Garmin Instinct 3 Review of AMOLED vs. Solar Models Tested by ChaseTheSummit

The Garmin Instinct 3, available in both AMOLED and Solar variants, has been thoroughly tested by the ChaseTheSummit YouTube channel, which provides detailed insights into the performance and features of these rugged outdoor watches. The Instinct series, long celebrated for its durability and appeal to outdoor enthusiasts, continues to evolve with the Instinct 3 lineup. While both models cater to different user preferences, their performance, design, and functionality offer notable contrasts.

The AMOLED model features a bright, high-resolution display with approximately 1000 nits of brightness, delivering excellent visibility even under direct sunlight. This vibrant screen makes the watch more engaging, especially when navigating its user interface. However, the AMOLED model lacks a touchscreen, which is a surprising omission for a watch priced as high as $499. While some users may prefer physical button controls, ChaseTheSummit notes that Garmin could have offered a toggle option to disable the touchscreen, as seen in other Garmin models. Despite its absence, the display is well-constructed, likely using Gorilla Glass to minimize glare and reflection. Battery life on the AMOLED model is good but not groundbreaking. It is sufficient for ultramarathons, but it trails the solar variant in longevity. Additional features, such as muscle maps, large font mode, and strength training animations, enhance its appeal but do not fully compensate for the missing touchscreen and mapping capabilities.

In contrast, the Solar model retains a monochrome memory-in-pixel (MIP) display, which stands out for its exceptional clarity, contrast, and efficiency. This display is highly readable in all lighting conditions, including direct sunlight, performing even better than the AMOLED display. The improved backlight ensures excellent visibility at night. Solar charging capabilities have also seen significant enhancements, with the Solar model outperforming its predecessor, the Instinct 2X, by 33% in solar collection efficiency. During a controlled test, the Solar model collected 50,000 lux hours in just 23 minutes of direct sunlight, compared to 32,000 lux hours for the Instinct 2X. After an hour, the Solar model reached 88,000 lux hours, demonstrating its ability to gather solar energy quickly. Even under less-than-ideal conditions, such as cloudy weather or indirect sunlight during a two-hour run, the Solar model collected 33,000 lux hours. ChaseTheSummit highlights that users who spend time outdoors regularly may rarely need to charge the watch, thanks to its enhanced solar efficiency.

source @ChaseTheSummit

Both models share upgraded features, including Garmin Pay, improved training metrics like training load focus and nap detection, and new social features like Garmin Messenger. The watches also have SatIQ technology and multi-band GPS for excellent tracking accuracy. GPS performance in tests matched that of higher-end Garmin models, with SatIQ intelligently switching between satellite modes to balance accuracy and battery life. However, notable omissions include music storage, advanced training metrics such as Hill and Endurance scores, and full mapping functionality. Instead, the Instinct 3 relies on breadcrumb navigation, albeit with minor enhancements like city name display. ChaseTheSummit considers the lack of maps a significant drawback for a watch marketed to hikers and backpackers, especially given the capabilities of the AMOLED display.

From a hardware perspective, both watches maintain the rugged design synonymous with the Instinct series, now featuring a built-in flashlight on all models. ChaseTheSummit initially considered the flashlight a gimmick but now uses it daily for tasks like finding keys or navigating dark rooms. Despite the premium pricing, Garmin opted for its Gen 4 heart rate sensor instead of the newer Gen 5, meaning users miss out on features like ECG and skin temperature monitoring. Nevertheless, the Gen 4 sensor delivers reliable accuracy for most activities, consistent results across multiple tests, and is comparable to other Garmin devices that use the same sensor.

ChaseTheSummit’s final analysis strongly favours the Solar model for its exceptional battery life, improved solar charging, and functional MIP display, making it an ideal choice for outdoor enthusiasts. While visually impressive, the AMOLED model struggles to justify its high price given the absence of touch controls, mapping, and music storage. At $499, it competes directly with Garmin’s other models, like the Forerunner 965, which offers more features for the same price. As ChaseTheSummit concluded, the Solar model retains the rugged, outdoors-focused identity of the Instinct series, while the AMOLED variant feels more like a crossover attempting to bridge the gap with Garmin’s fitness-oriented watches. For those who value practical outdoor functionality over flashy visuals, the Solar model is the clear winner in the Instinct 3 lineup.