Apple's September 9 'Surprise and Shine' event has come and gone, and we've learned a lot about Apple's latest crop of devices. While we've got new AirPods and iPhones (including Apple's first foldable, the iPhone Duo), it's the Apple Watches that have caught my eye as TechRadar's resident fitness and wearables writer — specifically, the Apple Watch Ultra 4, the latest version of Apple's flagship watch series.

But how does it compare to the previous gen, the Apple Watch Ultra 3 — and is it worth upgrading? Read on for a full comparison of both watches, so you can make an informed decision.

Apple Watch Ultra 4 vs Apple Watch Ultra 3: Specifications

Apple Watch Ultra 4 vs Apple Watch Ultra 3: Price and availability

• Price is unchanged from last year
• $799 / £749 / AU$1,399
• Available from September 18

Here's an easy one to start with: the Apple Watch Ultra 4's price is unchanged from last year, at $799 / £749 / AU$1,399. It's available from the September 18, so if you were considering getting an Apple Watch Ultra 3 but were holding out, there's no reason not to wait a few days for the latest model.

Apple Watch Ultra 4 vs Apple Watch Ultra 3: design

Physically, little has changed in terms of looks, but there have been subtle tweaks. The titanium case is still there, slightly wider and slimmer than last year, and it lasts six hours longer than the Ultra 3 to make it to two days, or 18 hours with continuous GPS use.

The watch's heart rate accuracy is even better thanks to the new Health Sensing System. This redesign of Apple's LED optical heart rate sensor tech offers better skin contact thanks to an increased electrode surface area. Heart rate readings are now being taken up to every five seconds, with heart rate variability, an overnight measure of rest and recovery, being read up to every five minutes.

This makes Apple's heart rate sensor the most accurate of any wearable, according to Apple. It has apparently conducted tests against rivals using ECG chest straps, much like we do in our reviews.

I can attest that the Apple Watch Ultra 3 is as accurate a wearable as it gets, so I'll be intrigued to test the new Ultra 4 against my trusty Polar H10.

Apple Watch Ultra 4 vs Apple Watch Ultra 3: Features

• Finally, a Readiness Score
• New Audio Intelligence features
• Redesigned Health app

At last! Apple Watch gets a Readiness Score, a feature almost every other fitness wearable has had for years. Typically from Apple, it looks like the bee's knees, feeding into Vitals to generate a holistic overview of your night, and updating throughout the day, like Garmin's Body Battery function. A new Health Age feature also compares your current fitness level to those in your age group, much like Garmin's Fitness Age or Whoop's, er, Whoop Age.

It's unclear at the moment whether the Ultra 3 will get these features, or if it will be an Ultra 4 / Series 12 exclusive. But all the Apple Watch Ultra 3 features, including LTE and satellite connectivity, are available on the Ultra 4.

An incoming redesigned Health app on iPhone is Apple Intelligence-forward, offering personalized AI-powered insights, and what is clear is that this will also work with the Apple Watch Ultra 3 and all Apple Intelligence-compatible iPhones. This Health App will show you Readiness, Longevity, and allow you to measure your VO2 Max using a coached guided workout on your iPhone's camera, then update it according to your activity levels and metrics.

Audio Intelligence features are exclusive to the Ultra 4 and Series 12, and include Shazam on your wrist, Sound Recognition (your watch will let you know the doorbell's rung or a siren's going off, for example), and two more features which are sure to prove controversial.

Live Rewind has your watch listen to and instantly recall a conversation up to 15 seconds previously, by double-tapping the crown of your Apple Watch. Siri Recap listens throughout the day and uses Siri AI to process live audio files, serving you a summary of the day in the evening. There are numerous controls and privacy safeguards in place here, but there's no doubt they'll come across as creepy to many. You can read all about Audio Intelligence on Apple Watch here.

The Garmin Cirqa is making waves in the fitness community. I put the new screenless tracker through its paces over 10 days of intensive testing, and awarded it 4.5 stars in my Garmin Cirqa review. As part of the testing process, I wore it for all of my workouts over the past couple of weeks — and, unusually for a device I've been testing for review purposes, I'm still wearing it now.

I normally alternate between an Apple Watch Ultra 3 or a Garmin Fenix 8, but I've found myself loathe to ditch the Cirqa just yet. This isn't only because it's good: I'm gravitating towards the Cirqa because it interfaces with a system I already use, and because it's helping me get over the dreaded "Strava-itis".

Last month, our writer Becca Caddy wrote about optimization culture — how wearables are causing us to engage in unhealthy mindsets and disordered behaviors. I can certainly attest to that: I'm guilty of glancing at my watch during a run, wanting to push my pace even on zone 2 sessions and easy days, because I know the end results are going to end up on my Strava account for all to see.

Even uncoupling my watch from automatically uploading my run to Strava is only half the battle. I'm constantly glancing at the watch to check my pace and time, engaging in subconscious judgement, comparing my own performance to that of my mates, colleagues and acquaintances. I didn't realize quite how much my self-judgement was sapping my enjoyment of exercise.

The Cirqa, and to some extent the Google Fitbit Air I tested earlier in the year, goes some way to changing all that.

While the Cirqa offers up some fitness and wellness metrics (certainly plenty to understand the effect of exercise on your body and health), what it doesn't give you is workout specifics. You won't find split pace per kilometer, for example, which runners use to measure average speed across a distance run, or heart rate zones to display a workout's intensity. With other models, I get those statistics piped into my ears at regular intervals, and my watches offer them at a glance.

Having access to such statistics removed during the workout can be detrimental to performance or for those times you're training for a specific event, but it's oddly freeing for day-to-day fitness training. I ran a 10km route during the testing period (at least, I assume it was 10km based on previous runs) and the Cirqa recorded plenty of heart rate-based statistics and applied them to recovery metrics such as my Training Readiness Score, along with how it improved stats such as my VO2 Max and Fitness Age.

However, it informed me of these statistics after the run, and didn't deliver any specific run performance information at all beyond time and heart rate information. Without my watch to glance at during the workout, I wasn't adhering to a target pace: I was running on vibes and perceived effort.

I concentrated on how my body felt, and responded to that in the moment. I paid attention to my form, my music, the trees and the road. I didn't feel guilty about stopping to stretch part way through, nor did I pause the Cirqa for that particularly pause, as doing so would invalidate the whole "complete, holistic workout overview" thing it's got going on. For the first time in quite some time, I had no idea at all about how fast I had run — but I knew that it was a good workout as a result of every other metric and the fact that I felt awesome.

Although it isn't a running-specific device, the Cirqa is exactly what I needed to reinvigorate my relationship with the road. When the time returns to take my training seriously again, taking speed and times on board again, I'll switch back to my best Garmin watch, with all my fitness stats ready to be incorporated into Garmin's workout plans.

Do you run without a fitness tracker, or use a screenless model, to better run on vibes, or are you a metrics-fiend with a dedicated running watch? Let me know in the poll below.

One of my favorite hobbies is Dungeons & Dragons. I love nothing more than sitting around a table with friends and playing out a fantastical adventure, in which the dice are the difference between success and failure.

It's a fun game, and all the more fun because real-life people make dumb, suboptimal decisions and the dice cause the game to change in unpredictable ways. But I really love it because the concept of people sitting around a table or hearth and telling stories is as old as the campfire, and it's a fun modern-day way to keep that experience alive.

You might think such a robust framework for an analog hobby (friends, a table, dice, pen and paper) might be tech-proof, but even in the Dungeons & Dragons world, AI is coming for my job as a Dungeon Master — the person who runs and guides the game world. Deep in the corpus of most popular generative AI models designed for general use are the rules to D&D 5e (and likely every other edition before it) and plenty of people report playing with their chatbots online.

Many of these players can't, or simply don't want to, get round a table with real people. For them, having a chatbot write them a story while the user prompts the continuation of the story with their character's actions, must seem like the perfect solution — even if it's more like a solo choose-your-own-adventure than a 'proper' group D&D game.

Gemini and ChatGPT both have a strong grasp of the rules for D&D's popular 5th Edition; they are certainly strong enough to make them an accessible choice for a player without a group. Maybe one day, the fire will die, and instead of sitting around a table with friends, we'll all be sitting at separate desks playing our own separate D&D adventures with our AI companions.

I wanted to test whether this dark future would be an adequate replacement for my usual game night, and which chatbot will be the best one to choose if so. I fired up Gemini 3.6 Flash and ChatGPT 5.5, and asked them for the same game.

The parameters

I gave both chatbots the same prompt: "Can you be my D&D 5e DM?" and following up with another message:

"Let's do a classic high fantasy dungeon crawl. Please use a strict RNG for all rolls to ensure fairness - you can roll dice for me. My character is a 10th-level conjuration wizard. See all information about him below:"

I then copy-pasted a character sheet of a 10th-level wizard — a powerful spellcaster with a variety of magical abilities at his disposal. It's easy to DM a game for a level 1 thief — I wanted to see how the AIs could handle a character who could do fantastical things, such as teleport and summon creatures to fight for him.

Interestingly, both Gemini and ChatGPT created a similar adventure, at least at first: an abandoned dwarven stronghold bristling with magical traps, ready to be explored. However, that's where the similarities ended.

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Gemini's adventure was what any D&D player could expect from the "classic high-fantasy dungeon crawl." I avoided a pressure-plate trap that would have shot darts at me, and in one memorable sequence, defeated a bunch of skeletons by casting a Grease spell on a stone staircase and freezing them in place with my Ray of Frost cantrip while they slipped and stumbled at the bottom of the steps.

Gemini was offering me suggested actions, and I did find myself choosing a few of those suggestions — but as time wore on, this began to feel lazy, like my brain wasn't firing in the same way it did when I played with my friends. I was skim-reading the AI's descriptions of the scene and responding with a single click. I asked it to remove suggested options and as a result, I had to think more carefully about each move, typing out requests and thinking about my actions rather than clicking on a predetermined response.

The memorable finale occurred when I unlocked a secret passage and defeated a Naga, a giant snake monster, by teleporting away and blasting it with a powerful Cone of Cold. The snake ended up frozen solid, and I checked the monster's HP against the official book, and it was accurate. When asked to generate a picture of our adventure, Gemini came up with this moment:

I asked Gemini a few questions at the end, such as whether it nudged the dice in my favor, as all my rolls were successful. This happened in my previous experiment with ChatGPT. Gemini said it used a 'pseudorandom number generator', not a true RNG, but the model doesn't 'fudge dice, pad rolls, or tweak numbers behind the scenes to keep players happy or prolong the game'.

Gemini's language was natural and even evocative in places, although it's still not a patch on a good creative human. Overall, a decent enough effort at simulating a D&D game.

ChatGPT 5.5

Despite the similar setting, ChatGPT's adventure with the same character was very different. There was little to no combat throughout the entirety of the game, and ChatGPT didn't tell me when it was rolling 'behind the scenes', preferring to keep me in the moment.

When I asked it about the lack of rolling, the grovelling chatbot began its apologetic essay with "That is a fair critique. The short answer is: I leaned too heavily into narrative pacing and not enough into D&D mechanics. The adventure became closer to a collaborative fantasy novel than a 5e dungeon crawl", while suggesting fixes if I wanted to continue. I hadn't even said anything negative — but it certainly picked up on my tone, and the choose-your-own adventure I got was a far cry from a classic dungeon crawl.

Instead of combat, ChatGPT came up with a rambling mystery about a dimensional prison beneath the mountain, a sphere suspended in a cavern. Its guardians spoke ominous (and to be honest, quite confusing) portents such as "The archive does not open for authority. It opens for judgement."

Mysteries work best when they're developed with skill by a writer who can work backwards to seed clues throughout the game or text. ChatGPT does not do this: instead, it's arranging tokens on the fly to generate a facsimile of a mystery, and although it got the trappings of the genre right, the execution fell very flat. I (or at least, my character) underwent trials to seek obsidian objects such as keys and seals to reveal more about the prison, themselves accompanied by more foreboding, sometimes nonsensical portents.

Very little 'action' was taken by my character in a classical sense: it was all about investigating the origins of the being contained in this prison, and by the time I had spent 40 minutes on this, I had seen enough. It didn't help that ChatGPT also spoke in the peculiar sentence structure pattern that AI users are likely very familiar with now: "This isn't just X. It's Y." Examples include:

"Unlike the rest of Khaz Varek, this room has remained untouched.

No dust. No decay."

Or the following, when I met one of the prison's guardians:

"Ser Kaelen immediately looks toward the sphere. 'You hear it too.'

Not a question. A confirmation."

Any user of ChatGPT (or those who look at AI-generated posts on LinkedIn or Reddit) will immediately recognise this sort of language, and know what I'm talking about. By the end, it was quite painful to have every other sentence be treated as a grand revelation. Not a statement. An omen.

When asked to generate a picture of our adventure, ChatGPT came up with this moment:

The winner

Out of these two? Gemini 3.6 Flash, by a mile. It was at least a mildly enjoyable experience conveyed in natural language, and something I'd consider revisiting.

ChatGPT's efforts, on the other hand, were unenjoyable, and I wouldn't return to it. In fact, it's gotten worse since the last time I tried it.

Both, however, were a far cry from an in-person session. While they have a good grasp of the rules, and you can create your perfect world and character, the chatbots are ultimately missing the 'human and hearth' element that keep me returning to the game. For people who can't get round a table with friends, I'd pick Gemini over ChatGPT.

For those who can? While AI is busy taking as many creative jobs as it can, I feel safe in the knowledge that the role of Dungeon Master is AI-proof for a long time yet.

• The RingConn Gen 3 is now available to buy
• It offers features such as sleep apnea tracking, and up to 14 days of battery life
• To celebrate, RingConn has entered a partnership with Warner Bros.

The RingConn Gen 3 has arrived. After going up for pre-order in May earlier this year, it's now available to buy, starting at $349 (around £260 / AU$500). And to celebrate, it's entered an unusual partnership... or should that be Fellowship?

Let's have a look at the ring first. It offers haptic vibration alerts for health events (not notifications), which not even the best smart rings can do. Other features of note include vascular health insights, blood pressure and sleep apnea features. RingConn said the feature is 'the first smart ring brand to introduce sleep apnea monitoring with continuous SpO2 tracking every two seconds....all with no recurring subscription for premium insights.'

The key is in the specifics there, as other smart rings do offer reliable sleep apnea tracking. Recently at Samsung Galaxy Unpacked, the Samsung Galaxy Ring was cleared for FDA approval for its sleep apnea detection feature, so it's likely RingConn's claims are due to its specific sleep-tracking methodology regarding SpO2 measurement. We've reached out to RingConn for clarification.

Otherwise, the ring features compatability with iOS and Android, women's health tracking and activity tracking. With vibration alerts on, the Ring lasts 10 days, stretching to 14 with them off. It all seems very reasonably priced for a ring without an additional subscription, and we're almost finished with our RingConn Gen 3 review. Watch this space!

Counting your steps to Mordor

It finally happened: a smart ring company entered a partnership with Warner Bros. to celebrate the 25th anniversary of The Lord Of The Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (otherwise known as The Best One, and I'll hear no arguments otherwise). However, I certainly didn't expect it to be RingConn.

A press release states the partnership is 'bringing together one of fantasy's most epic film series and a new generation of wearable technology' as 'the collaboration celebrates the shared belief that greater awareness can empower better choices.'

Unfortunately, there doesn't appear to be a redesign of the Gen 3 ring to resemble the famous One Ring from the movies. The release says that 'to mark the partnership, RingConn will introduce exclusive film-themed rewards for eligible Gen 3 customers in the United States of America' — but it doesn't establish what those rewards actually are. In the words of Frodo: "all right then, keep your secrets".

Despite the fact that it's not been officially announced, there's a lot of information (albeit all unverified) going around about the Google Pixel Watch 5.

The Google Pixel Watch 4 has become the best Android smartwatch for most people, getting better with each iteration. That model was announced last August, and it's very likely a sequel is on the horizon. Here's everything we know so far, including the most recent leaks.

When is the Google Pixel Watch 5 coming out?

August 12. Last year's 'Made by Google' event took place on August 20, and Google looks set to stick to that annual timeframe.

Google has officially confirmed that pre-orders will open for new Google Pixel phones on August 12, and it makes sense to assume that the Google Pixel Watch 5 will be released alongside its companion Pixel devices.

What will the Google Pixel Watch 5 look like?

It'll be very similar to the Google Pixel Watch 4. We actually have what's purported to be leaked renders of the device, coming from noted leaker OnLeaks via The Tide Chart, a website with a single post to its name (so treat this rumor as unverified).

Despite this solitary post and lack of credible history, The Tide Chart (TTC) did correctly call the August 12 event date before Google announced it, so there is a claim of legitimacy there. The renders look extremely similar to the Google Pixel Watch 4, with the now-classic teardrop shape in its new-last-year dome, in four new colors and two sizes.

Those colors are Dark Anthracite (above) with a black band, Natural Silver with a pale gray band, Pyrite with an olive band, and Warm Gold with a pink coral band. The larger size reportedly remains the same at 45mm, but the smaller size is now 42mm instead of 41mm.

Will the price remain the same?

Not according to TTC. The blog says the watch's list price will start at $399 (around £295 / AU$570) for the Wi-Fi-only 42mm version, a $50 increase over the smallest Wi-Fi-only Pixel Watch 4 in the US.

The price will go up with each model, and the LTE-enabled 45mm Pixel Watch 5 is said to cost a hefty $529 (around £395 / AU$755).

The equivalent Pixel Watch 4 costs $499, a $30 increase over the model in the US. We don't yet know the equivalent prices for the Pixel Watch 5 in the UK or Australia.

Any new features?

This we're not yet sure about. We can expect Wear OS 7 to include yet more AI capabilities, especially for Pixel phone users, similar to the way watchOS 27 uses Siri AI to work across multiple devices.

Repairability — a standout feature for the Pixel Watch 4, allowing users to take apart the smartwatch and replace the display and battery — and limited satellite connectivity to send SOS messages without signal are both expected to make a welcome return.

A bizarre story earlier this year had a reported prototype of the Google Pixel Watch 5 discovered on the ocean floor, near the island of St Martin. It's said to have had labels including ‘SpO2’ (Blood Oxygen Level), ‘EDA’ (Electrodermal Activity), ‘Skin Temperature’, ‘Heart Rate Sensor’, ‘Pulse Sensor’, and ‘UWB’ (Ultra-Wideband) — all features present in earlier iterations of the watch.

We can expect Google's new AI Health Coach and the revamped Google Health app to play a role. These debuted earlier this year in tandem with the Google Fitbit Air.

Amazon Prime Day is the perfect time to find yourself a new smartwatch. But while most people use the word 'smartwatch' in a very general sense, there is a massive variety in the category, and the right smartwatch has to fit your lifestyle and budget.

Do you want something that could pass convincingly for an analog watch that can also field notifications and make calls, or do you want a rugged trail companion that'll withstand everything from seawater to rock-scrambling? A cheap fitness tracker or a super-premium specialist golf watch?

• • Browse the full Amazon Prime Day sale

Below are 24 deals on every kind of smartwatch, mainly from Amazon but here and there from other sites running anti-Prime Day sales, for you to peruse this week. It's likely the wearable you're looking for is here, whether you want a rugged Apple Watch Ultra 3 for Prime Day or a low-priced, high-performer like the Amazfit Active 2.

US deals

Quick links:

• Samsung Galaxy Watch8 Classic: was $499.99 now $349.99 at Amazon
• Apple Watch SE 3: was $249 now $199 at Amazon
• Garmin Fenix 8: was $999.99 now $749.99 at Amazon

More Prime Day deals in the US

• Amazon Devices: Fire Sticks & Echo from $18
• Amazon Haul: viral gadgets, tech & appliances from $1.99
• Apple: MacBooks, AirPods & AirTags from $29
• Beauty: 50% off toothbrushes & hair tools
• Cheap TVs: smart TVs from $69.99
• Garden: tools, mowers, planters from $24.99
• Headphones: 50% off Beats, Bose & Samsung
• Laptops: Apple, HP & Dell from $199
• Mattresses: Sealy, Serta & more from $186
• Patio: outdoor furniture, rugs & decor from $19.99
• Sports: 50% off fitness gear, treadmills & clothing
• Vacuums: Dyson, Shark & Bissell from $34

UK deals

Quick links:

• Garmin Epix Pro (Gen 2): was £739.99 now £299.99 at H Samuel
• Samsung Galaxy Watch8: was £399.99 now £299.99 at Amazon
• Apple Watch SE 3: was £249 now £189.05 at Amazon

More Amazon Prime Day deals in the UK

• Amazon Prime: sign up for a 30-day free trial
• Amazon Devices: Fire TV, Ring & Blink from £21.99
• Apple: AirPods Pro 3 for a record-low price
• Appliances: up to 45% off Ninja, Tefal & Sage
• Essentials: household goods from under £10
• Laptops: from £149.99
• Tablets: Samsung & Lenovo from £125
• TVs: from £129.99