches or fitness trackers should I test head-to-head next? Let me know in the comments below. Follow Tom's Guide on Google News and add us as a preferred source to get our up-to-date news, analysis, and reviews in your feeds. More from Tom's GuideI biked 11 miles with the Garmin Instinct 3 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 — and the winner is clearI walked 4,000 steps with the Pixel Watch 5 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch 9 — and we have a new Android champI walked 7 miles with the Apple Watch Ultra 3 vs Pixel Watch 5 — here's the winner Dan Bracaglia is the Tom’s Guide editorial lead for all things smartwatches, fitness trackers and outdoor gear. With 15 years of experience as a consumer technology journalist testing everything from Oura Rings to instant cameras, Dan is deeply passionate about helping readers save money and make informed purchasing decisions. In the past year alone, Dan has assessed major product releases from the likes of Apple, Garmin, Google, Samsung, Polar and many others. An avid outdoor adventurer, Dan is based in the U.S. Pacific Northwest where he takes advantage of the beautiful surroundings every chance he gets. A lover of kayaking, hiking, swimming, biking, snowboarding and exploring, he also makes every effort to combine his day job with his passions. When not assessing the sleep tracking and heart rate accuracy of the latest tach gadgets, you can find him photographing Seattle’s vibrant underground music community.