Notebookcheck Logo

Google Pixel Tablet review - Google revises its tablet and offers the better iPad

A revolution in the tablet market? With the Pixel Tablet, Google offers an exciting alternative to the Apple iPad 10 or Galaxy Tab S9. The 10.95-inch Pixel tab is not only a classic tablet, but, together with its docking station, it is also a smart home hub or a smart speaker with an XXL display, á la Apple's HomePod.
Update: Speakers built into the docking station tested.
Google Pixel Tablet review

With its Pixel Tablet, Google would like nothing less than to change how tablet lovers use their devices. Tablets are often seen as possible laptop replacements and are offered with a keyboard cover - this is not the case with Google. Rather, the US-American manufacturer is offering a versatile, all-in-one solution consisting of a classic tablet, smart home hub and smart speaker. This is made possible with the help of a docking station to which the Pixel tab can be attached magnetically and with pogo pins.

The tablet itself is equipped with a 10.95-inch IPS display and the Google Tensor G2. The RAM weighs in at 8 GB, whereby the UFS 3.1 storage can be purchased with either 128 or 256 GB. Unlike the attractive pricing in the USA ($499), the RRP in Germany starts at 679 euros (RRP) including the docking station. 

Google Pixel Tablet
Processor
Google Tensor G2 8 x 1.8 - 2.9 GHz, Cortex X1 / A76 / A55
Graphics adapter
Memory
8 GB 
Display
10.95 inch 16:10, 2560 x 1600 pixel 276 PPI, Capacitive Touchscreen, native pen support, IPS, glossy: yes, HDR, 60 Hz
Storage
128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash, 128 GB 
, 111 GB free
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), Audio Connections: USB-C, 1 Fingerprint Reader, Brightness Sensor, Sensors: accelerometer, gyro, compass, hall, Miracast, OTG, UWB
Networking
802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6/), Bluetooth 5.2
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 8.1 x 258 x 169 ( = 0.32 x 10.16 x 6.65 in)
Battery
27 Wh, 7020 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Android 13
Camera
Primary Camera: 8 MPix (f/2.2, 1,12 μm, fixfocus)
Secondary Camera: 8 MPix (f/2.2, 1,12 μm, fixfocus)
Additional features
Speakers: Quad-Audio system, Keyboard: OnScreen, dock, charger (for dock), info material, 24 Months Warranty, widevine L1, fanless
Weight
493 g ( = 17.39 oz / 1.09 pounds) ( = 0 oz / 0 pounds)
Price
679 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Possible competitors compared

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Height
Size
Resolution
Best Price
89.3 %
09/2023
Google Pixel Tablet
Tensor G2, Mali-G710 MP7
493 g8.1 mm10.95"2560x1600
89.3 %
04/2023
OnePlus Pad
Dimensity 9000, Mali-G710 MP10
552 g6.5 mm11.61"2800x2000
90.2 %
06/2022
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
SD 8 Gen 1, Adreno 730
507 g6.3 mm11.00"2560x1600
88.6 %
11/2022
Apple iPad 10
A14, A14 Bionic GPU
477 g7 mm10.90"2360x1640
89.7 %
12/2022
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
SD 870, Adreno 650
449 g5.9 mm11.00"2560x1600

Case - The Google Tablet and recycled metal

Google Pixel Tablet in gray
Google Pixel Tablet in gray

In the EU, the 493-gram Pixel Tablet comes in two colors, beige (Porcelain) and gray (Hazel). The case is made from recycled aluminum, however, the Google Tab doesn't feel metallic. On the rear of the device, the surface material is matte and has a somewhat velvety feel that is very fingerprint-resistant. We reckon opinions could split regarding the rear side's haptics in comparison to glass materials or an anodized aluminum surface. Nevertheless, in terms of the good build quality, there can be no criticism regarding the overall impression made.

According to the manufacturer's data sheet, the front of the Pixel Tablet has an anti-smudge coating, although, no details have been disclosed concerning the implemented protective glass. It's worth mentioning that some online stores state the Google tab as having Gorilla Glass 3. The front of the device has a solid 79.7 screen-to-body ratio. However, for our taste, the display bezels ought to be a little slimmer. Compared to the Galaxy Tab S8's almost 84 percent, the Pixel Tablet clearly loses out. Unfortunately, the Google tab doesn't possess a special certification combating the infiltration of dust or water.

Size comparison

258 mm / 10.2 inch 169 mm / 6.65 inch 8.1 mm / 0.3189 inch 493 g1.087 lbs258 mm / 10.2 inch 189.4 mm / 7.46 inch 6.5 mm / 0.2559 inch 552 g1.217 lbs253.8 mm / 9.99 inch 165.3 mm / 6.51 inch 6.3 mm / 0.248 inch 507 g1.118 lbs248.6 mm / 9.79 inch 179.5 mm / 7.07 inch 7 mm / 0.2756 inch 477 g1.052 lbs249.2 mm / 9.81 inch 160.4 mm / 6.31 inch 5.9 mm / 0.2323 inch 449 g0.99 lbs210 mm / 8.27 inch 148 mm / 5.83 inch 1 mm / 0.03937 inch 2.9 g0.00639 lbs

Features - The Pixel Tablet has a fast USB port

Due to the operating system and some preinstalled apps, our review device's 128 GB UFS 3.1 storage possesses an available capacity of 111 GB. Anyone requiring more space for videos or photos can only do so with the help of peripheral devices such as memory sticks or USB OTG since microSD card memory expansion is not possible. 

Fast data transfer speeds of up to 5 GBit/s take place via the installed USB 3.2 port (1st gen) and can, theoretically, also be used to output image signals to external monitors with the aid of an adapter. However, were unable to establish a connection between a monitor and the Pixel Tablet. Google doesn't appear to have created the necessary software-related requirements. Despite this, wireless data transfer is available, at least via Miracast. In addition, using the Nearby Share function, information such as photos and videos can be sent from the Pixel Tablet to a nearby Android smartphone.

Ton top of this, the Pixel Tablet has four speakers and three microphones at its disposal, as well as an ultra-wideband chip for accurate distance determination. The tablet can not only be charged via the included dock but can also be switched to a so-called hub mode, turning the device into a smart display. For example, in hub mode, the Pixel Tablet can be used as a digital photo frame or as a control center for your own smart home. Thanks to Chromecast support, the wireless transfer of music and videos from an Android smartphone to the Pixel Tablet is also possible.

Lower side of the case (rubber feet)
Lower side of the case (rubber feet)
Left side of the case (speaker, USB port, speaker)
Left side of the case (speaker, USB port, speaker)
Top side of the case (microphone, volume button, on/off button)
Top side of the case (microphone, volume button, on/off button)
Right side of the case (speaker, microphone, speaker)
Right side of the case (speaker, microphone, speaker)

Software - The Google tablet comes with 5-year updates

During our tests, the Pixel Tablet is based on the current Android 13, including the security patches for August and will receive updates for at least 5 years from the time it is added to the Google Store. However, this only applies to the security patches. Android version updates are guaranteed until at least Juni 2026 - in other words, three years. With its update guarantee, that means Google remains behind Samsung who promises four generations of Android OS upgrades for its Galaxy Tab S9 models.   

Similar to the Samsung tablets with their Knox Vault platform, the Pixel Tablet is also equipped with the Titan M2 security chip which is said to protect sensitive user data using machine learning.

Since Google is less focused on productivity, it is understandable that a desktop-style UI, such as the ones seen in Samsung or Lenovo devices, hasn't been implemented. Despite this, with the Pixel Tablet it is possible to switch quickly between multiple user accounts via the Android menu or lock screen which, in turn, also fits better to the docking concept. 

Google Pixel Tablet review
Google Pixel Tablet review
Google Pixel Tablet review
Google Pixel Tablet review

Communication - The Google tab and WiFi 6

The Pixel Tablet uses the MIMO process, in order to ensure first-class reception. However, the Google tab has only opted for Wi-Fi 6. For a tablet in this price category, we would have at least expected it to support the 6 Ghz frequency band for Wi-Fi transmissions. The Wi-Fi-6E competition, such as the OnePlus Pad, manages significantly more in the way of bandwidth. Nevertheless, the Pixel Tablet's speed is decent. Paired with the Asus ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000, we measured a peak of over 900 MBit/s and when it came to sending data, we only managed an average of 690 MBit/s - this was due to transmission dips to less than 250 MBit/s during our analysis.

In addition to Wi-Fi 6, Bluetooth 5.2 is available, but both a GNSS module and a cellular connection are missing. For video calls via Wi-Fi, Google has implemented a centering function which is intended to ensure that users continually remain in the middle of the picture during such calls, even if they are moving around. However, this is only supported by Google Meet. 

Networking
iperf3 receive AXE11000
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
1696 (1635min - 1722max) MBit/s +93%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
881 (690min - 925max) MBit/s
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
741 (621min - 759max) MBit/s -16%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
735 (687min - 788max) MBit/s -17%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
715 (339min - 767max) MBit/s -19%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
1710 (1696min - 1724max) MBit/s +148%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
893 (775min - 941max) MBit/s +29%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
843 (599min - 944max) MBit/s +22%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
816 (764min - 851max) MBit/s +18%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
690 (241min - 849max) MBit/s
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1802 (884min - 1853max) MBit/s
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1611 (1577min - 1636max) MBit/s
09018027036045054063072081090099010801170126013501440153016201710Tooltip
Google Pixel Tablet Google Tensor G2, ARM Mali-G710 MP7; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø881 (690-925)
OnePlus Pad MediaTek Dimensity 9000, ARM Mali-G710 MP10; iperf3 receive AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1696 (1635-1722)
Google Pixel Tablet Google Tensor G2, ARM Mali-G710 MP7; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø690 (241-849)
OnePlus Pad MediaTek Dimensity 9000, ARM Mali-G710 MP10; iperf3 transmit AXE11000; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1708 (1696-1724)

Cameras - The Pixel Tablet lacks autofocus

A selfie with the Google Pixel Tablet
A selfie with the Google Pixel Tablet
A portrait with the Google Pixel Tablet
A portrait with the Google Pixel Tablet

There is disappointment when it comes to the front and rear cameras because identical lenses - which both lack autofocus - have been used. Both cameras possess a resolution of eight megapixels and an aperture of ƒ/2.0. We have difficulty getting our heads around this cost-cutting approach for an upper mid-range tablet, at least in terms of the rear lens. Even sub-$200 entry-level tablets are equipped with a higher resolution camera that includes autofocus. 

The quality presented in our test photos speaks for itself with none of our subjects being displayed with proper sharpness. The Pixel Tablet can't even really be recommended for quick snapshots. At most, the rear camera module can be used to take photos of documents or notes, although, even here, the distance from the lens must be spot on. With very large DIN formats and a large distance from the subject, things already started to get critical for the 8 MP camera. Even when recording videos, expect to have to live with compromises with a maximum resolution of 1080p and 30 fps.

Google Pixel Tablet review
Google Pixel Tablet review
Google Pixel Tablet review
Google Pixel Tablet review

Image Comparison

Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

wide anglewide anglelow lightzoom 5x
click to load images

By contrast, the Pixel Tablet's photos are very colour-accurate. Under controlled lighting conditions, we analyzed the 8 MP camera's color reproduction compared to the actual reference colors. In our ColorChecker passport test, the Google tab displayed no color deficits (Delta E-value >10). Only turquoise is reproduced somewhat inaccurately. 

ColorChecker
3.5 ∆E
3.1 ∆E
4.4 ∆E
6 ∆E
3.8 ∆E
4.1 ∆E
3.2 ∆E
5.1 ∆E
4.3 ∆E
2.6 ∆E
4.7 ∆E
4.8 ∆E
3.7 ∆E
6.7 ∆E
6.6 ∆E
1.5 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
9.3 ∆E
5.7 ∆E
4 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
2.5 ∆E
1.6 ∆E
4.9 ∆E
ColorChecker Google Pixel Tablet: 4.37 ∆E min: 1.49 - max: 9.31 ∆E
ColorChecker
17.9 ∆E
23.5 ∆E
19.7 ∆E
18.7 ∆E
21.6 ∆E
25.1 ∆E
27 ∆E
15.2 ∆E
17.1 ∆E
15.3 ∆E
27 ∆E
27.4 ∆E
14.9 ∆E
24.9 ∆E
12.5 ∆E
23.1 ∆E
17 ∆E
20.5 ∆E
23.5 ∆E
22.7 ∆E
24.3 ∆E
21.6 ∆E
17 ∆E
12.8 ∆E
ColorChecker Google Pixel Tablet: 20.44 ∆E min: 12.53 - max: 27.43 ∆E

Accessories and warranty - The Google Tablet comes with a docking station

The Pixel Tablet's case was also developed with the hub mode in mind.
The Pixel Tablet's case was also developed with the hub mode in mind.

The Pixel Tablet comes with a docking station, a suitable 15-watt charger (for the dock) as well as brochures with information regarding security and the limited warranty. In addition, the charging dock with built-in speakers is available separately for $129 (RRP). Likewise, a Google Case (RRP: $79) as well as a Speck StandyShell case (RRP: $49) can also be purchased.

In Germany, Google offers a two-year limited standard warranty.

Input devices & operation - The Pixel Tablet and stylus input

Finger-based inputs are accurately implemented on the 10.95-inch IPS panel. However, due to the common screen refresh rate of 60 Hz, scrolling when browsing or animations are not displayed as smoothly as a Galaxy Tab S8. In addition to finger input, it is also possible to interact with the device using a stylus that supports the USI 2.0 protocol (Universal Stylus Initiative). 

The fingerprint scanner in the on/off button works reliably and wakes the Pixel Tablet from stand-by mode with a lovely animation. However, as a result, the locking process seems a bit on the slow side. An unlocking function using biometric face identification is not possible via the front camera. 

Google Pixel Tablet review
Google Pixel Tablet review

Display - The Google Pixel Tablet has an IPS display

The Pixel Tablet has a classic RGB subpixel matrix consisting of one red, one blue and one green light diode.
The Pixel Tablet has a classic RGB subpixel matrix consisting of one red, one blue and one green light diode.

Display fetishists will certainly not be satisfied with the Pixel Tablet but PWM-sensitive users will be as there is no measurable low-frequency display flickering present in the implemented liquid crystal display. The IPS panel, together with its 1600p resolution, achieves a pixel density of 274 ppi and refreshes with a frame rate of only 60 Hz. In doing so,  the Pixel Tablet finds itself on the same level as the Apple iPad 10 but 120 Hz or 144 Hz are available in this Android price segment.

When it came to our brightness measurements, the IPS panel managed an average of 508 cd/m² with a full surface white screen which is quite satisfactory for this price class. Unlike the OLED competition, the Google tablet is not really able to increase its APL18 measurement, with a maximum of 529 cd/m². The IPS-typical weaknesses, such as shadows or uneven lighting at the edges, are not particularly pronounced with the Google device.

535
cd/m²
527
cd/m²
478
cd/m²
534
cd/m²
521
cd/m²
489
cd/m²
521
cd/m²
493
cd/m²
474
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 3
Maximum: 535 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 508 cd/m² Minimum: 1.92 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 89 %
Center on Battery: 521 cd/m²
Contrast: 1022:1 (Black: 0.51 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.2 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5.1
ΔE Greyscale 1.3 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
94.9% sRGB (Calman 2D)
Gamma: 2.2
Google Pixel Tablet
IPS, 2560x1600, 10.95
OnePlus Pad
IPS, 2800x2000, 11.61
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
LCD, 2560x1600, 11.00
Apple iPad 10
IPS, 2360x1640, 10.90
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
AMOLED, 2560x1600, 11.00
Screen
-38%
-16%
-17%
0%
Brightness middle
521
474
-9%
551
6%
467
-10%
584
12%
Brightness
508
447
-12%
536
6%
468
-8%
574
13%
Brightness Distribution
89
89
0%
93
4%
92
3%
91
2%
Black Level *
0.51
0.32
37%
0.6
-18%
0.49
4%
Contrast
1022
1481
45%
918
-10%
953
-7%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
1.2
3.16
-163%
1.4
-17%
1.4
-17%
1.03
14%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
2.6
5.37
-107%
5.6
-115%
3.3
-27%
2.64
-2%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
1.3
2.5
-92%
1.1
15%
2.3
-77%
1.8
-38%
Gamma
2.2 100%
2.09 105%
2.15 102%
2.21 100%
2.159 102%
CCT
6696 97%
7112 91%
6621 98%
6852 95%
6744 96%

* ... smaller is better

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 1108 Hz

The display backlight flickers at 1108 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) .

The frequency of 1108 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 18732 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

A series of measurements with fixed levels of zoom and various brightness settings.

The IPS panel's black level of 0.51 cd/m² results in a solid contrast ratio of around 1,000:1, but isn't really impressive when compared to a OnePlus Pad. The mid-range tablet has two color profiles with which the color temperature cannot be adjusted. If desired, the light sensor automatically adjusts the color reproduction depending on the ambient light.

We analyzed the IPS panel's color calibration using the Calman analysis software. Our measured sRGB color space DeltaE values highlight very low color and gray scale deviation (<2). This means differences compared to the reference colors are barely noticeable. 

Color accuracy (target color space: sRGB; profile: Natural)
Color accuracy (target color space: sRGB; profile: Natural)
Color space (target color space: sRGB; profile: Natural)
Color space (target color space: sRGB; profile: Natural)
Gray scales (target color space: sRGB; profile: Natural)
Gray scales (target color space: sRGB; profile: Natural)
Color saturation (target color space: sRGB; profile: Natural)
Color saturation (target color space: sRGB; profile: Natural)

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
16.66 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 6.335 ms rise
↘ 10.32 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 31 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21.8 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
35.3 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 16.4 ms rise
↘ 18.9 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 42 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (34.3 ms).

The Pixel Tablet is well equipped to handle everyday outdoor situations. In direct sunlight, the content remains legible due to the display's solid brightness levels, however, it's generally best to avoid getting reflections on the glass surface.  

The IPS panel's viewing angle stability is decent but from wide angles a dip in brightness is noticeable. There are no visible changes to the colors.

Pixel Tablet viewing angle
Pixel Tablet viewing angle

Performance - The Google Tablet comes with a Tensor SoC

Google has opted to use the second generation of its in-house SoC for the Pixel Tablet, the Tensor G2 and 8 GB of LPDDR5 RAM. Our Pixel 7 Pro review already showed that the Google chipset can't keep up with the current high-end processors, however, in everyday operation, the  Pixel Tablet made a confident impression and, in our set of CPU benchmarks tests, it builds on the Pixel range of smartphone's good results.

Especially when it comes to the Geekbench single-core score, the Google Tablet's Cortex X1 cores are unable to keep pace with the MediaTek Dimensity 9000 and its Cortex X2 Ultra or even an Apple A14 Bionic. But, also the multi-core score or Antutu benchmark highlights a significant performance deficit between the Pixel Tablet and a OnePlus Pad.

Geekbench 6.2
Multi-Core
Google Pixel Tablet
3667 Points
Average Google Tensor G2 (3383 - 3967, n=4)
3638 Points -1%
Average of class Tablet (493 - 5652, n=17, last 2 years)
3006 Points -18%
Single-Core
Average Google Tensor G2 (1428 - 1480, n=4)
1452 Points +1%
Google Pixel Tablet
1435 Points
Average of class Tablet (203 - 2107, n=17, last 2 years)
1115 Points -22%
Geekbench 5.5
Single-Core
Apple iPad 10
1580 Points +47%
OnePlus Pad
1279 Points +19%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
1226 Points +14%
Google Pixel Tablet
1078 Points
Average Google Tensor G2 (1036 - 1078, n=4)
1053 Points -2%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
943 Points -13%
Average of class Tablet (140 - 1892, n=49, last 2 years)
793 Points -26%
Multi-Core
Apple iPad 10
4027 Points +25%
OnePlus Pad
3998 Points +24%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
3362 Points +5%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
3269 Points +2%
Google Pixel Tablet
3212 Points
Average Google Tensor G2 (3093 - 3265, n=4)
3198 Points 0%
Average of class Tablet (312 - 8524, n=49, last 2 years)
2747 Points -14%
Antutu v9 - Total Score
OnePlus Pad
935522 Points +47%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
927884 Points +46%
Average Google Tensor G2 (619727 - 773857, n=5)
692109 Points +9%
Apple iPad 10
691084 Points +9%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
677914 Points +7%
Google Pixel Tablet
635893 Points
Average of class Tablet (92766 - 1416727, n=43, last 2 years)
530231 Points -17%
PCMark for Android - Work 3.0
OnePlus Pad
15951 Points +50%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
13740 Points +29%
Average Google Tensor G2 (10530 - 11736, n=5)
11184 Points +5%
Google Pixel Tablet
10638 Points
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
9827 Points -8%
Average of class Tablet (4045 - 17267, n=45, last 2 years)
9303 Points -13%
CrossMark - Overall
OnePlus Pad
1114 Points +25%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
1069 Points +20%
Apple iPad 10
987 Points +11%
Average Google Tensor G2 (886 - 934, n=5)
900 Points +1%
Google Pixel Tablet
889 Points
Average of class Tablet (172 - 1585, n=41, last 2 years)
754 Points -15%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
732 Points -18%
BaseMark OS II
Overall
OnePlus Pad
7453 Points +16%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
6908 Points +8%
Google Pixel Tablet
6419 Points
Average Google Tensor G2 (5704 - 6419, n=5)
6057 Points -6%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
6043 Points -6%
Average of class Tablet (444 - 8886, n=40, last 2 years)
3923 Points -39%
Apple iPad 10
Points -100%
System
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
10926 Points +22%
OnePlus Pad
10635 Points +19%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
10334 Points +16%
Google Pixel Tablet
8938 Points
Average Google Tensor G2 (7803 - 9601, n=5)
8791 Points -2%
Average of class Tablet (1103 - 14097, n=40, last 2 years)
6628 Points -26%
Memory
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
7694 Points +18%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
6940 Points +6%
OnePlus Pad
6873 Points +5%
Google Pixel Tablet
6548 Points
Average Google Tensor G2 (4556 - 6548, n=5)
5416 Points -17%
Average of class Tablet (916 - 8890, n=40, last 2 years)
4444 Points -32%
Graphics
OnePlus Pad
22155 Points +35%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
18998 Points +16%
Google Pixel Tablet
16372 Points
Average Google Tensor G2 (15766 - 16375, n=5)
16151 Points -1%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
12445 Points -24%
Average of class Tablet (580 - 31738, n=40, last 2 years)
8460 Points -48%
Web
OnePlus Pad
1906 Points +11%
Average Google Tensor G2 (1720 - 1838, n=5)
1750 Points +2%
Google Pixel Tablet
1721 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
1581 Points -8%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
1348 Points -22%
Average of class Tablet (10 - 1907, n=40, last 2 years)
1230 Points -29%
AImark - Score v3.x
OnePlus Pad
27367 Points +2985%
Average of class Tablet (84 - 156427, n=20, last 2 years)
9958 Points +1023%
Google Pixel Tablet
887 Points
Average Google Tensor G2 (496 - 1008, n=5)
840 Points -5%
UL Procyon AI Inference - Overall Score
Google Pixel Tablet
44323 Points
Average Google Tensor G2 (37656 - 44323, n=5)
42050 Points -5%
OnePlus Pad
29879 Points -33%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
17904 Points -60%
Average of class Tablet (1535 - 73266, n=32, last 2 years)
12779 Points -71%

Legend

 
Google Pixel Tablet Google Tensor G2, ARM Mali-G710 MP7, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
 
OnePlus Pad MediaTek Dimensity 9000, ARM Mali-G710 MP10,
 
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, Qualcomm Adreno 730, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
 
Apple iPad 10 Apple A14 Bionic, Apple A14 Bionic GPU, 64 GB SSD
 
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022 Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 5G, Qualcomm Adreno 650, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash

In the GPU-intensive tests, the Tensor G2, with its integrated Mali-G710 MP7, does a little better compared to the competition but this is also an area where the OnePlus Pad has its nose in front. The previous generation's Samsung Galaxy Tabs also managed considerably higher scores in the 3DMark and GFXBench tests with their Adreno 730.

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
2310 Points +26%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2205 Points +20%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
2124 Points +15%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1839 Points
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1216 Points -34%
3DMark / Wild Life Extreme
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
2377 Points +32%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
2287 Points +27%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
2250 Points +25%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1803 Points
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
1230 Points -32%
3DMark / Wild Life Unlimited Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
9052 Points +37%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
8539 Points +29%
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
8497 Points +29%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
6599 Points
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4244 Points -36%
3DMark / Wild Life Score
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
8630 Points +30%
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
7933 Points +19%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
6649 Points
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4243 Points -36%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
Points -100%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
9689 Points +8%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
8948 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
8945 Points 0%
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Graphics
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
14871 Points +28%
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
12658 Points +9%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
11589 Points
3DMark / Sling Shot Extreme (ES 3.1) Unlimited Physics
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
5321 Points +7%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
4983 Points
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
3735 Points -25%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
120 fps +100%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
119 fps +98%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
60 fps 0%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
60 fps 0%
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 / T-Rex Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
381 fps +25%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
317 fps +4%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
305 fps
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
246 fps -19%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
230 fps -25%
GFXBench 3.0 / Manhattan Onscreen OGL
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
115 fps +92%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
76 fps +27%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
60 fps 0%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
60 fps
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
60 fps 0%
GFXBench 3.0 / 1080p Manhattan Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
209 fps +19%
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
177 fps +1%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
175 fps
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
171 fps -2%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
132 fps -25%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
88 fps +57%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
58 fps +4%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
56 fps
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
53 fps -5%
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
51 fps -9%
GFXBench 3.1 / Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
146 fps +29%
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
128 fps +13%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
120 fps +6%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
113 fps
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
94 fps -17%
GFXBench / Car Chase Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
47 fps +21%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
45 fps +15%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
39 fps
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
32 fps -18%
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
32 fps -18%
GFXBench / Car Chase Offscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
83 fps +24%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
75 fps +12%
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
73 fps +9%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
67 fps
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
58 fps -13%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
34 fps +13%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
34 fps +13%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
30 fps
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
26 fps -13%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
21 fps -30%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
37 fps +19%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
35 fps +13%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
32 fps +3%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
31 fps
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
22 fps -29%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
50 fps +16%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
47 fps +9%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
43 fps
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
36 fps -16%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
33 fps -23%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
94 fps +22%
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
93 fps +21%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
87 fps +13%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
77 fps
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
58 fps -25%
GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
OnePlus Pad
Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000
17 fps +21%
Apple iPad 10
A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD
16 fps +14%
Google Pixel Tablet
Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
14 fps
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash
10 fps -29%

When it came to browsing with Chrome, the Google Tablet made a very positive impression. The perceived speed is top-notch and without any stutters to speak of, despite the 60 Hz display. Just like the GPU and CPU tests, the Pixel Tablet's benchmark scores are, at times, significantly lower than the competition.    

Jetstream 2 - Total Score
Apple iPad 10 (Safari Mobile 16.1)
178.932 Points +52%
OnePlus Pad (Chrome 112)
148.115 Points +26%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G (Chrome 101.0.4951.41)
121.695 Points +3%
Google Pixel Tablet (Chrome 115)
117.838 Points
Average Google Tensor G2 (96.3 - 117.8, n=5)
104.7 Points -11%
Average of class Tablet (19.9 - 236, n=47, last 2 years)
91.6 Points -22%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022 (Huawei Browser 12.1.3)
63.9 Points -46%
WebXPRT 4 - Overall Score
OnePlus Pad (Chrome 112)
158 Points +61%
Apple iPad 10 (Safari Mobile 16.1)
147 Points +50%
Average Google Tensor G2 (90 - 111, n=5)
98.6 Points +1%
Google Pixel Tablet (Chrome 115)
98 Points
Average of class Tablet (21 - 227, n=38, last 2 years)
90.6 Points -8%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022 (Huawei Browser 12.1.3)
72 Points -27%
WebXPRT 3 - ---
Apple iPad 10 (Safari Mobile 16.1)
214 Points +60%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G (Chrome 101.0.4951.41)
155 Points +16%
Google Pixel Tablet (Chrome 115)
134 Points
Average of class Tablet (34 - 342, n=38, last 2 years)
128.9 Points -4%
Average Google Tensor G2 (98 - 134, n=3)
110 Points -18%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022 (Huawei Browser 12.1.3)
94 Points -30%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Apple iPad 10 (Safari Mobile 16.1)
272 runs/min +103%
Google Pixel Tablet (Chrome 115)
134 runs/min
OnePlus Pad (Chrome 112)
119 runs/min -11%
Average Google Tensor G2 (100 - 134, n=5)
118 runs/min -12%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G (Chrome 101.0.4951.41)
116 runs/min -13%
Average of class Tablet (14.7 - 376, n=41, last 2 years)
88.8 runs/min -34%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022 (Huawei Browser 12.1.3)
53.6 runs/min -60%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Apple iPad 10 (Safari Mobile 16.1)
59963 Points +25%
OnePlus Pad (Chrome 112)
50429 Points +5%
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G (Chrome 101.0.4951.41)
48205 Points +1%
Google Pixel Tablet (Chrome 115)
47939 Points
Average Google Tensor G2 (43817 - 47939, n=5)
45221 Points -6%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022 (Huawei Browser 12.1.3)
33003 Points -31%
Average of class Tablet (5004 - 74614, n=51, last 2 years)
26734 Points -44%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Tablet (451 - 34733, n=47, last 2 years)
3018 ms * -224%
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022 (Huawei Browser 12.1.3)
1354.5 ms * -46%
Average Google Tensor G2 (920 - 1075, n=5)
992 ms * -7%
Google Pixel Tablet (Chrome 115)
930.2 ms *
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G (Chrome 101.0.4951.41)
864.6 ms * +7%
OnePlus Pad (Chrome 112)
797.7 ms * +14%
Apple iPad 10 (Safari Mobile 16.1)
547 ms * +41%

* ... smaller is better

Measured against its competitors, the UFS 3.1 storage's speed isn't really record-breaking and is mainly due to the Tensor-SoC's rather weak memory controller. The determined values are on a low level, especially when writing at 307 MB/s. 

Google Pixel TabletOnePlus PadSamsung Galaxy Tab S8 5GHuawei MatePad Pro 11 2022Average 128 GB UFS 3.1 FlashAverage of class Tablet
AndroBench 3-5
141%
63%
24%
42%
-1%
Sequential Read 256KB
1473.3
1866.48
27%
1517.98
3%
1615
10%
1604 ?(1030 - 3134, n=51)
9%
940 ?(159.3 - 3414, n=48, last 2 years)
-36%
Sequential Write 256KB
307.57
1616.83
426%
1026.82
234%
730.7
138%
791 ?(233 - 1332, n=51)
157%
608 ?(66.7 - 2528, n=48, last 2 years)
98%
Random Read 4KB
219.43
341.39
56%
263.23
20%
171.3
-22%
246 ?(126.2 - 428, n=51)
12%
167.7 ?(10.1 - 451, n=48, last 2 years)
-24%
Random Write 4KB
274.59
420.93
53%
256.83
-6%
187.8
-32%
245 ?(121.4 - 503, n=51)
-11%
155.2 ?(5.3 - 447, n=48, last 2 years)
-43%

Games - The Pixel Tablet manages 60fps

Following our GPU benchmark bundle, the ARM Mali G710 MP7 now had to prove itself in everyday gaming settings. With the GameBench app, we recorded the Pixel Tablet's exact refresh rate in selected Android games. The Google tablet is basically limited to 60fps due to the IPS panel's low refresh rate.

At the current, highest UHD graphic settings, PUBG mobile runs at a frame rate of 40fps and with lower details, the display's supported 60fps is achievable. Armajet also manages the same frame rates provided by the panel's native refresh rate. 

Armajet
Armajet
PUBG mobile
PUBG mobile
051015202530354045505560Tooltip
Google Pixel Tablet; Armajet: Ø59.9 (55-61)
Google Pixel Tablet; PUBG Mobile; Smooth: Ø59.6 (58-61)
Google Pixel Tablet; PUBG Mobile; Balanced: Ø59.5 (58-61)
Google Pixel Tablet; PUBG Mobile; HD: Ø59.5 (56-61)
Google Pixel Tablet; PUBG Mobile; Ultra HD: Ø39.9 (38-41)

Emissions - The Google Pixel Tablet hardly throttles

Temperature

The Pixel Tablet's case hardly heats up under load. At a maximum of 38 °, our recorded temperatures sit within a harmless range. The internal heat production also didn't lead to a reduction in the Tensor-SoC's performance. The Wild Life stress test clearly shows that the performance drops by around 2 percent as the load increases.  

3DMark Wild Life stress test

05101520253035404550Tooltip
Google Pixel Tablet Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø38.8 (37.8-39.7)
OnePlus Pad Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø41.2 (35.1-48.8)
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø40.1 (37.3-50)
Apple iPad 10 A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD; Wild Life Stress Test Stability: Ø42.4 (41.9-48.6)
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022 Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Stress Test Stability; 0.0.0.0: Ø25.2 (25.1-25.3)
Google Pixel Tablet Mali-G710 MP7, Tensor G2, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø11.1 (11-11.1)
OnePlus Pad Mali-G710 MP10, Dimensity 9000; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø12.5 (12-14.1)
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G Adreno 730, SD 8 Gen 1, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.0.9.1: Ø10.9 (10.2-13.4)
Apple iPad 10 A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test: Ø11.8 (11.6-13.5)
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022 Adreno 650, SD 870, 128 GB UFS 3.1 Flash; Wild Life Extreme Stress Test; 1.1.0.2: Ø7.35 (7.34-7.37)
Apple iPad 10 A14 Bionic GPU, A14, 64 GB SSD; Wild Life Unlimited Stress Test Stability: Ø43.4 (42.4-51.8)
Max. Load
 34.6 °C
94 F
35.4 °C
96 F
34.8 °C
95 F
 
 31.7 °C
89 F
32.5 °C
91 F
32.3 °C
90 F
 
 30.2 °C
86 F
30.2 °C
86 F
31.3 °C
88 F
 
Maximum: 35.4 °C = 96 F
Average: 32.6 °C = 91 F
34.7 °C
94 F
37.9 °C
100 F
38.4 °C
101 F
31.3 °C
88 F
33.7 °C
93 F
31.6 °C
89 F
29.9 °C
86 F
30.6 °C
87 F
30.1 °C
86 F
Maximum: 38.4 °C = 101 F
Average: 33.1 °C = 92 F
Power Supply (max.)  38.4 °C = 101 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated) & Voltcraft IR-260
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 32.6 °C / 91 F, compared to the average of 30.2 °C / 86 F for the devices in the class Tablet.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 35.4 °C / 96 F, compared to the average of 34 °C / 93 F, ranging from 21.2 to 53.2 °C for the class Tablet.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 38.4 °C / 101 F, compared to the average of 33.5 °C / 92 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.7 °C / 84 F, compared to the device average of 30.2 °C / 86 F.

Speakers

The Pixel Tablet possesses four speakers that aim to provide appealing sound. However, at 81.6 dB, these sound generators are not particularly loud. The mids and the highs seem very linear and even light bass notes are present in the audio landscape. The performance on offer is more than sufficient to be able to watch a film or video.

Anyone wishing to use the Pixel Tablet to listen to music will most certainly turn to the charging dock and its built-in speakers. The latter uses a 43.5-millimeter driver and offers a significantly fuller sound than the tablet itself. To put it into perspective, an Amazon Echo Dot 5 offers a 44-millimeter driver meaning the Pixel Dock's driver level sits around that of a budget smart speaker. The Pixel Dock only emits sound when the tablet is connected which means multiple devices cannot be connected to form a single sound source.

Wired headphones or external speakers can be connected to the Pixel Tablet via its USB-C port. A wireless option comes in the form of Bluetooth 5.2 and the audio codecs SBC, AAC, LDAC, Opus, LC3 as well as Qualcomm's aptX and aptX HD are available.

Note: Analysis of the Pixel Tablet's docking station and the corresponding pink noise will follow shortly.

September 12, 2023 update: Speakers built into the docking station tested, see updated graph below.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2037.235.52529.427.43123.323.94022.324.75028.524.26317.118.88013.517.510018.221.61251639.916014.859.720015.457.825015.255.53151359.640013.162.750012.769.363012.97080013.571100012.769125012.770.2160013.172200012.672250013.470.8315013.769.2400014.666.250001465.6630014.569.1800013.868.61000013.766.61250015.466.71600013.466.3SPL25.781.6N0.753.5median 13.7median 66.7Delta15.337.539.526.327.423.723.535.926.13631.824.924.620.424.918.530.816.938.517.951.11652.914.154.212.258.113.358.310.965.812.364.512.168.312.567.511.869.511.971.612.474.212.87513.174.71376.313.275.813.670.413.670.513.759.41459.413.851.52584.60.658.9median 13.2median 65.81.68.63343.730.944.919.447.127.347.93751.526.9571968.818.471.21573.916.18115.979.714.278.912.177.71478.914.781.3158013.779.214.177.113.674.613.176.412.870.813.372.413.470.813.876.21473.314.181.513.580.613.783.513.681.313.17326900.798.2median 13.8median 78.90.73.3hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseGoogle Pixel TabletApple iPad 10Google Pixel Tablet Speaker Dock
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Google Pixel Tablet audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.7% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (15.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 18% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 78% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 23%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 10% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 87% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 26%, worst was 134%

Apple iPad 10 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 7.8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (5.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 41% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 51% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 23%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 33% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 59% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 26%, worst was 134%

Google Pixel Tablet audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(+) | good bass - only 2.8% away from median
(+) | bass is linear (3.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (6.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 99% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 23%, worst was 129%
Compared to all devices tested
» 0% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 99% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 26%, worst was 134%

Energy management - The Pixel Tablet has a small battery

Power consumption

In terms of power consumption, the Pixel Tablet shows itself to be economical in idle use, however, a Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022 demonstrates what is possible with an AMOLED panel. Under load, we measured a peak of up to 20 watts. 

A USB-C charger for the Pixel Tablet is not included, instead, there is a 15-watt charger for the dock. In order to protect the already rather small battery, in hub mode, the Google tab only charges to a maximum of 90 percent. For this, we required around 2.5 hours before the power pack was fully charged. With a suitable power bank (PD 3.0, 100 watts), the Pixel Tablet can be charged to around 55 percent after one hour via the USB port – neither of which is record-breaking.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.02 / 0.13 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 1.33 / 4.67 / 4.78 Watt
Load midlight 9.81 / 19.76 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.
Google Pixel Tablet
7020 mAh
OnePlus Pad
9510 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
8000 mAh
Apple iPad 10
7606 mAh
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
8300 mAh
Power Consumption
-44%
22%
-15%
22%
Idle Minimum *
1.33
3.64
-174%
1.19
11%
1.34
-1%
1.9
-43%
Idle Average *
4.67
6.84
-46%
4.38
6%
7.78
-67%
2.2
53%
Idle Maximum *
4.78
7.15
-50%
4.45
7%
7.89
-65%
3
37%
Load Average *
9.81
8.98
8%
7.85
20%
9.05
8%
7.2
27%
Load Maximum *
19.76
11.9
40%
6.67
66%
9.98
49%
12.7
36%

* ... smaller is better

Power consumption: Geekbench (150 cd/m²)

012345678910111213Tooltip
Google Pixel Tablet Google Tensor G2: Ø6.53 (1.95-11.8)
Apple iPad 10 Apple A14 Bionic: Ø7.3 (2.93-13.3)

Power consumption: GFXBench (150 cd/m²)

0123456789101112Tooltip
Google Pixel Tablet Google Tensor G2; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø8.81 (8.35-9.47)
Apple iPad 10 Apple A14 Bionic; 1920x1080 Aztec Ruins Normal Offscreen: Ø11.5 (10-12.6)
Google Pixel Tablet Google Tensor G2; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø2.18 (2.11-2.4)
Apple iPad 10 Apple A14 Bionic; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø3.05 (3.02-3.16)

Battery life

With its IPS panel, we were left positively surprised by the Pixel Tablet's battery life. Our comparison devices can be best compared at an adaptive display brightness of 150 cd/m².

In the practical Wi-Fi test, the Google tab managed 16.5 hours and 20.5 hours during continual video playback with the Wi-Fi module deactivated and this speaks for a well-optimised communication module. It's quite astounding what the Mountain View-based manufacturer is able to coax out of a 7,020 mAh battery – even compared to the iPad 10, which has similar hardware. 

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
36h 42min
WiFi Websurfing
16h 32min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
20h 39min
Load (maximum brightness)
6h 31min
Google Pixel Tablet
7020 mAh
OnePlus Pad
9510 mAh
Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 5G
8000 mAh
Apple iPad 10
7606 mAh
Huawei MatePad Pro 11 2022
8300 mAh
Battery Runtime
-29%
-13%
-37%
-11%
Reader / Idle
2202
1345
-39%
2170
-1%
1729
-21%
2103
-4%
H.264
1239
963
-22%
831
-33%
740
-40%
1020
-18%
WiFi v1.3
992
648
-35%
966
-3%
647
-35%
905
-9%
Load
391
310
-21%
331
-15%
191
-51%
336
-14%

Pros

+ long battery life
+ interesting form of usage (together with the dock)
+ good build quality
+ solid chipset (for this price category) without throttling
+ a fast USB port ...

Cons

- .. without display output
- no 5G option
- only a 60 Hz panel
- thick bezels

Verdict - The Google Pixel Tablet

Review: The Google Pixel Tablet was provided by Google Germany
Review: The Google Pixel Tablet was provided by Google Germany

It is pretty certain that Google won't revolutionize the tablet market with its Pixel interpretation. But, in many regards, the manufacturer has found the right way of creating a coherent overall concept. The idea of combining a tablet with a dock which includes built-in speakers is certainly not new, however, Google is taking this kind of usage behavior to a new level with smart solutions such as easy account switching. 

With its hardware orientation and pricing, the Pixel Tablet is very similar to the Apple iPad 10. Both tablets will not satisfy users with the highest display demands, however, with its laminated and brighter 60 Hz panel, the Pixel Tablet provides a better visual experience. But, even away from the screen, the Pixel tab offers a more thoughtfully put-together complete package with longer battery life and a more comprehensive feature set. 

The Pixel Tablet's concept will have you wanting more. Let's hope Google will also provide resources for the optimization of Android for tablets.   

In some areas, we still see some room for improvement, especially considering the high RRP. The thick bezels, slow charging and low refresh rate display ought to be adjusted accordingly for the next generation. Additional points of criticism the Pixel tablet has to face up to are the lack of memory expansion options, 5G support and GNSS module – although these only fit into Google's overall concept to a limited extent.

Anyone for whom the docking station or hub mode doesn't particularly provide added value should consider including the significantly cheaper but not really inferior Xiaomi Pad 6 in their reading material. Also, a Galaxy Tab S8 is an interesting alternative to the Google tablet.        

Download your licensed rating image as SVG / PNG

Price and availability

The Pixel Tablet starts with an RRP of $499 and is available at online dealers such as Amazon, or on the Google Store.  

Google Pixel Tablet - 09/02/2023 v7
Marcus Herbrich

Chassis
87 / 98 → 88%
Keyboard
69%
Pointing Device
93 / 40-88 → 100%
Connectivity
45%
Weight
83%
Battery
91 / 92 → 99%
Display
89%
Games Performance
67%
Application Performance
85 / 91 → 94%
Temperature
93%
Noise
100%
Audio
81%