VIDEO
HIGHLIGHT
Log InSign up
Amazfit Bip 6 Scientific Review (79$ Apple Watch Alternative?)
SummaryTranscriptChat

Amazfit Bip 6 Scientific Review (79$ Apple Watch Alternative?)

Amazfit Bip 6: Is It a Viable Apple Watch Alternative?

Overview of the Amazfit Bip 6

  • The Amazfit Bip 6, priced at $79, is presented as an alternative to the Apple Watch, compatible with both Android and iOS devices.
  • The speaker, Rob, a post-doctoral scientist specializing in biological data analysis, will conduct systematic testing on four copies of the Bip 6 to evaluate its sports and health tracking capabilities.

Design and Aesthetics

  • The Amazfit brand is recognized for producing aesthetically pleasing smartwatches at reasonable prices; the Bip 6 features a large vibrant screen that performs well visually.
  • While it has appealing design elements that may surpass those of an Apple Watch, it faces tough competition due to Apple's superior health and sports tracking features.

Heart Rate Tracking Performance

  • Testing involved wearing two different colorways of the Bip 6 during indoor cycling sessions to compare heart rate accuracy against a Polar ECG chest strap.
  • Results from the dark gray version showed excellent correlation with Polar's readings (correlation value of 1.00), indicating high accuracy in heart rate detection.

Comparative Analysis of Both Devices

  • The light gray version also performed well but had slightly lower accuracy in some instances (correlation value around 0.99).
  • Individual session analyses revealed minor discrepancies between the two versions during varying heart rates but overall maintained good agreement with reference measurements.

Performance Comparison with Other Devices

Performance Analysis of Smartwatches

Overview of Top Performing Devices

  • The analysis focuses on smartwatches with a correlation of 0.9 or higher, highlighting the Amazfit models as top performers alongside the Pixel Watch and Apple Watch.

Personal Testing Conditions

  • The speaker notes a recent injury affecting their heart rate during testing, which may have given the Amazfit an advantage in performance metrics compared to competitors. This raises questions about the reliability of results under varying conditions.

Comparison with Other Models

  • The Amazfit T-Rex 3, equipped with the same sensor, performed slightly worse than the Amazfit model tested, suggesting that weight and design may impact heart rate signal quality during exercise.

Indoor vs Outdoor Cycling Performance

  • For indoor cycling, both Amazfit watches showed strong performance and could serve as alternatives to more expensive options like the Apple Watch. However, outdoor cycling presented challenges due to increased arm tension and ride bumpiness affecting tracking accuracy.

Glucose Tracking Recommendation

  • A brief mention of using the Levels app for glucose tracking is made, along with an affiliate link for viewers interested in monitoring their glucose levels effectively while also supporting the channel.

Cycling Performance Results

Left Wrist (Lefty) Performance

  • The left wrist watch (referred to as "Lefty") demonstrated a high correlation of 0.91 with reference devices during outdoor cycling but still recorded some instances of low heart rates below expected levels. Overall performance was deemed satisfactory compared to competitors.

Right Wrist (Righty) Performance Issues

  • In contrast, the right wrist watch ("Righty") struggled significantly more during outdoor cycling tests, showing a lower correlation at 0.71 and frequent instances where it detected excessively low heart rates without clear explanation for discrepancies in performance between wrists.

Individual Ride Analysis for Lefty

  • Analyzing individual rides revealed that while Lefty performed well overall—tracking closely with reference data—it occasionally missed peaks or dips in heart rate readings and experienced dropout periods where no data was recorded at all.

Individual Ride Analysis for Righty

Heart Rate Monitoring Performance Comparison

Overview of Heart Rate Detection

  • The heart rate monitor detected a low heart rate for an extended period, indicating potential issues with data accuracy. The performance comparison between the left and right wrist devices shows significant discrepancies.
  • A visual overview compares the performance of two devices, highlighting that the device on the left wrist (lefty) performed significantly better than the one on the right wrist (righty).
  • The left wrist device is closer to other high-performing devices, suggesting it has superior tracking capabilities compared to its counterpart.

Device Performance Insights

  • The Amazefit device on the left wrist closely resembles another tested model (Amazefit T-Rex 3), which also showed good performance. Both are deemed adequate for general use but not perfect.
  • For optimal heart rate tracking during outdoor cycling, recommendations include Pixel Watch 3, Apple Watch, or Garmin/Chorus devices with chest straps. Notably, Garmin's performance in heart rate tracking was subpar despite excellent GPS capabilities.

Testing Results from a Second Subject

  • Raphael tested two Amazefit devices; however, he wore them suboptimally—both on one wrist—with one positioned incorrectly. His feedback indicated that the higher-positioned device seemed more accurate.
  • Initial results from Raphael's correctly positioned black version showed promising accuracy in detecting his heart rate during biking sessions.

Analysis of Deviations and Consistency

  • Some sessions displayed poor detection accuracy for both models worn by Raphael. However, overall performance remained decent across multiple tests.
  • There were notable deviations between how each device performed based on their positioning on Raphael’s wrist. This suggests variability in measurement stability depending on wear location.

Confusion Over Outdoor Cycling Results

  • Inconsistent results were observed when comparing performances between wrists; this raises questions about potential defects or physiological factors affecting readings.
  • While some users may find results acceptable for outdoor cycling with Bip 6, they do not match up to those from higher-end models like Apple Watch.

Running Test Observations

Heart Rate Tracking Performance of Bip 6

Overview of Heart Rate Tracking Issues

  • The second run of heart rate tracking showed more issues than the first, with the Bip 6 struggling to keep up during faster intervals.
  • Results from the initial run appeared good, but the second run's inconclusive data suggests that performance is neither clearly good nor bad.

Challenges in Weightlifting Heart Rate Tracking

  • Weightlifting poses significant challenges for smartwatches like Bip 6 due to arm tension affecting heart rate signal detection.
  • Correlation for heart rate tracking on both wrists was decent (0.89 and 0.86), but many peaks were missed during sets when heart rates typically rise.

Performance Comparison Between Users

  • Analysis revealed that while some peaks were detected, most were not tracked correctly during upper body sessions; however, leg day showed better results.
  • Raphael's sessions indicated slightly better performance than the speaker’s, though still missing many heart rate peaks.

Contextualizing Device Performance

  • Compared to other devices tested previously, both Amazfit devices performed similarly and are not among the worst options available.
  • While there are superior devices on the market (e.g., Apple watches), Amazfit models show competitive performance for weightlifting.

Recommendations for Heart Rate Monitoring

  • For reliable heart rate monitoring during weightlifting, alternatives like Apple Watch or Power Beats Pro 2 are suggested; chest straps remain the best option overall.
  • Despite its limitations in tracking during workouts, considering its price point, Bip 6 offers reasonable value if users assess their specific needs carefully.

Sleep Stage Tracking Performance of Bip 6

Introduction to Sleep Quality Assessment

Sleep Stage Tracking Performance of Amazfit Bip 6

Overview of Sleep Stage Detection

  • The Amazfit Bip 6 has limitations in detecting awake time but provides a general impression of sleep stage tracking performance.
  • A comparison is made between sleep stages recorded by the Zmax EEG device and the Amazfit Bip 6, with each column summing to 100% for percentage analysis.

Agreement on Sleep Stages

  • Deep sleep agreement is at 76%, indicating that a significant portion of deep sleep detected by the EEG was also recognized by the Amazfit Bip 6. Most confusion arises with light sleep.
  • Light sleep agreement is similarly good at 76%, with confusion primarily occurring between deep and REM sleep stages.
  • REM sleep detection shows poor agreement at only 29%, suggesting that much of what was classified as REM by the EEG was instead categorized as light sleep by the Amazfit Bip 6.

Analysis of Awake Time

  • The accuracy for awake time detection stands at about 37%, where many shorter wake moments are misclassified, complicating true awake time assessment.

Example Night Analysis

  • An example night illustrates how well the devices track different sleep stages, showing decent alignment in deep sleep detection but poor recognition in REM cycles, which typically occur towards the end of a night's rest.
  • The Amazfit Bip 6 fails to detect sufficient REM sleep during expected cycles, raising concerns about its overall reliability for detailed analysis beyond deep sleep metrics.

Comparative Performance Against Other Devices

  • A graph compares various watches' agreements with different EEG references; while the Amazfit Bip 6 performs poorly relative to others, it still shows reasonable average agreement due to decent deep and light sleep tracking despite low REM accuracy.
  • The device ranks among poorer performers but not among the worst due to its relatively better performance in detecting deep and light sleeps compared to other models tested against similar standards.

Insights on Manufacturer Algorithms

  • It’s suggested that many manufacturers likely use similar algorithms across their devices due to high development costs; thus, performance may be consistent across models like Bipu Pro and T-Rex 3 from Amazfit.

Recommendations for Better Sleep Tracking Devices

  • Apple Watches are noted for their strong performance in both personal and independent testing regarding accurate sleep stage tracking.
  • The Eight Sleep Pod is highlighted as an excellent option for reliable tracking without needing wearable devices, although it comes at a higher price point.

Sleep and GPS Tracking Performance of Amaz Devices

Recommendations for Sleep Tracking Devices

  • The speaker recommends several devices for sleep tracking, including the Aurora, Whoop strap, and Pixel Watch, which uses Fitbit's algorithm.
  • The Sleep 2 app (formerly NUA) is mentioned as a good option but requires a Polar device and has a monthly subscription.
  • The Amaz BIP 6 is deemed suitable only for basic sleep tracking; it provides rough estimates of time spent in bed and deep sleep but lacks accuracy in sleep stage tracking.
  • Users should be cautious about claims made by companies regarding their ability to track sleep stages accurately.

GPS Tracking Performance Evaluation

  • The speaker tests the GPS performance of the Amaz device by cycling the same route multiple times to check consistency in tracking.
  • Initial results show that while signal acquisition is quick, there are inconsistencies in track overlap during different rides.
  • Some systematic deviations are noted between tracks, indicating potential issues with accuracy despite some areas showing improvement over time.

Overall Impressions on GPS Accuracy

  • After initial signal acquisition, the quality improves significantly during later parts of the ride; however, it may require time to stabilize fully.
  • Consistency between signals shows improvement on return trips compared to outbound journeys; overall performance is considered satisfactory against competitors.

Amazfit Bip 6 Review: Performance Insights

General Performance Overview

  • The Amazfit Bip 6 is deemed sufficient for most casual athletes, with overall satisfactory performance considering its price.
  • Heart rate tracking has shown improvement but still presents larger issues; sleep stage tracking was found lacking in effectiveness.
  • GPS tracking performance is noted to be solid, indicating reliability in outdoor activities.

Improvements in Heart Rate Tracking

  • Amazfit has made significant strides in heart rate tracking, evolving from one of the worst to a competitive option within its price range.
  • Recent products from Amazfit have been surprisingly effective, particularly highlighting improvements seen in the Bip 6 during indoor cycling sessions.

Considerations for Potential Buyers

  • The Amazfit Bip 6 is recommended for those on a budget seeking an aesthetically pleasing smartwatch; however, users should be aware of its limitations.
Video description

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬👇DISCOUNTS/AFFILIATES*!👇▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ 🔴 Anything on Amazon*: https://geni.us/thequantifiedscientist 🔴 Whoop Strap 4.0*: https://join.whoop.com/QuantifiedScientist (best $$$ off any new WHOOP membership) 🔴 Levels CGM app best offer $$$ (USA only!)*: http://levels.link/QS 🔴 Best Running app Runna*: https://web.runna.com/redeem?code=QUANT 🔴 Eight sleep best $$$ (€) discount*: https://eight-sleep.ioym.net/TheQuantifiedScientist + add code “TQS” for full discount 🔴 Oura Ring Link: I recommend you search for a discount on reddit with the "Refer-A-Friend" program! If you can’t find one: https://ouraring.sjv.io/Oura4 * (affiliate link that supports the channel, but doesn't have a discount) ☝️Affiliate* (paid) links. Supports the channel, doesn't cost you any more!☝️ 🟢 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/quantified_scientist/ 🟡 Strava: https://www.strava.com/athletes/5206985 🟠 Shorts: https://www.youtube.com/@smartwatchshorts 🔵 Newsletter: www.robterhorst.com 🟡 Twitter: @QuantifiedRob * Affiliate (paid) links support the channel by earning me a commission on any sale, and it doesn't cost you any more! My opinions are completely my own, and this content is not sponsored. ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Support the channel by becoming a member🙏: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChNWxrTlmh4IRSevon1X93g/join Subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/@TheQuantifiedScientist?sub_confirmation=1 Video edited by Alex: https://linktr.ee/allexb 📸My Gear* (paid links, supports the channel and doesn’t cost you any more)📸 Camera body (main): https://geni.us/SonyA6600_body Camera lens (main): https://geni.us/SigmaContemporary Camera (B-roll 1): https://geni.us/Sony_ZVE1 Camera (B-roll 2): https://geni.us/CanonEosM50MarkII and https://geni.us/Sony_ZVE10 Light: https://geni.us/Godox_VL150 Softbox: https://geni.us/NiceFotoSoftbox Light stand: https://geni.us/WalimexLightstand ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Reference devices: ZMax + Dreamento: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.08.18.553744v1 & https://github.com/dreamento/dreamento Polar H10: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31004219/ 🔴 Polar H10: https://geni.us/hnXc Timestamps: 00:00 Most important info 02:02 Heart Rate Tracking Test 20:02 Sleep Stage Tracking Test 26:44 GPS Tracking 30:46 Conclusions Based on my testing, the 79 dollar Amazfit Bip 6 will be an Apple Watch alternative for some of you, and the good thing is, you can use it on both Android and iOS. Weirdly, the test results of the Amazfit Bip 6 are a bit confusing, as you will see in a second. There are a number of limitations and shortcomings of this Bip 6 you should be aware of; because while it is good at some things, it does do poorly in other regards. For those of you that don’t know me, my name is Rob, and I am a postdoctoral scientist specializing in biological data analysis, and in this video we will put 4 copies of the Bip 6 through systematic testing, and we will find out if the Bip 6 is any good at sports and health tracking. But before doing that, let me get some subjective things out of the way. Amazfit is known for their beautiful products, especially considering the price, and the Bip 6 is no exception. It has a big vibrant screen, and everything just works well. So in terms of design and looks, I have nothing to complain about, in some ways, it looks even better than the Apple Watch. However, the Apple Watch is great at health and sports tracking: it has a great heart rate tracker, a great sleep stage tracker and it also has a pretty good GPS tracker. So, the Bip 6 has big shoes to fill if it is going to be an Apple Watch alternative. The good thing is that the Bip 6 seems to have the same sensor as the Amazfit T-rex 3, which did surprisingly well in my testing. So, let’s dive right in, and let’s start with the heart rate tracking performance. Amazfit actually sent me 4 different colors of the Bip 6, so I could test two simultaneously on myself and also two on my colleague Raphael. Just for your information, I wore the dark grey Amazfit Bip 6 on my left wrist and the light grey Amazfit Bip 6 on my right wrist. Let’s start with the performance during indoor cycling, which is one of the easiest exercises to track for a smartwatch. By the way, Amazfit sent me these devices to test, but they did not sponsor this video and did not have any input in, or knowledge of, this video.