vsversusfinder

Adidas Women's X_PLR Path, Black/White/Black, 8.5 vs ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17 Running Shoes, 9,

Updated August 2026 — Adidas Women's X_PLR Path, Black/White/Black, 8.5 wins on comfort and breathability, ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17 Running Shoes, 9, wins on price and intended use.

The Adidas Women's X_PLR Path offers a more budget-friendly option with great comfort for casual wear, while the ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17 focuses on performance and advanced cushioning for serious runners.

Why Adidas Women's X_PLR Path, Black/White/Black, 8.5 is better

Price

Adidas is $20 cheaper.

Comfort

Cloudfoam midsole provides excellent comfort.

Sales Rank

Adidas has a better sales rank at 2513.

Why ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17 Running Shoes, 9, is better

Cushioning

ASICS features advanced shock-absorbing technology.

Performance

Designed specifically for running.

Durability

Molded rubber outsole enhances longevity.

Overall score

Adidas Women's X_PLR Path, Black/White/Black, 8.5
75
ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17 Running Shoes, 9,
68

Specifications

SpecAdidas Women's X_PLR Path, Black/White/Black, 8.5ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17 Running Shoes, 9,
BrandadidasASICS
ModelX_PLR PathGel-Pulse 17
UpperMeshMesh
MidsoleCloudfoamAMPLIFOAM PLUS
OutsoleRubberMolded Rubber

Dimension comparison

Adidas Women's X_PLR Path, Black/White/Black, 8.5ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17 Running Shoes, 9,

Price Comparison

When it comes to price, the Adidas Women's X_PLR Path is the more budget-friendly option at $49.00, making it about 30% cheaper than the ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17, which retails for $69.95. This significant price difference may be a deciding factor for those looking to save money while still investing in a quality running shoe. The Adidas model not only offers a lower price but also maintains a respectable bestseller rank of 2513, indicating a solid market presence among consumers.

Comfort and Cushioning

Comfort and cushioning are crucial for running shoes, and the Adidas Women's X_PLR Path excels in this area with its Cloudfoam midsole designed for step-in comfort. This feature is essential for those who prioritize comfort during daily wear. In contrast, the ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17 utilizes Rearfoot GEL technology and AMPLIFOAM PLUS cushioning, providing a soft and comfortable ride. While both shoes aim for superior cushioning, the ASICS model's advanced shock-attenuating materials suggest a focus on performance, which may appeal to more serious runners.

Breathability

Breathability is a vital aspect for running shoes, especially during extended wear. The Adidas Women's X_PLR Path features a textile and synthetic mesh upper that promotes excellent airflow, ensuring your feet stay cool and comfortable. On the other hand, the ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17 also includes a mesh upper but enhances breathability with an OrthoLite Hybrid Max Lite sockliner. While both shoes prioritize breathability, the Adidas model's lightweight design might give it a slight edge for those seeking a featherlight feel during casual wear.

Design and Aesthetics

In terms of design, the Adidas Women's X_PLR Path has a sleek and minimalist aesthetic, available in a classic Black/White color scheme that appeals to a wide audience. It features TPU 3-Stripes for a stylish finish. The ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17, with its Gravel/Lilac color combination, offers a more vibrant style but may not appeal to everyone. Personal preferences in aesthetics will play a significant role in deciding between these two models, as both brands have distinct visual identities.

Durability

Durability is another important factor to consider when choosing running shoes. The Adidas Women's X_PLR Path has a rubber outsole designed for outstanding grip, which is crucial for maintaining performance over time. Meanwhile, the ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17 features a molded rubber outsole, suggesting it is also built for longevity under various conditions. While both shoes are constructed with quality materials aimed at durability, the Adidas model's sales rank of 2513 might indicate a higher customer satisfaction regarding its longevity.

Intended Use

The intended use of each model may differ slightly, influencing your decision. The Adidas Women's X_PLR Path is marketed as a lightweight running-inspired sneaker for everyday wear, making it suitable for casual outings as well as light running. Conversely, the ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17 is designed specifically as a running shoe, incorporating features like shock absorption and advanced cushioning technology to enhance performance during runs. This distinction is important for potential buyers who need shoes tailored to specific activities.

Brand Reputation

Brand reputation can significantly affect consumer choices, and both Adidas and ASICS have established strong followings. Adidas, with its emphasis on lifestyle and casual wear, has a broad appeal, as evidenced by the Adidas Women's X_PLR Path's solid sales rank. ASICS, known for its performance-driven footwear, targets a niche of serious runners, which is reflected in the ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17's design and technology. Depending on whether you prioritize lifestyle or performance, your brand preference might sway your choice.

Which should you buy?

Ultimately, the decision between the Adidas Women's X_PLR Path and the ASICS Women's Gel-Pulse 17 comes down to your specific needs and budget. If you're looking for a more affordable option that offers comfort and style for everyday wear, the Adidas model is a strong contender at $49.00. However, if you prioritize advanced cushioning and performance for running, the ASICS model, while pricier at $69.95, may be worth the investment. Each shoe has its strengths, making it essential to consider what features matter most to you before making your purchase.