107 days is the number that explains why a leaked Amazfit solar smartwatch matters: Garmin’s Fenix 8 Solar can stretch power-saving battery life from 48 days to 107 days with a MiP display and integrated solar cells, while Garmin’s newer Fenix 8 Pro microLED is listed at just 14 days in power-saving mode.
That gap is the opening. Amazfit appears to be exploring solar charging inside the Zepp Health app version 10.5.0, where code references point to solar intensity tracking, input power measurement, and sync jobs between watch and phone, according to Notebookcheck. No product has been announced. No launch date is confirmed. But the code is specific enough to suggest this is more than a stray label.
107 days versus 14 days is the real Garmin-Amazfit tension
The leak lands as Garmin appears to be pushing parts of its premium lineup toward brighter, richer displays. Notebookcheck notes that the Fenix 8 Pro is offered only with AMOLED or microLED displays, while the microLED version reaches 14 days in power-saving mode.
That does not make AMOLED or microLED wrong. It means the product philosophy changes. A vivid screen improves maps, widgets, watch faces, and retail appeal. A low-power display protects the thing many outdoor watch buyers still care about most: not charging.
Amazfit’s possible solar model would target that second camp. The strongest clue is not just a generic “solar” string in app code. It is the expansion of solar-specific telemetry inside Zepp Health.
The app code includes fields and functions such as “SolarBatteryChargeRecord,” “solar intensity,” “watch_face_input_power,” “case_back_input_power,” “SolarIntensityAction,” and “SolarIntensitySyncJob.”
MLXIO analysis: that cluster points to a watch that does more than show a decorative sun icon. It suggests Amazfit may be preparing to record light exposure, measure charging input, and sync solar-related data into the companion app.
This also fits a broader leak-heavy moment in wearables. Garmin itself has been surrounded by specialist-device reports, including our coverage of the Garmin Enduro 4 leak and the Garmin CIRQA certification leak. The common thread is segmentation: not every buyer wants the same screen, form factor, or battery compromise.
MiP and solar only make sense if the whole watch is built around restraint
Solar charging is not magic. On a smartwatch with a power-hungry display, small solar gains can be swallowed quickly by the screen, sensors, GPS, and radios. That is why the display question matters.
Notebookcheck argues it is “reasonable to assume” Amazfit would choose a more efficient panel, likely a transflective LCD, often referred to as MiP or ePaper, if it ships a solar smartwatch. That inference is grounded in the same Garmin pattern: the Fenix 8 Solar pairs solar cells with an energy-efficient MiP display.
The precedent inside Amazfit is also real. The Amazfit Bip S, launched in 2020, used this kind of display and reached 40 days of battery life without solar cells.
| Device / category | Display approach | Solar noted? | Battery figure from source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Garmin Fenix 8 Solar | MiP | Yes | 48 days to 107 days in power-saving mode |
| Garmin Fenix 8 Pro microLED | microLED | Not cited as solar | 14 days in power-saving mode |
| Amazfit Bip S | Transflective / MiP-like | No | 40 days |
| Rumored Amazfit solar watch | Unknown, likely low-power if solar is meaningful | App code suggests yes | Unknown |
The trade-off is obvious. AMOLED and microLED can make a watch feel modern. MiP can make it feel independent. For endurance users, travelers, field workers, and anyone who hates charging routines, independence can matter more than animation smoothness.
The code points to solar telemetry, not just a battery gimmick
The most useful detail in the leak is the distinction between old and new app code. Notebookcheck reports that older Zepp Health versions already included “lux,” “panelType,” and “status” inside “SolarBatteryChargeRecord.” Version 10.5.0 expands that solar functionality.
The newer references include “solar intensity”, described as a value indicating the light intensity hitting the device’s surface. The code also includes “watch_face_input_power” and “case_back_input_power,” which Notebookcheck says apparently allow the app to distinguish how much energy was charged through solar cells or through the charger.
That matters because credible solar wearables need measurement. A simple “solar charging active” label tells users little. Exposure, input power, and syncing can help show whether outdoor time is meaningfully extending battery life.
MLXIO analysis: if Amazfit ships this, the launch specs should be read skeptically unless the company discloses the assumptions. Solar performance depends on exposure time, panel area, season, weather, clothing coverage, and GPS use. A watch can gain impressively in controlled sunlight and still add little during normal urban wear.
The useful metrics will be:
- Display type: MiP, AMOLED, microLED, or another panel.
- Smartwatch battery life: baseline endurance before solar help.
- GPS battery life: the number outdoor users will punish hardest.
- Solar assumptions: how much light, for how long, under what conditions.
- Charging area: whether solar cells sit under the display, around it, or elsewhere.
- Real-world logging: whether the app shows meaningful solar input data.
Garmin’s AMOLED shift creates a narrow but valuable opening
Garmin still owns the clearest benchmark in the source material. The Fenix 8 Solar figure — 107 days in power-saving mode under solar-assisted conditions — is the kind of number that defines a category.
But the Fenix 8 Pro comparison shows the cost of display ambition. A 14-day power-saving figure on the microLED model may be plenty for many buyers, but it is not the same promise. It moves the conversation from “weeks and weeks away from a charger” to “better than a typical smartwatch, but still finite.”
That is where Amazfit could be dangerous, if the product exists. It does not need to beat Garmin across every dimension. It would need to make solar endurance feel accessible enough that buyers reconsider whether they need Garmin’s higher-end option.
The risk for Amazfit is credibility. A solar watch that lacks strong battery fundamentals would look like marketing. A solar watch with a low-power display, clear solar data, and Bip S-style endurance DNA would be harder to dismiss.
Amazfit has also been pushing into adjacent wrist-worn categories, as seen in our coverage of the Amazfit Helio Strap Pro. A solar watch would extend that same pressure into endurance hardware, but with a very different promise: less dependence on the wall charger.
Buyers should separate sunlight gains from launch-slide optimism
For athletes, the solar leak is interesting but incomplete. Longer battery life helps, but runners and cyclists will still judge any Amazfit solar watch on GPS reliability, heart-rate consistency, training features, and data export. None of those are established by the Zepp Health code references.
Outdoor users will be even less forgiving. Solar charging matters most when it reduces charging anxiety during long trips. That means readability in bright light, durable construction, weather resistance, navigation quality, and battery drain during tracked activity all matter alongside the solar panel.
For Garmin, the immediate threat is not that Amazfit instantly replaces a Fenix. The threat is narrower: Amazfit could make solar-assisted endurance feel like a feature that should not be reserved for premium rugged watches.
If Amazfit validates that demand, other brands may revisit low-power display designs instead of treating bright panels as the only premium path. That is the bigger signal beneath the leak.
The next proof is whether Amazfit chooses endurance over spectacle
The strongest version of this product would pair solar charging with a MiP or transflective display, long baseline battery life, and transparent solar metrics inside Zepp Health. That would make the code leak feel coherent.
The weaker version would attach solar language to a watch whose main display still burns too much power for sunlight to matter. In that case, the feature could look better on a spec sheet than on a wrist.
The evidence that would confirm the thesis is simple: an official Amazfit watch with a low-power panel, published solar assumptions, strong non-solar battery life, and real solar input tracking in the app. The evidence that would weaken it is just as clear: AMOLED-first design, vague battery claims, or solar data that users cannot verify.
For now, the leak says one thing clearly: the next smartwatch fight may not be about the brightest screen. It may be about which watch makes the charger feel least necessary.
The Bottom Line
- Amazfit may be preparing to challenge Garmin in long-battery outdoor smartwatches.
- The leak highlights a growing tradeoff between vivid displays and extended battery life.
- Solar charging could become a key differentiator for users who prioritize fewer charges over screen quality.
