Amazon Basics Versus Callaway Supersoft: How Close Is A $14.49 Golf Ball To The Category Leader?
Golf Balls

Amazon Basics Versus Callaway Supersoft: How Close Is A $14.49 Golf Ball To The Category Leader?

Support our Mission. We independently test each product we recommend. When you buy through our links, we may earn a commission.

Amazon Basics Versus Callaway Supersoft: How Close Is A $14.49 Golf Ball To The Category Leader?

We put Amazon’s ultra-cheap Core Soft golf ball head-to-head with Callaway Supersoft using a robot. The results may surprise you.

When the Amazon Basics golf ball hit the market, there wasn’t much in the way of detail—at least not nearly as much as you’d get from a mainstream OEM.

Between Amazon and the USGA conforming list, we were able to confirm that the Core Soft is a two-piece ball (ionomer cover), it likely was produced at the same factory as the Kirkland and PXG offerings, and regardless of whether or not it was suitable for the “VERSATILE USE” Amazon claims, there’s no arguing that it’s dirt cheap.

At $14.49 for one dozen or just over $24 for a two-dozen bundle, the Amazon ball is one of the most affordable golf balls on the market. If saving money is the only thing that matters, Amazon is tough to beat. But for golfers interested in learning a bit more about the Amazon Basics Core Soft and how it performs, we decided to dig deeper (and do some testing).

Callaway supersoft in a compression gauge

With two-piece construction, it’s never going to be mistaken for a Pro V1 (or even a Kirkland Signature). Perhaps the most interesting detail about the Amazon ball is its compression. On our gauge, it measures 55, which puts it among the softest on the market, and just a few points firmer than the Callaway Supersoft.

Supersoft is notable for not just its (super) soft compression but also for being the best-selling two-piece ball on the market (by plenty).

Amazon Basics Core Soft: The value alternative to Supersoft?

Sidy by side: Amazon Basics Core soft  and Callaway Supersoft

While most DTC and house brands overtly target the Pro V1 or the Pro V1x, Amazon seems to have taken a different approach. To the best of my recollection, the Amazon Basics Core Soft is the first DTC offering to (apparently) intentionally compete with the market leader in the soft category.

It’s an interesting strategy given the inherent price constraints (they have to be cheap) but the thinking (and all of the evidence to date) suggests Amazon can make up for what must be exceedingly tight margins with high volume.

Since they launched, the Core Soft has been out of stock every bit as often as not so it seems like Amazon might be on to something.

To be sure, I’m not entirely convinced the golfer spending less than $13 for a dozen Amazon balls or less than $25 for a dozen Supersofts is making much of a performance-driven decision. Still, we felt like it made sense to see how the Amazon Basics Core Soft stacks up to the market leader in the category.

Let’s dig into the data.

About the test

A box of Amazon Basics Core Soft balls

For this test, we hit the Amazon Basics Core Soft side by side with the Callaway Supersoft.

Data was collected with Trackman (drivers and irons) and Foresight GCQuad (wedges).

While we conduct our larger ball tests at three speeds, for this smaller test, the driver’s speed was set to 100 mph. Irons were tested at 80 mph while the wedge test was designed to replicate a greenside shot of approximately 25 yards.

As I’ve noted previously, we’ll often use these smaller ball tests as an opportunity to experiment with different robot settings and different clubs. This time around, we used an iron model (Srixon ZX5) we’ve previously used at lower speeds only. Our greenside distance was also a bit shorter.

Driver data

ClubBallBall Speed [mph]Launch Angle [degrees]Spin Rate [RPM]Max Height [yards]Descent AngleCarry YardsTotal Yards
DriverAmazon Basics146.0013.43194524.2629.65235.59273.06
DriverCallaway Supersoft145.7313.34197225.0430.40241.96277.63

Observations:

  • The first thing you’ll notice is there’s very little difference between the two balls off the driver.
  • Differences in speed, launch angle, spin and height are minimal and not statistically significant.
  • Under the conditions tested, driver spin for both balls is excessively low and could border on unplayable for some golfers.
  • Supersoft has the advantage in carry and total yards but a good bit of that can be traced to a single shot with the Amazon Basics Core Soft that flew appreciably shorter. There’s no evidence that wind was a factor, nor is there anything in the data to suggest a misread.
    • The most likely culprit is an arodynamic deficiency caused by dimple disruption (uneven paint or similar manufacturing defect.

Driver dispersion and consistency

Observations:

The cuckoo Amazon ball observed is evident in the dispersion pattern which shows greater variation in the front-to-back distance. Beyond that, the actual dispersion areas (square yards) are nearly identical.

The shot patterns reinforce what we see in the launch monitor data. That is to say that there isn’t much in the way of difference to be found in performance off the driver.

7-iron data

ClubBallBall Speed [mph]Launch Angle [degrees]Spin Rate [RPM]Max Height [yards]Descent AngleCarry YardsTotal Yards
7-IronAmazon Basics113.6520.80483131.3944.61166.70179.51
7-IronCallaway Supersoft113.7320.78483031.3244.19168.63181.87

Observations:

  • As with the driver data, the performance difference between the two balls is minimal to the point of being indistinguishable.
  • Speed, launch, spin … across the board, there are no statistically significant differences in the data.

The broad strokes takeaway here is that the Supersoft and Amazon Basics Core Soft are about as similar as any two balls you’re likely to find.

As quick aside … yeah, the Srixon is a fast iron. While clubhead speed was inline with our larger ball test, switching from a player’s iron to a more speed-centric design produced significantly faster ball speeds and more distance. The upside is that speed helps identify differences (not that we found many here) but we’ll probably stick with player’s irons moving forward.

7-iron dispersion and consistency

Observations:

  • Again, we find slight differences in the dispersion patterns (Callaway is wider, Amazon is shallower).
  • The scale of the charts exaggerates the differences but the patterns themselves are roughly the same size.

Wedge data

ClubBallBall Speed [mph]Launch Angle [degrees]Spin Rate [RPM]Max Height [yards]Descent AngleCarry YardsTotal Yards
Sand WedgeAmazon Basics34.935.03351613.7538.5824.1328.17
Sand WedgeCallaway Supersoft34.835.72329514.18
39.324.2228.18

Observations:

  • With wedges, we again find minimal difference between balls.
  • The only meaningful difference is found in the spin rate where the Amazon ball spun approximately 200 rpm more.

Wedge dispersion and consistency

Observations:

The scale of the chart inflates differences between balls.

  • Even with allowances for small numbers, the Callaway Supersoft was more consistent from front to back and similar from left to right.

Which one’s better?

Given the cuckoo ball observed with the Amazon Basics sample off the driver, the bigger (although not by nearly as much as the scale of the chart suggests) dispersion pattern with wedges and the slight distance advantage across the board, I’m inclined to say the Callaway Supersoft performed slightly better.

That said, factoring in performance off driver, 7-iron and wedge, it’s entirely reasonable and fair to suggest there is very little, other than price, separating these two balls.

If cost is a key factor in your buying decision, I’m not sure there’s enough between them to justify a $10 or more difference in price. Frankly, I’m pretty sure there isn’t.

The bottom line

Neither the Callaway Supersoft nor the Amazon Basics Core Soft is designed for tour-level (or arguably mid-range) performance. The point of Supersoft, and apparently the Amazon ball as well, is to deliver exceptionally soft feel. That’s it. That’s the entirety of the story. Whatever you get beyond that is little more than happenstance.

The golf ball industry’s dirty little secret is that, as much as golfers love soft balls, they’re exceedingly difficult to make (or at least make well). Quality/consistency will invariably fall short of firmer balls.

The point is that when you’re playing in the absolute softest part of the market, nobody is making a top-quality product which makes a strong case that, if soft feel is what you’re looking for, there’s no reason to spend a penny more than you have to.

For You

For You

News
Jun 19, 2026
Everything Fell Apart On The 5th hole. Here’s How to Save Your Score Anyway.
News
Jun 18, 2026
AskMyGolfSpy: The Equipment We Use To Test Your Equipment
History's Mysteries Titleist History's Mysteries Titleist
News
Jun 18, 2026
History’s Mysteries: The Long Forgotten “Father” Of Titleist Golf Clubs
Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony is the Editor of MyGolfSpy where his job is to bring fresh and innovative content to the site. In addition to his editorial responsibilities, he was instrumental in developing MyGolfSpy's data-driven testing methodologies and continues to sift through our data to find the insights that can help improve your game. Tony believes that golfers deserve to know what's real and what's not, and that means MyGolfSpy's equipment coverage must extend beyond the so-called facts as dictated by the same companies that created them. Most of all Tony believes in performance over hype and #PowerToThePlayer.

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey





    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

      Gary

      5 months ago

      Thanks again, for the data. One of the things I appreciate about MGS is your evaluation based on data. Cracks me up people want to complain about how you conducted the tests, instead of focusing on the results. Like MGS doesn’t know how to run a test. Hilarious. It was interesting to see how close they are in comparison. I suspect far more golfers with mid swing speed play the Supersoft. It’s not all Seniors and women buying those balls. Many golfers buy off of price, not performance, obviously, or the sales numbers wouldn’t be so high. The myth of “I am not good enough” still lives with golf balls. Despite the data saying otherwise. Keep up the good work! Thanks Tony!

      Reply

      El

      5 months ago

      100 SS and PLAYERS irons for THIS test?
      A recap of the discussion that arrived at THESE test parameters would be more interesting than the test itself.
      April 1st publish date would have been at least worth a laugh….

      Reply

      JDA32

      5 months ago

      Why use such high driver and 7 iron speeds? I would think the vast majority of players using either of these balls are 10 mph or more below these speeds. Set test parameters for the majority of users of the product.

      Reply

      Dave

      5 months ago

      I fully agree. Second I saw the hundred mile an hour swing speed. I’m thinking G this is probably not representative of many or perhaps most of the people who would buy these two brands of golf balls. It’s been noted in several times by readers that your swing test for the low swing speed is really not slow enough. There’s significant difference between 75 or 80 miles an hour swing speed and 100 mile an hour swing speed. There are 1000s of a senior golfers out there who can no longer achieve 100 mph swing speed. Certainly wish you guys would show test results for the lower swinging speed more around the 80 mph range. Also noted an inaccurate statement within the article. You stated that you’re not entirely convinced that golfers looking to spend between 13 and $25 for a dozen golf balls or making their decision based on performance. Would’ve been accurate Tony if you indicated that probably most or a lot of of golfers, but your statement frames it as an absolute that means there are no golfers out there based these purchase price levels on performance. I for one would pay 40+ for a dozen of super soft if that’s what they cost because it’s not just being a soft feel is that they deliver exceptional distance due to reduce Spine. You of course know that which makes your statement a little more perplexing. You’re known for your accuracy in these testing, which we all benefit from and certainly appreciate. However, this statement is not accurate per se. Not withstanding such, you guys are the best and keep up the good work.

      Reply

      Jim Robinson

      5 months ago

      Testing at 95 mph would be more representative of a mid swing speed as Bridgestone considers 105 mph as fast. I am not sure of the demographics of Callaway Supersoft but I assume the majority are seniors and women. Testing at slower swing speeds would probably be more meaningful to the majority of those who would be interested in a ball like that.

      Reply

      Brad H

      5 months ago

      Interesting read. As most of the players these days are not 4 or 5 handicap, we do tend to go for value. I tend to play with value in mind as long as I don’t suffer serious degradation in play. Im around a 14 handicap. Lose a ball sometimes 2 each round. If I find 1, im sure I will play it. If I have a Pro v1 (found), I will play it. Right now, I have been playing these Eagle Ace™️ Drive Golf Balls-2 Layers-Maximum Distance, Optimal Spin.
      They have been selling good on Amazon for over a year now. $26 for 30 balls is hard to beat. Yes, they are a little short and tend to be hard feeling around the green but they fly straight and hold up well. When you guys do your ball test add those in there as well If you can. I would be curious as would the other 1000s of people that have bought them.

      Reply

      Papa Bogey

      5 months ago

      Interesting as always, but …. moot point. Once again the Amazon balls are sold out and not even listed online. They’re as rare as hen’s teeth and harder to find than Jimmy Hoffa’s grave.

      As for me, I’ll stick with my Kirkland. Unfortunately they just jumped in price to $33 for 2 dozen. Still a great price, but 2 price jumps in the past year have moved them from $12.50/dz to $16.50.

      Reply

      Craig Brown

      5 months ago

      I tried the Amaon ball … I use Pro v1x as my every day ball. My experience is similar as your’s especially with low flight off the driver. My driver swing speed is 87+

      Reply

      Bill

      6 months ago

      For us stat nerds, why not also post the sample size, # of reps, SD, SE?

      Reply

      League Golfer

      5 months ago

      Yes. Please at least tell us how many shots you hit with each club. You state that one bad ball or bad shot skewed the driver distance average downward on the Amazon ball, but it isn’t possible for the reader to understand how much that one bad result impacted the distance average downward. Can you tell us did you hit 3 dives with each ball model or 20 shots? Why not throw out the one or two longest shots and the one or two shortest shots? Give us some more info one the testing please.

      Reply

      CrashTestDummy77

      6 months ago

      The golf ball tests are always interesting. I’m sure they are ok balls, but not using them on the course. However, I wouldn’t mind seeing golf ranges having them especially if they have better feel than some of the golf balls that feel like rocks that some golf ranges have.

      Reply

      Hopp Man

      6 months ago

      Most likely, standard range balls are by design more durable. I have had conversations with people that run ranges at busy courses, and balls are actually degraded after about 2 weeks. Most ranges don’t swap their balls during the season.

      Reply

      Wilson Player

      5 months ago

      That 2 week number seems very low. Most ranges only pick the range a couple times a day. This means a ball can only get hit 2-3 a day. That’s only 28-42 strikes in a 2-week period. With a mix of driver, iron and wedges that makes it less than a round of golf in that period.
      Maybe at a place like Topgolf were they pick all day long and have an auto collection system under the traps (just guessing on this part) you may get excessive wear.
      Nothing is as high a wear as simulator golf and the balls aren’t going dead after a few dozen hits. In sim golf you can wear a ball out if you only use a single ball on the sim. The heat builds up and it may actually split.

    Leave A Reply

    required
    required
    required (your email address will not be published)

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    News
    Jun 19, 2026
    Everything Fell Apart On The 5th hole. Here’s How to Save Your Score Anyway.
    News
    Jun 18, 2026
    AskMyGolfSpy: The Equipment We Use To Test Your Equipment
    History's Mysteries Titleist History's Mysteries Titleist
    News
    Jun 18, 2026
    History’s Mysteries: The Long Forgotten “Father” Of Titleist Golf Clubs