The Galaxy Watch 8 series is here, and this is the model I'd buy
Which new Samsung Galaxy Watch would you buy?
0 votes
Samsung Galaxy Watch 8
NaN %
Samsung Galaxy Watch 8 Classic
NaN %
Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (refreshed)
NaN %
None
NaN %
New to the stable
This year, Samsung's wearables have gone all in on the squircle. The cushion-shaped case introduced with the Galaxy Watch Ultra is now standard across the Watch 8 lineup, bringing a more cohesive visual identity. I've already voiced my skepticism around the shape, so I won't harp, but yeah, it was a choice. All three watches also feature an updated dynamic lug system, which Samsung claims should provide more comfort as well as accuracy.
The Galaxy Watch 8 is now 11% thinner than last year's model, with a peak display brightness of 3,000 nits, and still comes in 40mm and 44mm sizes in Silver or Graphite. The Watch 8 Classic, meanwhile, is back in a single 46mm case (Black or White) and brings with it the beloved rotating bezel, which is still the most satisfying way to interact with a smartwatch UI. It also borrows the Quick Button from the Ultra, offering faster access to workouts or custom actions.
C. Scott Brown / Android Authority
Finally, the Galaxy Watch Ultra returns with some light touch-ups, namely a new Titanium Blue colorway, and a bump in storage to match the 64GB found on the 8 Classic. It remains the most rugged and feature-dense option in the lineup, with a large display, long battery life, 10ATM water resistance, dual-frequency GPS, and serious outdoor chops. At $649, though, it's a pricey pick if you don't need all the extras.
All three models ship with One UI 8 Watch based on Wear OS 6, and the user experience is identical no matter which model you buy. The new Now Bar makes multitasking smoother, while stackable tiles and a refreshed apps folder help cut down on menu digging and endless swiping.
All three models ship with One UI 8 Watch based on Wear OS 6.
Samsung's health features also see meaningful updates this year. Sleep coaching now includes bedtime recommendations and passive heart rate tracking (after three nights of baseline data). A new Antioxidant Index gives a five-second reading of carotenoid levels, meant to inform dietary choices. Runners get a more intelligent coaching suite with real-time feedback and personalized training plans. Notably, in an era where others are locking features behind subscriptions, the whole platform is still free. The devices all launch with Gemini preloaded out of the box.
Which one would I buy?
Hadlee Simons / Android Authority
The real question is which watch fits your wrist and your priorities. The Galaxy Watch Ultra is undeniably capable, with the largest battery, most durability, and outdoor-focused features like a siren, triathlon mode, and functional threshold power for cyclists. But it's also large, expensive, and this year, light on changes. Unless you need its rugged toolkit, it's hard to justify the price bump over the others. Honestly, I'd be tempted to snag last year's model at a discount.
That leaves the Galaxy Watch 8 and Watch 8 Classic. The standard Watch 8 is thin, light, and comes in a size that better fits smaller wrists. I do wish it stayed circular, but the overall aesthetic is clean and modern. For a minimalist daily wearable, it's more than capable.
I'd choose the Galaxy Watch 8 Classic for the most distinctive experience Samsung offers.
Yet, the Classic wins my heart again. The rotating bezel remains unmatched for navigating Wear OS without smudging the display, and the added Quick Button now onboard only solidifies the device's user-friendly build. Yes, it's bigger and more expensive, but it's the one I'd wear every day. It's also the one that best separates itself from other Wear OS options, like the Google Pixel lineup. If you value simplicity and a smaller size, the base model is the smarter buy. If you want the most complete, distinctive experience Samsung offers this year, go with the Classic.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Tom's Guide
44 minutes ago
- Tom's Guide
Galaxy Z Fold 7 vs. Honor Magic V5: Which foldable will win?
The Galaxy Z Fold 7 is Samsung's thinnest foldable phone yet, but the landscape is only getting more and more competitive. Case in point, Samsung's flagship no longer holds the No. 1 spot on our best foldable phone list, and now a new contender may leave it in the dust once again. And no, we're not talking about Apple's rumored iPhone Fold on the horizon. No, this foldable is already out (in certain markets at least), and it deletes any hope Samsung had of delivering the thinnest foldable of 2025. Earlier this month, Honor launched the Magic V5 in Chinese markets with a powerful new chipset, huge AI integration, and a super-thin build measuring just 8.8mm when folded and 4.1mm when opened fully. That's just a hair thinner than the Galaxy Z Fold 7, which measures 8.9mm folded and 4.2mm unfolded. Granted, we're talking literal millimeters here. In everyday use, you probably won't notice much difference between these phones unless you're comparing them side by side. But it certainly gives Honor bragging rights to beat out both Samsung's latest foldable flagship and last year's winner, Oppo's Find N5, which measures 8.93mm thick, for slimmest profile. Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7 Honor Magic V5 Dimensions Folded: 158.4×72.8×8.9 mmUnfolded: 143.2×158.4×4.2 mm Folded: 156.8×74.3×8.8 mmUnfolded: 156.8×145.9×4.1 mm Weight 215 g 217g or 222g Inner screen 8″ Dynamic AMOLED 2X, 2184×1968, 120 Hz 7.95″ LTPO OLED, 2352×2172, 120 Hz Cover screen 6.5″ FHD+ AMOLED 2X, 2520×1080, 120 Hz 6.43″ OLED, 2376×1060, 120 Hz, 5 000 nits Chipset Snapdragon 8 Elite for Galaxy Snapdragon 8 Elite RAM 12 GB/16GB 12GB/16GB Storage 256/512 GB/1 TB 256/512 GB/1 TB Battery 4,400mAh 6,100mAh Size isn't the only place where Honor has Samsung beat. The Magic V5 has a colossal 6,100mAh battery compared to the Z Fold 7's 4,400mAh one. That large internal screen is a huge battery drain, which makes it genuinely remarkable that Honor managed to eke out a two-day battery life in such a slim design. While Samsung offers a slightly larger internal screen, Honor packs a brighter display capable of up 5,000 nits vs. the Z Fold 7's 2,600 nits. That being said, both share the same Snapdragon 8 Elite chipset, so you can expect similar performance capabilities. On paper, the Honor Magic V5 has the Galaxy Z Fold 7 beat, but its biggest drawback is availability. It won't be available in Europe until later this year, after Samsung's foldable has hit stores. Plus, Honor devices aren't officially sold in the U.S., cutting off a huge swatch of the smartphone market. It took Samsung several generations to finally start getting the hang of foldables, and the Galaxy Z Fold 7 is undeniably its most impressive iteration yet. But its $2,000 price tag was already hard to swallow when the series first debuted in 2019, and things have only gotten more expensive in the years since. Knowing that phonemakers have the technology to build better foldables, but they're limited to markets outside the U.S., makes Samsung's flagship an even tougher sell. It's clear Samsung will have to step up its game if it wants to continue to be competitive in the foldable landscape. Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips.
Digital Trends
2 hours ago
- Digital Trends
You Asked: What Specs Actually Matter When Buying a TV? Projector vs. Huge TV?
On today's episode of You Asked: What are the most important specs to consider when buying a TV? Should you go for a big screen TV or projector for your vacation home? And… was I wrong about OLED being the highest mainstream standard for TV performance? What specs matter most when buying a TV? Pete asks: What are the most important specs to consider when buying a TV? Pete, I'd say there are a few, but the first thing to consider is where you're placing the TV in your home. Is it a living room? Bedroom? Dedicated theater-style area? Workout room? I won't go down the rabbit hole on each one of those, but let's assume it's a living room TV. Depending on if you've got a lot of big windows that will add a lot of light during daytime watching, I'd say brightness and the panel type are both important specs to start with. Starting with the latter: if you don't have a lot of ambient light or you can control the light in the room well, I'd consider OLED if you've got the budget for it. It's going to give you the best picture quality in terms of contrast and HDR viewing. A lot of the newer models also get bright enough to battle added light in the room. The Samsung S95F, especially, has an anti-glare screen that does a great job handling reflections, and its QD-OLED panel in the 55, 65, and 77-inch sizes is quite bright. Now, if there is a lot of light that's going to be pumping into the viewing space, you don't want your TV to struggle to compete with it. The simple answer in this case would be to go with a Mini LED TV. Fortunately, most of the ones we talk about on this channel get plenty bright. If you've got the budget, Sony's Bravia 9 is a top-notch option. The Samsung QN90 series sets are also great performers. TCL and Hisense have a number of more budget-friendly options that can still compete with some of the more expensive models. What those TVs I listed also have in common is their backlight technology: Mini LED with full-array local dimming. This is another spec to consider for the best viewing experience. These TVs will have much better contrast and be the best performers when it comes to HDR viewing. It's not quite OLED levels, but they are getting very, very good with improved contrast these days. Mini LED TVs are also pretty fairly priced. So if you're serious about a purchase, it would be the bare minimum I'd look at in terms of tech. The operating system is another feature that I wouldn't say is a dealbreaker, but it shouldn't be something you don't understand or don't enjoy using since you're going to be using it every day with the TV. To be honest, most of them are fine in my book. Google TV is probably the easiest to use on Sony, Hisense, and TCL TVs, but Samsung's Tizen and LG's WebOS aren't difficult to learn. They all make it pretty easy for users to find what they need. All of them are finding ways to get more ads in front of us, but I don't find them obnoxious, especially on Tizen. I'd say Fire TV is the only one I'm not a big fan of. Amazon is just a bit pushy with those ads sometimes. But as always, if you don't like an operating system, just pick up your streaming box of choice, like an Apple TV 4K, and you can easily work around it. Speaking of which, inputs are also important—especially for gamers. For the latest-gen consoles and PC gaming, you're going to want at least one HDMI 2.1 port to get the most out of the console output and maximize what I'd assume is a faster refresh rate on the TV, like 120Hz or more. And certainly, if you have more than one console or know you'll be connecting a streaming box and external audio devices as well, just know what you're working with in terms of HDMI capability so there aren't any surprises when you start setting things up. The last thing I'd say goes on my most important spec list is size. I can see you rolling your eyes—of course you need to consider size—but seriously, you want the TV to fit your space well. If it's too small, you'll know right away and feel it with the empty wall space around it. If it's too big, it may dominate your room and just be too much if you aren't sitting far enough away. Now, some of you might also say sound is an important spec, and I'd mostly agree. Certainly do your research there if you're going to rely on the TV speakers. I think a lot of mid to top-tier models do have good enough sound, and many are starting to take speakers more seriously. But I'm just Team Soundbar these days—especially when you can find good ones for as little as a hundred dollars. They'll add clarity and an experience that most TV speakers won't compete with. Big TV or projector for a rental? Dennis asks: I have a short-term vacation rental and one of the rooms is set up as a theater. Currently, it uses a 75-inch Samsung LED. I'd like to upgrade and go bigger. My question is: Do I stick with a TV and go with something along the lines of a 100-inch Hisense QLED or 98-inch TCL QLED? My other option is going with a screen and projector. What are the biggest differences? Pluses and minuses of each option? One thing to keep in mind: how easy will it be for guests to use? Starting with the last part first—I just assume most guests have not used a screen and projector. And what I know is a lot of people don't like change or having to learn new things on vacation. So if it's a screen and projector, while it sounds awesome on a list of amenities, I don't know if it's going to get used that much. Just my opinion. An extra-large Hisense or TCL TV, on the other hand, is going to be a bit more guest-friendly, and one big reason is the operating system. With Google TV, guests can sign in and out of their Google accounts on the TV and have access to all their usual subscriptions and content, making them feel right at home. Plus, it's a huge TV that a lot of people probably haven't used. So the experience will be right up there with using a large screen and projector. Now, I'm not super experienced with projectors. I've just used a few small ones that we've had around here. But a few things that are noticeably better on TVs: brightness, contrast, and color. Even if the projector is going in a theater setup in a darker room, the TV will produce better picture quality. But again, my main reasoning would just be ease of use and setup. TVs are pretty plug-and-play and won't require guests pinging you and asking how to use the projector. Is OLED still the peak of TV tech? Dru asks: You're crowning OLED as the peak of TV tech, highlighting some refinements still to come to match the limits of human vision. But is that title based on actual superiority, or just what's attainable and widely available right now? Because last I checked, the real king is Micro LED. It's just living in a castle most of us can't afford to visit yet. Dru, you are exactly right, which is why I said in that video: 'In terms of mainstream, affordable TVs, I'd say the current bar is set at OLED.' Keywords: mainstream and affordable—because yeah, Micro LED is insanely expensive. According to the 163-inch Micro LED TV released by Hisense in China costs the equivalent of $110,000. At least at one point, I know Hisense planned on releasing a 136-inch Micro LED TV here in the United States as well. And when you think of the tariffs on that thing, you just gotta laugh to keep from crying. That's a downpayment on a house. Anyway, seeing a Micro LED TV like that in person was an experience. Incredibly bright. Incredibly sharp. And noticeably more clear than OLED. So we haven't quite hit that peak yet. When it does come down from the castle and can be manufactured in a more reasonable, consumer-friendly price and size, it will sit atop the TV mantle and give everyone that can produce one a new standard to chase.
Android Authority
2 hours ago
- Android Authority
5 features I don't care about when buying a new phone
C. Scott Brown / Android Authority When it comes to buying a new smartphone, it's easy to get caught up in all the hype. Manufacturers constantly push the latest and greatest features, leading many of us to buy more phone than we actually need. When I'm in the market for a new phone, I always try to narrow down my options as much as possible. I do that by making a list of not only the features I want in my next smartphone but also those I don't care about. This approach helps me cut through the marketing noise and find a device that truly suits my preferences, without overspending on things I'll never use. Here are some popular smartphone features that I, personally, don't care about, and why you might consider them optional too. Which of these smartphone features you care about the least? 0 votes IP rating NaN % Wireless charging NaN % The latest and greatest SoC NaN % Lots of storage NaN % A super-slim body NaN % 1. IP rating Edgar Cervantes / Android Authority An IP rating indicates a phone's resistance to dust and water. While most high-end phones come with one, it's never been a deciding factor for me. In all my years of using smartphones, I've never found myself in a situation where an IP rating would have saved the day. I've never dropped a phone in a pool, spilled a drink on it, or taken a call in a downpour without an umbrella. I also make a habit of not handling my phone with wet hands. Of course, accidents happen, and some people are naturally more prone to them. Everyone's preferences are different, but for me, a phone without any water resistance is something I can absolutely live with. 2. Wireless and reverse wireless charging Ryan Haines / Android Authority Much like an IP rating, wireless charging and reverse wireless charging are standard features on many flagship phones these days. My current Pixel has it, but honestly, I couldn't care less. I've never used it. For starters, wireless charging is often slower than wired charging. It's also less convenient for me. With a cable, I can easily pick up my phone and use it while it's charging. Grabbing a phone off a wireless charging pad obviously cuts the power supply. I have a habit of plugging in my phone and tossing it on the bed. And let's be real, wireless charging doesn't technically get rid of cables; you still have one connected to the charging pad. Speaking of pads, they usually need to be placed on a flat, stable surface, whereas I have a habit of plugging in my phone and tossing it on the bed, couch, or other soft furniture. The only real benefit I see to wireless charging is when I'm at a coffee shop or restaurant that have tables with built-in charging pads, offering a quick top-up while I'm out. Beyond that, it's a feature I happily pass on. 3. The latest and greatest Joe Maring / Android Authority The days when you needed the absolute newest phone to get a smooth, lag-free experience are long gone. Modern mid-range phones are incredibly capable and more than good enough for most users, even some demanding ones. I don't play graphically intensive games on my phone, so I don't need the very latest Snapdragon SoC to be happy. The Tensor chip in my older Pixel works perfectly fine, and many mid-range options from Snapdragon would also suit my needs. I also don't need 16GB of RAM or the absolute newest camera hardware. Phones like the Pixel 9a or the Galaxy A56 are more than sufficient for my daily use, and that goes for the vast majority of people, in my opinion. My point is, I don't chase the latest specs and features just for the sake of it; I prioritize what I actually need. 4. Excessive storage Mishaal Rahman / Android Authority Phones now come with as much as 1TB of internal storage, which, for me, is complete overkill. I don't use hundreds of apps or play dozens of demanding games. Most of my photos and videos are stored in the cloud, which makes them easily accessible from all my devices. The same goes for other documents. 256GB is the sweet spot for me. A phone with 256GB of storage is typically all I need, although I could easily live with less. For me, 256GB is the sweet spot that ensures I won't run out of space over the few years I'll use a specific device. With that in mind, I also don't need a microSD card slot. Granted, most high-end phones don't have one these days, outside of certain models like the Xperia 1 VII, for example. I understand that some people prefer local storage for privacy reasons, and that others download a ton of apps and games. But with my current wants and needs, a phone with massive internal storage is simply unnecessary. 5. An ultra-thin body Ryan Haines / Android Authority Don't get me wrong, I don't want a phone as thick as a brick. But I've also never asked for a phone as thin as the Galaxy S25 Edge. It seems manufacturers are constantly trying new tricks to convince us to part with our money, and an ultra-thin body appears to be the latest craze that I hope not every manufacturer will jump on. A thinner phone often means a smaller battery, which is a compromise I'm not willing to make. A phone with a standard thickness of around 8 to 9mm is perfectly fine for me, and I've never wished for it to be thinner. Usually, it's the overall size I have a problem with. A phone that's too big isn't easy to hold and use with one hand, and it's certainly not the easiest to pocket. The phone's thickness rarely plays a significant role in that, so it's not something I care about when buying a new phone. And unlike some other entries on this list, I think most people would agree with me on this one. These are the things I don't care about when buying a new phone. Of course, there are plenty of features I do prioritize, but that's a topic for another post. What about you? Are there any popular smartphone features that you just don't care about? Let me know in the comments.
