Breve Análise do Tablet Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 (2019): Um tablet Samsung econômico com grandes deficiências
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 79.6 % v7 (old) | 01/2020 | Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 2019 Wifi SM-T290 SD 429, Adreno 504 | 345 g | 8 mm | 8.00" | 1280x800 | |
| 81 % v7 (old) | 01/2020 | Lenovo Tab M8 HD Helio A22 MT6762M, PowerVR GE8320 | 305 g | 8.2 mm | 8.00" | 1280x800 | |
| 78.7 % v6 (old) | 03/2019 | Alldocube M8 T801 MT6797X, Mali-T880 MP4 | 345 g | 8.48 mm | 8.00" | 1920x1200 | |
| 77.7 % v6 (old) | 07/2019 | Amazon Fire 7 2019 MT8163 V/B 1.3 GHz, Mali-T720 MP2 | 286 g | 9.6 mm | 7.00" | 1024x600 | |
| 78.9 % v7 (old) | 12/2019 | Amazon Fire HD 10 2019 MT8183, Mali-G72 MP3 | 504 g | 9.8 mm | 10.10" | 1920x1200 | |
| 80.8 % v7 (old) | 10/2018 | Huawei MediaPad M5 lite Kirin 659, Mali-T830 MP2 | 475 g | 7.7 mm | 10.10" | 1920x1200 | |
| 73.7 % v6 (old) | 09/2018 | Trekstor SurfTab B10 MT8163 V/A 1.5 GHz, Mali-T720 MP2 | 505 g | 9.8 mm | 10.10" | 1280x800 | |
| 75.4 % v7 (old) | 03/2020 | Lenovo Tab M7 MT8321, Mali-400 MP2 | 236 g | 8.2 mm | 7.00" | 1024x600 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 87 %
iluminação com acumulador: 377 cd/m²
Contraste: 1300:1 (Preto: 0.29 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.1 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 6.6 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
85.3% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.13
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 2019 Wifi SM-T290 TFT, 1280x800, 8" | Lenovo Tab M8 HD IPS, 1280x800, 8" | Alldocube M8 T801 IPS, 1920x1200, 8" | Amazon Fire 7 2019 IPS, 1024x600, 7" | Amazon Fire HD 10 2019 IPS, 1920x1200, 10.1" | Huawei MediaPad M5 lite IPS, 1920x1200, 10.1" | Trekstor SurfTab B10 IPS, 1280x800, 10.1" | Lenovo Tab M7 IPS, 1024x600, 7" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen | 19% | -20% | 9% | 2% | -26% | -13% | -5% | |
| Brightness middle | 377 | 379 1% | 317.5 -16% | 391 4% | 449 19% | 514 36% | 223 -41% | 447 19% |
| Brightness | 372 | 346 -7% | 320 -14% | 385 3% | 425 14% | 492 32% | 211 -43% | 449 21% |
| Brightness Distribution | 87 | 88 1% | 94 8% | 75 -14% | 89 2% | 80 -8% | 81 -7% | 86 -1% |
| Black Level * | 0.29 | 0.21 28% | 0.5 -72% | 0.15 48% | 0.6 -107% | 0.96 -231% | 0.22 24% | 0.25 14% |
| Contrast | 1300 | 1805 39% | 635 -51% | 2607 101% | 748 -42% | 535 -59% | 1014 -22% | 1788 38% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 6.1 | 3.8 38% | 6.12 -0% | 6.3 -3% | 3.1 49% | 5.42 11% | 6.2 -2% | 7.1 -16% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 10.9 | 7.5 31% | 13.72 -26% | 19.3 -77% | 6.4 41% | 9.84 10% | 13 -19% | 20.6 -89% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 6.6 | 5 24% | 5.8 12% | 6.1 8% | 3.8 42% | 6.5 2% | 6.2 6% | 8.1 -23% |
| Gamma | 2.13 103% | 2.23 99% | 2.12 104% | 2.22 99% | 2.09 105% | 2.216 99% | 2.17 101% | 2.07 106% |
| CCT | 7861 83% | 7514 87% | 7633 85% | 8069 81% | 7202 90% | 6780 96% | 7022 93% | 8255 79% |
* ... smaller is better
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8715 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 28.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 14 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 14.8 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 74 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 44.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 20.4 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 24.4 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 74 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
| Jetstream 2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Tablet (19.9 - 334, n=70, last 2 years) | |
| Amazon Fire HD 10 2019 (Silk Browser 75.3.60) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 2019 Wifi SM-T290 (Chrome 79) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 429 (14.6 - 16.1, n=2) | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2019 (Silk Browser 70.3.1) | |
| Lenovo Tab M8 HD | |
| JetStream 1.1 - Total Score | |
| Amazon Fire HD 10 2019 (Silk Browser 75.3.60) | |
| Alldocube M8 T801 (Chrome 72.0.3626.105) | |
| Huawei MediaPad M5 lite (Chrome 67) | |
| Lenovo Tab M8 HD (Chrome 79) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 429 (25.1 - 25.1, n=2) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 2019 Wifi SM-T290 (Chrome 79) | |
| Trekstor SurfTab B10 (Chrome 72) | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2019 (Silk Browser 70.3.1) | |
| Lenovo Tab M7 (Chrome 79) | |
| WebXPRT 3 - Overall | |
| Average of class Tablet (34 - 435, n=45, last 2 years) | |
| Amazon Fire HD 10 2019 (Silk Browser 75.3.60) | |
| Huawei MediaPad M5 lite (Chrome 67) | |
| Lenovo Tab M8 HD (Chrome 79) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 429 (32 - 36, n=2) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 2019 Wifi SM-T290 (Chrome 79) | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2019 | |
| Lenovo Tab M7 (Chrome 79) | |
| Speedometer 2.0 - Result | |
| Average of class Tablet (2.59 - 572, n=64, last 2 years) | |
| Amazon Fire HD 10 2019 (Silk Browser 75.3.60) | |
| Lenovo Tab M8 HD (Chrome 79) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 429 (13.5 - 15.6, n=2) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 2019 Wifi SM-T290 (Chrome 79) | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2019 (Silk Browser 70.3.1) | |
| Lenovo Tab M7 (Chrome 79) | |
| Octane V2 - Total Score | |
| Average of class Tablet (763 - 105178, n=87, last 2 years) | |
| Amazon Fire HD 10 2019 (Silk Browser 75.3.60) | |
| Alldocube M8 T801 (Chrome 72.0.3626.105) | |
| Huawei MediaPad M5 lite (Chrome 67) | |
| Lenovo Tab M8 HD (Chrome 79) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 429 (4297 - 4392, n=2) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 2019 Wifi SM-T290 (Chrome 79) | |
| Trekstor SurfTab B10 (Chrome 72) | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2019 (Silk Browser 70.3.1) | |
| Lenovo Tab M7 (Chrome 79) | |
| Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total | |
| Lenovo Tab M7 (Chrome 79) | |
| Trekstor SurfTab B10 (Chrome 72) | |
| Amazon Fire 7 2019 (Silk Browser 70.3.1) | |
| Lenovo Tab M8 HD (Chrome 79) | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 2019 Wifi SM-T290 (Chrome 79) | |
| Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 429 (10433 - 10655, n=2) | |
| Huawei MediaPad M5 lite (Chrome 67) | |
| Alldocube M8 T801 (Chrome 72.0.3626.105) | |
| Amazon Fire HD 10 2019 (Silk Browser 75.3.60) | |
| Average of class Tablet (319 - 34733, n=75, last 2 years) | |
* ... smaller is better
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 2019 Wifi SM-T290 | Lenovo Tab M8 HD | Alldocube M8 T801 | Amazon Fire 7 2019 | Amazon Fire HD 10 2019 | Huawei MediaPad M5 lite | Trekstor SurfTab B10 | Lenovo Tab M7 | Average 32 GB eMMC Flash | Average of class Tablet | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AndroBench 3-5 | -2% | -41% | -47% | 15% | 61% | -39% | -46% | -10% | 511% | |
| Sequential Read 256KB | 291.9 | 297.1 2% | 142.8 -51% | 164.9 -44% | 266.2 -9% | 308.1 6% | 109 -63% | 155.7 -47% | 242 ? -17% | 1045 ? 258% |
| Sequential Write 256KB | 108.5 | 79.6 -27% | 103 -5% | 77.3 -29% | 180.1 66% | 82.6 -24% | 70.5 -35% | 53.1 -51% | 100.5 ? -7% | 686 ? 532% |
| Random Read 4KB | 57.8 | 77.4 34% | 19.5 -66% | 24.98 -57% | 75 30% | 73.5 27% | 16.96 -71% | 31.39 -46% | 43.2 ? -25% | 189.4 ? 228% |
| Random Write 4KB | 16.89 | 15.84 -6% | 10.01 -41% | 5.83 -65% | 23.28 38% | 77.3 358% | 8.43 -50% | 11.96 -29% | 22.4 ? 33% | 189.9 ? 1024% |
| Sequential Read 256KB SDCard | 87.1 ? | 83.8 ? -4% | 59.2 ? -32% | 77.2 ? -11% | 83.7 ? -4% | 83.2 ? -4% | 38.97 ? -55% | 71.8 ? -18% | ||
| Sequential Write 256KB SDCard | 69.9 ? | 64.3 ? -8% | 32.05 ? -54% | 52 ? -26% | 72.8 ? 4% | 62.5 ? -11% | 35.21 ? -50% | 52.9 ? -24% |
PUBG Mobile
Asphalt 9: Legends
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 33.3 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 33.7 °C / 93 F, ranging from 20.7 to 53.2 °C for the class Tablet.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 26.9 °C / 80 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.3 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 30 °C / 86 F.
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 2019 Wifi SM-T290 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.9% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 45% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 48% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 40% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Lenovo Tab M8 HD audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.9% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 12.3% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (27.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 83% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 14% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 22%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 82% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 14% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado |   0.01 / 0.16 Watt |
| Ocioso |  0.62 / 2.68 / 2.7 Watt |
| Carga |
3.61 / 4 Watt |
    
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 2019 Wifi SM-T290 5100 mAh | Lenovo Tab M8 HD 5100 mAh | Alldocube M8 T801 5500 mAh | Amazon Fire 7 2019 2980 mAh | Amazon Fire HD 10 2019 6300 mAh | Huawei MediaPad M5 lite 7500 mAh | Trekstor SurfTab B10 6000 mAh | Lenovo Tab M7 3500 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 15% | -178% | -30% | -60% | -109% | -136% | 1% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 0.62 | 0.66 -6% | 3.4 -448% | 1.1 -77% | 1.14 -84% | 2.8 -352% | 2.2 -255% | 0.85 -37% |
| Idle Average * | 2.68 | 2.15 20% | 5.1 -90% | 2.77 -3% | 3.71 -38% | 3.3 -23% | 3.94 -47% | 2.4 10% |
| Idle Maximum * | 2.7 | 2.18 19% | 5.3 -96% | 2.79 -3% | 3.74 -39% | 3.9 -44% | 4 -48% | 2.42 10% |
| Load Average * | 3.61 | 2.48 31% | 6 -66% | 4.5 -25% | 5.26 -46% | 5.2 -44% | 9.35 -159% | 3.17 12% |
| Load Maximum * | 4 | 3.49 13% | 11.5 -188% | 5.61 -40% | 7.68 -92% | 7.2 -80% | 10.92 -173% | 3.69 8% |
* ... smaller is better
| Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 2019 Wifi SM-T290 5100 mAh | Lenovo Tab M8 HD 5100 mAh | Alldocube M8 T801 5500 mAh | Amazon Fire 7 2019 2980 mAh | Amazon Fire HD 10 2019 6300 mAh | Huawei MediaPad M5 lite 7500 mAh | Trekstor SurfTab B10 6000 mAh | Lenovo Tab M7 3500 mAh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 35% | -49% | -52% | -2% | -10% | -38% | -52% | |
| Reader / Idle | 3132 | 3581 14% | 1008 -68% | 1691 -46% | 2162 -31% | |||
| H.264 | 934 | 1696 82% | 536 -43% | 1480 58% | 934 0% | |||
| WiFi v1.3 | 831 | 1124 35% | 420 -49% | 462 -44% | 950 14% | 852 3% | 515 -38% | 402 -52% |
| Load | 342 | 374 9% | 169 -51% | 228 -33% | 299 -13% |
Pro
Contra
Verdict - The Galaxy Tab A 8.0 (2019) lacks performance
O Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 (2019) é um tablet sólido que oferece um pacote geral adequado pelo preço de cerca de €150 (~$168). O tablet possui uma duração decente da bateria, alto-falantes impressionantes e um painel TFT convincente.
O acessível Galaxy Tab A 8.0 (2019) não é uma escolha sensata para usuários exigentes.
Nossos testes também revelaram algumas deficiências. Os patches de segurança de nossa unidade de teste não estão atualizados, por exemplo. Enquanto o tablet tem desempenho lento de Wi-Fi. A RAM e o armazenamento também são um pouco limitados, apesar de ter um leitor de cartão microSD a bordo. Além disso, a Samsung incluiu o desatualizado padrão micro USB em seu tablet de 8 polegadas.
Acima de tudo, o fraco desempenho é um fardo pesado na vida cotidiana. Um SoC Snapdragon 429 combinado com 2 GB de RAM se esforça na maioria das tarefas, o que não é de surpreender, considerando o nível de desempenho da One UI. A omissão de um método de autenticação biométrica em um dispositivo lançado em 2019 também é incompreensível. A Samsung nem sequer oferece o simples reconhecimento facial em 2D usando a câmera frontal do Galaxy Tab A 8.0 (2019). Também não podemos entender o dispositivo com a certificação Widevine Nível 3.
Samsung Galaxy Tab A 8.0 2019 Wifi SM-T290
- 12/30/2019 v7 (old)
Marcus Herbrich
Price comparison
