Buzz
When diving into the world of fitness watches, you’ll likely encounter heated discussions about display technologies. While AMOLED screens (vibrant! colorful! crisp! contemporary!) are becoming the industry standard, many loyal users remain staunch supporters of the classic MIP or LCD displays (their attitude: you’ll have to take them from me over my dead body). So, as a shopper trying to choose your first or next watch, where does this leave you? Let’s explore the advantages and disadvantages of each.
What sets MIP and AMOLED displays apart?
I’ll skip the technical jargon that only engineers would appreciate and focus on what it’s like to experience these screens in real-world use. Here’s the breakdown:
AMOLED displays consist of tiny, self-illuminating pixels that create vibrant visuals, with black areas appearing where pixels remain inactive. (Chances are, your phone uses this technology.) These screens are full-color and consume power whenever active. They excel in low-light conditions but may struggle with visibility under intense sunlight.
MIP displays (memory-in-pixel), often referred to as memory LCD, rely on external light to function, similar to traditional LCD watches. They perform exceptionally well in sunlight but need a backlight for visibility in the dark. While capable of displaying color, their range is limited, and they lack the vibrancy and resolution of AMOLED screens.
AMOLED screens generally offer higher resolution, greater brightness, and sharper visuals. MIP displays, though more traditional in appearance, excel in bright sunlight and can remain always-on without significantly draining the battery, provided the backlight is off.
AMOLED displays often feature touchscreen functionality, but MIP displays can also include this feature. For instance, the Coros Pace 3 incorporates a touchscreen, whereas the Garmin Forerunner 55 does not. (If you prefer not to use a touchscreen, note that most sports watches allow you to disable this feature.)
Which watches feature MIP and which come with AMOLED displays?
We’re currently in a transitional phase where most manufacturers are adopting AMOLED technology, if they haven’t already. High-end smartwatches, such as the Apple Watch, exclusively use AMOLED. However, in the realm of sports watches, many models with MIP displays are still available. Here’s a look at some popular options:
AMOLED (or comparable) displays:
Apple Watch
Samsung Galaxy Watch
Pixel Watch
Fitbit Charge 5 and Charge 6
Coros Pace Pro
Garmin Forerunners 165, 265, and 965
Garmin Vivoactive 5
Garmin Venu 2 and 3
Garmin Fenix 8 AMOLED
Polar Vantage, Ignite 3, Grit X2 Pro
Suunto Race
MIP (or similar) displays:
Coros Pace 3, Apex 2, Apex 2 Pro, Vertix 2 (all models except the Pace Pro)
Garmin Forerunners 55, 255, 955, and any Forerunner model not ending in -65
Garmin Instinct (this uses a standard 2-color LCD, not MIP)
Garmin Vivoactive 4
Garmin Fenix 7
Garmin Fenix 8 Solar
Polar Pacer, Pacer Pro, Grit X, Grit X Pro
Suunto Core, 9 Baro, 9 Peak
Practical visibility tests
After months of reviewing mostly AMOLED watches, I was taken aback when I stumbled upon running watch forums where users claimed they’d never switch to an AMOLED model due to poor sunlight readability. This puzzled me, as every AMOLED watch I’ve tested has performed excellently in the sun. Still, I wondered if I might be overlooking something.
Since reading those comments, I’ve made a point to closely evaluate visibility to form my own conclusions. I explored the differences in display types in my comparison of the Coros Pace 3 (MIP) and Pace Pro (AMOLED), for instance. For this analysis, I also borrowed a Forerunner 55 (MIP) to compare with my Forerunner 265S. Let’s dive in.
Under bright sunlight and at the correct angle, MIP displays have a slight advantage
This scenario highlights MIP’s strongest advantage, though it comes with some caveats, so let’s appreciate it while we can. When bright light shines directly onto a MIP screen, it practically sparkles. Modern AMOLED screens are also quite bright, but under the harshest sunlight, they can appear slightly washed out. That said, AMOLED displays don’t photograph well in sunny conditions, so the image above doesn’t fully capture the AMOLED’s quality. (The black horizontal lines on the AMOLED are a camera artifact caused by the display’s refresh rate and aren’t visible in person.)
Since I didn’t have many good side-by-side photos in sunlight, I conducted another test by placing both Forerunners directly under a bright desk lamp. A desk lamp isn’t the sun, but I believe this setup better represents typical conditions—at least according to my own eyes and judgment. Your perspective might differ. If sunlight readability is a deciding factor, trying the watches in person will give you far more insight than any photo. (Pro tip: Visit a running club and ask members about their watches. They’ll gladly show them off.)
In shaded areas, even on sunny days, AMOLED screens remain clearly visible
After several sunny-day runs with both Coros watches, I discovered I actually favored the AMOLED display, even in sunlight. Sunny days often come with deep shadows, and while MIP screens require the perfect angle to achieve their bright, glittery effect, AMOLED screens remain vibrant even in shaded areas. Most of the time, either my body or the watch’s bezel cast a slight shadow on the display. The photo above was taken on the same day and during the same run as the outdoor Coros sunlight photo. The sun didn’t disappear behind a cloud—I simply changed my position.
This photo shows the same desk lamp setup, but with the watches tilted slightly downward. The difference in readability is striking. If you’re accustomed to MIP watches, you’re likely used to angling them toward the light for better visibility. If that works for you, great. Personally, I prefer the AMOLED in this scenario. (Update, 12/20/2024 at 1:37 p.m. ET: I just noticed I used the wrong photo here. The one above is the correct image with the same desk lamp setup. The previous photo, now placed directly below this paragraph, shows a similar effect under daytime indoor lighting.)
In moderate lighting conditions, both displays perform well
Here are both watches outdoors on an overcast day, showcasing the typical display you’d see during a run or other sports activity. This is perhaps the most revealing photo: both perform well. The MIP watch compensates for potential visibility issues by defaulting to a white background, while the AMOLED continues to display bright numbers on a dark screen as usual. I use the AMOLED (the 265S) in this photo for most of my runs—it’s not a review unit but my personal watch—and it’s consistently clear and sharp in any weather, with or without sunglasses. As for the MIP? It’s also excellent! Both options shine here.
In low-light conditions, both screens perform admirably
You might have expected me to declare AMOLED superior in the dark. While AMOLED is indeed more visually appealing in low light (and generally more attractive due to its higher resolution), both screens are equally easy to read. The same gesture that activates the AMOLED display also turns on the MIP screen’s backlight. (Note: Both watches appear sharper in real life than in this photo. The blur is due to my inability to hold the camera perfectly steady in a dark room.)
In complete darkness, such as when putting your kids to bed, an AMOLED watch with a “sleep mode” that dimly displays the time is ideal. This eliminates the need to activate a backlight just to check the time. So, if you’re worried about the light being too bright, AMOLED is likely your best choice.
Battery performance
MIP enthusiasts often claim that MIP screens are more energy-efficient. While this may be technically accurate, no one purchases a watch solely based on its display’s battery life. What matters is the battery life of the entire watch.
In reality, AMOLED watches often match or even exceed the battery life of their MIP counterparts. Whether due to advanced battery technology, power-saving features in the software or hardware, or AMOLED’s unexpected efficiency, the result is the same. For example, the Forerunner 965 (AMOLED) and the Forerunner 955 (MIP) both offer 8.5 hours of battery life during activities with multi-band GPS and music playback. In smartwatch mode (without activity tracking), the 965 lasts 23 days, compared to the 955’s 15 days. In this case, the AMOLED watch lasts eight days longer. If battery life is a priority, the AMOLED model is the clear winner.
Battery life varies by model, of course. Always check the battery specifications for the specific watches you’re considering. While the MIP model might last longer in some cases, the AMOLED could outperform it in others. Avoid making assumptions about battery performance based solely on the display type.
How to decide
You’ve seen my photos and heard my thoughts, but the final decision is yours. Between the two display types, neither is unusable, terrible, or plagued by deal-breaking flaws. While I believe most people will prefer AMOLED, a MIP display will still serve you well. Here are some key considerations to help you decide:
If you already own and love a MIP watch, there’s no harm in sticking with what you know. You’re already familiar with its limitations and are comfortable with them.
If you’re a fan of MIP but hesitant about AMOLED, don’t let exaggerated online criticisms deter you. The drawbacks of AMOLED are often overstated.
If you’ve compared both displays in person under various lighting conditions and have a clear preference, trust your judgment.
If you’re new to this and feeling overwhelmed, you’ll likely prefer AMOLED. Most new watches now feature AMOLED displays anyway.
If your budget leans toward an older MIP model, go for it. It will still meet your needs.
That last point is worth some careful consideration. Often, you can find a feature-packed older-generation watch for the same price as a newer, more basic model. This is currently the case with many Garmin watches, where recent releases feature AMOLED screens, while older models stick with MIP.
For instance, focusing solely on the latest models, the Forerunner 965 offers more advanced features than the 265, priced at $599 compared to $449. However, if you opt for the previous generation, the Forerunner 955 with a MIP display is currently available for $399—$50 less than the newer, AMOLED-equipped Forerunner 265. Is it worth it? That’s up to you. Many would choose the 955 if they prioritize the 9xx series features, such as maps and skiing capabilities, over the display type. Now that you’ve seen the visuals and read my detailed analysis, you’re equipped to make an informed choice.
