vsversusfinder

Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0, White/Black/Grey, 8.5 vs Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 Supportive

Updated August 2026 — Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 Supportive leads on price and popularity.

The Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0 is a budget-friendly option for casual runners, while the Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 excels in support and performance for serious runners.

Why Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0, White/Black/Grey, 8.5 is better

Price

Adidas is $44.09 cheaper than Brooks.

Style

Adidas has a classic design appealing to casual users.

Comfort

Adidas offers good step-in comfort for casual wear.

Why Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 Supportive is better

Support

Brooks features Guiderails for enhanced support.

Cushioning

Brooks uses nitrogen-infused DNA Loft v3 for superior cushioning.

Popularity

Brooks has a higher sales rank, indicating greater consumer preference.

Overall score

Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0, White/Black/Grey, 8.5
65
Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 Supportive
85

Specifications

SpecAdidas Women's Run 70s 2.0, White/Black/Grey, 8.5Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 Supportive
BrandadidasBrooks
ModelRun 70s 2.0Adrenaline GTS 24
CushioningCloudfoamDNA Loft v3
Upper MaterialLeather/TextileAir Mesh
Sales Rank26341047

Dimension comparison

Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0, White/Black/Grey, 8.5Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 Supportive

Overview of Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0 and Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24

The Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0 is priced at $54.86, making it about 44% cheaper than the Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24, which retails for $98.95. While both shoes cater to women who enjoy running, their features and intended uses differ significantly. The Adidas model leans towards everyday comfort with a blend of racing and training heritage, while the Brooks shoe focuses heavily on providing support and cushioning for serious runners.

Design and Aesthetics

The Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0 features a classic design with a durable leather and textile upper, available in a stylish White/Black/Grey color scheme. This shoe combines functionality with a vintage aesthetic, appealing to those who appreciate a timeless look. In contrast, the Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 is predominantly black, with accents of ebony that lend it a sleek, modern appearance. While both shoes look great, the Adidas model stands out for its retro vibe, whereas the Brooks shoe is designed with a contemporary runner in mind.

Comfort Level

When it comes to comfort, the Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 excels with its nitrogen-infused DNA Loft v3 cushioning, which promises a plush and lightweight feel. This shoe is tailored for long-distance running, providing support to every stride. The Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0 offers Cloudfoam technology for step-in comfort and superior cushioning, making it a solid choice for casual wear and light running. However, the Brooks model's emphasis on dynamic cushioning and holistic support makes it more suitable for serious runners seeking a supportive shoe.

Fit and Sizing

The Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0 runs big, with a recommendation to buy half a size smaller. This is an important consideration for potential buyers to ensure they get the right fit. Conversely, the Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 does not specify any sizing quirks, suggesting a more standard fit. This could be a deciding factor for those who prefer to avoid the hassle of sizing adjustments, particularly for serious runners who need their shoes to fit just right for optimal performance.

Performance and Support

The Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 features the innovative Guiderails Holistic Support System, which helps maintain the body’s natural motion path while curbing excess movement. This design element is particularly beneficial for runners who require additional support. The Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0, while comfortable, does not provide the same level of support and is more suited for casual use or light training. Therefore, for those focusing on performance and stability during runs, the Brooks model is the clear winner.

Durability and Material Quality

Both shoes boast high-quality materials, but their durability may appeal differently to consumers. The Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0 uses a combination of leather and textile, offering a durable yet breathable upper, ideal for everyday wear. On the other hand, the Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 features an engineered air mesh upper, designed to deliver breathability and structure, which is crucial for maintaining comfort during extended runs. This focus on performance-oriented materials may lend the Brooks shoe an edge in terms of long-term durability under rigorous conditions.

Price Comparison

The Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0 is priced at $54.86, while the Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 is priced at $98.95. This price difference of approximately $44.09 means the Adidas model is about 44% cheaper than the Brooks option. For budget-conscious consumers or casual runners, the Adidas shoe presents a more accessible price point without sacrificing too much in terms of comfort and style. However, those willing to invest more for advanced features and support may find the Brooks model worthwhile.

Popularity and Sales Rank

In terms of popularity, the Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 ranks higher with a sales rank of 1047, compared to the Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0, which holds a sales rank of 2634. This suggests that the Brooks model is favored among consumers, likely due to its reputation for support and performance. The Adidas model, while still popular, seems to cater more towards casual users rather than serious runners.

Which should you buy?

Choosing between the Adidas Women's Run 70s 2.0 and the Brooks Women’s Adrenaline GTS 24 ultimately depends on your specific needs. If you're looking for a budget-friendly option with a stylish design for casual use, the Adidas model is a great choice at $54.86. However, if you prioritize performance, support, and comfort for serious running, the Brooks shoe, priced at $98.95, offers advanced features that cater specifically to those requirements. In summary, both shoes have their merits, but your intended use will guide your decision.