This $120 Android tablet proves you don't need to overspend for a Samsung Tab or iPad
Briefly

This $120 Android tablet proves you don't need to overspend for a Samsung Tab or iPad
"I get to test and review a lot of tablets in my job, and the iPad used to be the benchmark that all others were compared to. But now that you can pick up an iPad for $350, it's not the high-end premium bit of kit that it once was. And the lower end of the market is especially well catered for in terms of high-quality, low-cost products."
"One tablet that I've been putting through its paces is the . Tabwee says this is the world's first Android 16 tablet and is capable of running Gemini AI. It's certainly the first one that I came across, but more premium models like the Samsung Galaxy Tab S11 have also launched with the latest Android operating system. So you'll want to Tabwee with a grain of salt."
"The T90 is an 11-inch, 1,920 by 1,200 pixel/120Hz tablet running Android 16 and powered by the Unisoc T615 octa-core processor humming along at 1.8GHz, and the pixels are pushed to the display through a Mali G57 GPU. There's 8GB of physical RAM, with the option of boosting that to 24GB using virtual RAM. Since the tablet has 128GB of storage, handing over 12GB to RAM duties makes sense"
The iPad was historically the benchmark for tablets, but mainstream iPads now sell for around $350, reducing their premium status and leaving the lower end of the market well served by high-quality, low-cost products. Tabwee markets the T90 as the world's first Android 16 tablet capable of running Gemini AI, though premium models like the Samsung Galaxy Tab S11 also ship with Android 16, so that claim should be treated cautiously. The T90 features an 11-inch 1,920×1,200 120Hz display, Unisoc T615 1.8GHz CPU, Mali G57 GPU, 8GB RAM expandable virtually to 24GB, 128GB storage plus microSD, 5MP front and 16MP rear cameras despite a three-camera array appearance, an 8,000mAh battery rated about five to six hours of web browsing, and a light, thin chassis.
Read at ZDNET
Unable to calculate read time
[
|
]