SimplyAmplifying score: 7.4/10 · Confidence: Medium · Based on 2 in-depth review(s) from 2 outlets, and 2 article(s) read in full
First published 21 October 2026 · Last updated 21 October 2026 · Updated 1 time as new reviews came in
Reviewers’ own scores: Tom’s Guide 3.5/5
The verdict
The two reviews we read agree on the main points. The Race 3S improves clearly on the Race S in heart rate accuracy, battery life and display brightness, and it is light to wear. Both outlets also find the software limited and the price hard to justify against cheaper rivals. With only two outlets, treat this as a solid early picture rather than a final verdict; it suits buyers who want Suunto’s endurance focus and accept the cost.
Best for: Runners and endurance athletes who want long GPS battery life and a light, bright-screen watch, and who are fine paying a premium.
Skip it if: You want streaming music, NFC payments, routable maps or the best value, since both outlets point to cheaper, more capable rivals.
Scores by category
| Category | Score | Confidence | Outlets |
|---|---|---|---|
| Health & fitness accuracy | 8.2/10 | Medium | 2 |
| Battery life | 8.5/10 | Medium | 2 |
| Software & apps | 6.3/10 | Medium | 2 |
| Display | 8.5/10 | Medium | 2 |
| Comfort & design | 8.5/10 | Medium | 2 |
| Value | 4.9/10 | Medium | 2 |
What reviewers liked
- The new optical heart rate sensor is a clear step up from the Race S, per both outlets
- GPS tracks and pace/distance matched top watches such as the Garmin Forerunner 970 and Coros Pace 4 Pro in Tom’s Guide’s tests
- Long battery life: Tom’s Guide got five to six days of heavy use, and multi-band GPS suits ultramarathons
- The 2,000-nit display is readable in bright sun and shade
- Light at 56g and comfortable for round-the-clock wear
What they didn’t
- The $599 USD price is a big jump from the Race S and above cheaper rivals
- Software is limited: no streaming music, no NFC payments, non-routable maps and little sport-mode customization
- DC Rainmaker found widget scrolling laggier than on the older Race S
- Heart rate can spike and lag on cold outdoor starts, and the charger is a proprietary puck
In detail
Health & fitness accuracy: 8.2/10
Both DC Rainmaker and Tom’s Guide say the new optical heart rate sensor is a major improvement over the one in the Race S. Tom’s Guide tested it against a chest strap and found readings generally close, with occasional erroneous spikes and some lag at the start of cold outdoor runs. It also found GPS tracks and pace and distance figures in line with the Garmin Forerunner 970 and Coros Pace 4 Pro. DC Rainmaker offered less detail: it found sleep start and wake times usually correct, within a few minutes of other wearables, but did not report heart rate or GPS test results.
Battery life: 8.5/10
Battery life is a strength, though the evidence is uneven. Tom’s Guide measured five to six days per charge with a bright, always-on display and a GPS run every day, and said the multi-band GPS mode lasts long enough for ultramarathons. DC Rainmaker did not give test results, but listed spec gains over the previous model: daily smartwatch use rises from 9 to 12 days, and GPS time reaches 38 hours in dual-frequency mode or 45 hours in single-frequency mode. Both point the same way, and only Tom’s Guide verified real-world use.
Software & apps: 6.3/10
Software is where the two outlets are least impressed. DC Rainmaker found widget scrolling laggier than on the older Race S, despite a faster processor being claimed. It also notes there is no streaming music, only manual MP3 transfer over USB, and a modest allowance of up to three SuuntoPlus apps in a sport profile. Tom’s Guide adds that default sport modes cannot be edited, maps are not routable, and there is no NFC payment. It also found the training analysis useful but dense. Neither outlet describes a major flaw, but both see a limited package against rivals.
Display: 8.5/10
Both outlets are positive. DC Rainmaker notes brightness has doubled to 2,000 nits and found the screen clearly readable in both sunny and shaded conditions. Tom’s Guide also cites 2,000 nits, about three times the original Race S, and says it reads well in bright sunshine. DC Rainmaker adds two caveats: power-saving settings dim the panel aggressively within a few seconds of a wrist raise, and there is no LED flashlight like the one on the Suunto Vertical 2. It also describes the panel technology as dated next to newer rivals.
Comfort & design: 8.5/10
Only Tom’s Guide gives a comfort verdict. It weighed the watch at 56g with the silicone strap, found it thin and fairly light, and was comfortable wearing it around the clock. Its gripes are minor: the digital dial sometimes responds slowly, though the interface is generally quick, and the proprietary puck-style charger differs from other Suunto watches and is less convenient than Garmin and Coros systems. DC Rainmaker lists spec changes without a wearing verdict: weight down from 60g to 56g and a sapphire crystal lens in place of Gorilla Glass.
Value: 4.9/10
Value is the weakest area, and both outlets agree. DC Rainmaker points to a price rise of more than 70%, from $349 to $599 USD, for incremental hardware, and says the 2,000-nit display matches what competitors offered two years ago, while newer watches use 3,000 to 3,500-nit panels. Tom’s Guide calls $599 a tough sell next to the Coros Pace 4 Pro at $449 and the Suunto Run 2 at $349, and notes the Race S titanium launched at $449. Anyone weighing the purchase should compare those alternatives first.
Sources
- DC Rainmaker: Suunto Race 3S In-Depth Review: A Pricey Upgrade · Full review
- Tom’s Guide: Suunto Race 3S review: a feature-packed sports watch for smaller wrists · Full review
How we put this together
We read the reviews and articles listed above and weigh each by how much it should count: in-depth, hands-on testing with measurements counts most; launch news and press-release rewrites count least; sponsored content is penalised. Category scores are our trust-weighted summary of what those sources found, set to the same 10-point scale reviewers use; the reviewers’ own scores, where published, are listed above. This page was compiled with AI assistance and checked against the source notes. All findings belong to the outlets credited above; follow the links to read their full reviews. How we score.
Header image: AI illustration by SimplyAmplifying, drawn with reference photos of the product as a guide (not a copy of any one photo); scores drawn from this page’s data.
Leave a Reply