Garmin Forerunner 165 GPS Running Watch vs Polar Pacer Pro GPS Running Watch (2026)

✍️ By the 247Verdict Editorial Team📅 Updated 05 October 2026

Which is better? We compared both on score, owner ratings, pros and cons.

Garmin Forerunner 165 GPS Running Watch

8.9/10 Great

4.5★ (6,100 owners)

Entry AMOLED Garmin with training readiness and 11-day battery. The beginner's serious GPS watch.

Full Review

Polar Pacer Pro GPS Running Watch

9.0/10 Excellent

4.5★ (3,600 owners)

Running power, barometer, maps, hill splitter, 35hr GPS. Polar's training-focused runner's watch.

Full Review

At a Glance

	Garmin Forerunner 165 GPS Running Watch	Polar Pacer Pro GPS Running Watch
247Verdict Score	8.9/10	9.0/10
Owner Rating	4.5★ (6,100)	4.5★ (3,600)
Verdict	Great	Excellent
Display	AMOLED 1.2"	MIP (not AMOLED)
Battery	11 days / 19hr GPS	35 hours GPS

Quick Verdict

This is a genuine draw — both score within 0.15 points of each other. Garmin Forerunner 165 GPS Running Watch: Entry AMOLED Garmin with training readiness and 11-day battery. The beginner's serious GPS watch. Polar Pacer Pro GPS Running Watch: Running power, barometer, maps, hill splitter, 35hr GPS. Polar's training-focused runner's watch. Choose based on your specific needs. Check the current price on Amazon →

Pros & Cons Side by Side

Garmin Forerunner 165 GPS Running Watch

AMOLED display brings Garmin's best screen to the entry price point
Training Readiness score guides workout intensity without overwhelming beginners
11-day battery in smartwatch mode — matches the more expensive Forerunner 265
GPS accuracy from Garmin's trusted GNSS satellite support
Under £200 brings proper training analytics to budget-conscious runners

Single-band GPS (not dual-band like the 265) — less accurate on technical terrain
No HRV status measurement — only in the Forerunner 265+
Smaller feature set vs Forerunner 265 for structured workouts

Polar Pacer Pro GPS Running Watch

Running Power metric measures actual effort regardless of terrain — hills show true exertion without GPS distortion
Barometer altitude tracking is more accurate than GPS altitude — critical for hill running and racing
Hill Splitter breaks down hilly runs into climbing and descending segments with individual stats
35-hour GPS battery covers ultra-marathon distances without charging
Polar's 40-year heart rate monitoring heritage — the brand that invented wrist HR monitoring

Polar Flow app is less intuitive than Garmin Connect for new users
No AMOLED display — MIP display is readable outdoors but less attractive than competitors
Polar's running community is smaller than Garmin's — fewer training plan resources

FAQ

Which is better, Garmin Forerunner 165 GPS or Polar Pacer Pro GPS?

Is the Garmin Forerunner 165 GPS worth the extra cost?

The Polar Pacer Pro GPS Running Watch matches or exceeds it at a potentially lower price point.

Who is the Garmin Forerunner 165 GPS best suited to?

Entry AMOLED Garmin with training readiness and 11-day battery. The beginner's serious GPS watch.

Who is the Polar Pacer Pro GPS best suited to?

Running power, barometer, maps, hill splitter, 35hr GPS. Polar's training-focused runner's watch.

What are the main downsides of each?

Garmin Forerunner 165 GPS Running Watch: Single-band GPS (not dual-band like the 265) — less accurate on technical terrain; No HRV status measurement — only in the Forerunner 265+. Polar Pacer Pro GPS Running Watch: Polar Flow app is less intuitive than Garmin Connect for new users; No AMOLED display — MIP display is readable outdoors but less attractive than competitors.

Do owner ratings agree with our verdict?

Largely, yes — Garmin Forerunner 165 GPS Running Watch sits at 4.5★ from 6,100 verified Amazon owners, and Polar Pacer Pro GPS Running Watch at 4.5★ from 3,600.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Links below are affiliate links.