OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Routers Methodology v3.0
Routers Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Routers Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Routers Methodology v3.0

Tenda 4G03 Pro review: 77 specs compared

Avg. price:~£55Wi-Fi version:Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n)Wi-Fi speed:300 MbpsLAN port speeds:100 MbpsMesh Wi-Fi:?

Tenda 4G03 Pro Review: Compare 77 technical specifications, 2 expert and video reviews and 1 best-of list to see how this product ranks in the Routers category and whether it is worth buying.

Tenda 4G03 Pro
6.8/10

Overall score

Score
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 86% of models
Score components

40%

6.7

Technical score

25%

6.7

Reviews score

25%

6.7

List score

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 6.9, the mark of a weaker model in this category

▼Worse than 86% of routers
7.7

Value for money

Value for money
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the router's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a router with a good balance between network performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 88% of models
Score components

70%

6.8

Overall score

30%

10

Price

▼Worse than 88%
6.7

Technical score

Technical score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 65% of models
Score components

26%

5.6

Wireless

20%

4.7

Ports

18%

8.4

Networking

14%

9.3

Security

12%

6.9

Hardware

10%

7.2

Management

▼Worse than 65%
6.7

Reviews score

Reviews score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.7 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 80% of models

6.7

Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 8.1 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

8.1

Average grade

20%

6.3

Popularity

Grades by review (2)
2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 80%
6.7

List score

List score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (1)
List score: in 1 of 83 lists (1%)
▲Better than 70%
  • tenda-4g03-pro
  • tenda-4g03-pro
  • tenda-4g03-pro
  • tenda-4g03-pro
  • tenda-4g03-pro
  • tenda-4g03-pro
  • tenda-4g03-pro
  • tenda-4g03-pro
  • tenda-4g03-pro
  • tenda-4g03-pro
  • tenda-4g03-pro
tenda-4g03-pro
tenda-4g03-pro
tenda-4g03-pro
tenda-4g03-pro
tenda-4g03-pro
tenda-4g03-pro
tenda-4g03-pro
tenda-4g03-pro
tenda-4g03-pro
tenda-4g03-pro
tenda-4g03-pro
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Tenda 4G03 Pro

Based on 1 · 2

Reviewers agree it's compact, light and easy to set up, with no real complaints raised so far.
Praised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of router Tenda 4G03 Pro

Technical score
Technical score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 65% of models
Score components:

26%

5.6

Wireless

20%

4.7

Ports

18%

8.4

Networking

14%

9.3

Security

12%

6.9

Hardware

10%

7.2

Management

6.7
Reviews score
6.7
List score
6.7
Value for money
Value for money
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the router's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a router with a good balance between network performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 88% of models
Score components:

70%

6.8

Overall score

30%

10

Price

7.7
Brand name
Tenda
Wi-Fi version
Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n)
This router uses Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n), which is less advanced than 65% of routers and equal to 32.7% of routers.
Wi-Fi bands
2.4 GHz
This router supports 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi bands, which are less versatile than 76% of routers and equal to 21.6% of routers.
Wi-Fi speed
300 Mbps
Market range: <0 Mbps – >6k Mbps
This router delivers 300 Mbps Wi-Fi speed, which is lower than 75.8% of routers and equal to 16.7% of routers.
Channel widths supported
20 MHz + 40 MHz
This router supports 20 MHz + 40 MHz channel width options, which is fewer than 63.7% of routers and the same as 31.2% of routers.
Show more
Wi-Fi security protocols
?
DoS protection
yes
This router includes DoS protection. 9.8% of routers include DoS protection.
SPI intrusion protection
yes
This router includes SPI-based intrusion protection. 4.7% of routers include SPI-based intrusion protection.
MAC address filtering
yes
This router supports MAC address filtering. 1.7% of routers include MAC address filtering.
URL filter
yes
This router supports URL filtering. 2.6% of routers include URL filtering.
Show more
IPv6 support
yes
This router supports IPv6. 8.8% of routers are IPv6-ready.
Dynamic routing
no
This router does not support dynamic routing. 46.2% of routers support dynamic routing.
Inter-VLAN routing
?
VLAN tagging
?
QoS
yes
This router includes QoS controls. 2.4% of routers include QoS controls.
Show more
N. of LAN ports
1
Market range: <0 – >5
This router has 1 LAN ports, which is fewer than 89.6% of routers and the same as 8.5% of routers.
LAN port speeds
100 Mbps
This router offers 100 Mbps on its LAN ports, which is slower than 74.5% of routers and on par with 25.1% of routers.
N. of WAN ports
1
Market range: <0 – >5
This router has 1 WAN ports, which is more than 0.8% of routers and the same as 89.4% of routers.
N. of USB ports
?
Power over Ethernet (PoE)
no
This router does not support Power over Ethernet (PoE). 1.7% of routers can be powered over Ethernet.
Show more
Management interface
Web UI, App
This router uses Web UI, App for management, which is more advanced than 29.7% of routers and equal to 60.9% of routers.
Firmware upgrade method
Web UI, App
This router supports Web UI, App firmware update methods, which are more convenient than 62.3% of routers and equal to 8.4% of routers.
Traffic monitoring
yes
This router includes traffic monitoring. 13.9% of routers include traffic monitoring.
Guest Wi-Fi network
yes
This router offers a guest Wi‑Fi network. 7.3% of routers offer a guest Wi‑Fi network.
Captive portal
no
This router does not offer captive portal features. 22.4% of routers offer captive portal features.
Show more
CPU clock speed
?
RAM capacity
128 MB
Market range: <0 MB – >1k MB
This router has 128 MB of RAM, which is less than 54% of routers and the same as 16.3% of routers.
Internal storage
?
Hardware acceleration
yes
This router offers hardware acceleration. 24.9% of routers offer hardware acceleration.
N. of external antennas
2
Market range: <0 – >10
This router has 2 external antennas, which is more than 41.2% of routers and the same as 16.5% of routers.
Show more
What reviewers say

Tenda 4G03 Pro vs the average router

246810TotalWirelessSecurityNetworkingPortsManagementHardware
  • Newer cellular modem
    This router uses a 4G cellular modem, while the average router uses none (external modem required).
    4G vs none (external modem required)
  • Includes SIM slot
    This router has a SIM slot, while the average router does not. 11.5% of routers have a SIM slot.
  • More advanced integrated modem
    This router uses a 4G integrated modem, while the average router uses none (external modem required).
    4G vs none (external modem required)
  • 4 years newer release date
    This router was released more recently than the average router (2023 vs 2019). The average router release year is 2019.
    2023 vs 2019
  • 2 more internal antennas
    This router has more internal antennas than the average router (2 vs 0). The average router has 0 internal antennas.
    2 vs 0
  • 70.2% lighter weight
    This router is lighter than the average router (134 g vs 450 g). The average router weighs 450 g.
    134 g vs 450 g
  • 28 mm thinner design
    This router is thinner than the average router (26 mm vs 54 mm). The average router is 54 mm thick.
    26 mm vs 54 mm
  • 77 mm narrower width
    This router is narrower than the average router (116 mm vs 193 mm). The average router is 193 mm wide.
    116 mm vs 193 mm
  • Newer cellular modem
    This router uses a 4G cellular modem, while the average router uses none (external modem required).
    4G vs none (external modem required)
  • Includes SIM slot
    This router has a SIM slot, while the average router does not. 11.5% of routers have a SIM slot.
  • More advanced integrated modem
    This router uses a 4G integrated modem, while the average router uses none (external modem required).
    4G vs none (external modem required)
  • 4 years newer release date
    This router was released more recently than the average router (2023 vs 2019). The average router release year is 2019.
    2023 vs 2019
  • 2 more internal antennas
    This router has more internal antennas than the average router (2 vs 0). The average router has 0 internal antennas.
    2 vs 0
  • 70.2% lighter weight
    This router is lighter than the average router (134 g vs 450 g). The average router weighs 450 g.
    134 g vs 450 g
  • 28 mm thinner design
    This router is thinner than the average router (26 mm vs 54 mm). The average router is 54 mm thick.
    26 mm vs 54 mm
  • 77 mm narrower width
    This router is narrower than the average router (116 mm vs 193 mm). The average router is 193 mm wide.
    116 mm vs 193 mm
  • 3 fewer LAN ports
    This router has fewer LAN ports than the average router (1 vs 4). The average router has 4 LAN ports.
    1 vs 4
  • Slower LAN ports
    This router has a lower LAN port speed than the average router (100 Mbps vs 1 Gbps). The average router has a LAN port speed of 1 Gbps.
    100 Mbps vs 1 Gbps
  • Older Wi-Fi version
    This router uses an older Wi-Fi version than the average router (Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)). The average router uses Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac).
    Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)
  • Fewer Wi-Fi bands
    This router supports fewer Wi-Fi bands than the average router (2.4 GHz vs 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz). The average router supports 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz Wi-Fi bands.
    2.4 GHz vs 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz
  • 82.9% slower Wi-Fi speed
    This router has a lower Wi-Fi speed than the average router (300 Mbps vs 1,750 Mbps). The average router reaches Wi-Fi speed of 1,750 Mbps.
    300 Mbps vs 1,750 Mbps
  • No MU-MIMO
    This router does not support MU-MIMO, while the average router does. 54% of routers support MU-MIMO.
  • 17.3% lower list score
    List score
    6.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
    How we count it
    Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
    Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
    Lists with this model (1)
    List score: in 1 of 83 lists (1%)
    6.7 vs 8.1
  • Narrower channel widths
    This router has a lower supported channel width than the average router (20 MHz + 40 MHz vs 20 MHz + 40 MHz + 80 MHz). The average router supports channel width of 20 MHz + 40 MHz + 80 MHz.
    20 MHz + 40 MHz vs 20 MHz + 40 MHz + 80 MHz
  • 17.3% lower list score
    List score
    6.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
    How we count it
    Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
    Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
    Lists with this model (1)
    List score: in 1 of 83 lists (1%)
    6.7 vs 8.1
  • 13.0% lower review score
    Reviews score
    6.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.7 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 80% of models

    6.7

    Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 8.1 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    8.1

    Average grade

    20%

    6.3

    Popularity

    Grades by review (2)
    2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    6.7 vs 7.7
  • 4.4% worse value for money
    Tenda 4G03 Pro has worse value for money than the average router (7.74 vs 8.1).
    7.74 vs 8.08
  • Older Wi-Fi version
    This router uses an older Wi-Fi version than the average router (Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)). The average router uses Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac).
    Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)
  • Fewer Wi-Fi bands
    This router supports fewer Wi-Fi bands than the average router (2.4 GHz vs 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz). The average router supports 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz Wi-Fi bands.
    2.4 GHz vs 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz
  • 82.9% slower Wi-Fi speed
    This router has a lower Wi-Fi speed than the average router (300 Mbps vs 1,750 Mbps). The average router reaches Wi-Fi speed of 1,750 Mbps.
    300 Mbps vs 1,750 Mbps
  • No MU-MIMO
    This router does not support MU-MIMO, while the average router does. 54% of routers support MU-MIMO.
  • Narrower channel widths
    This router has a lower supported channel width than the average router (20 MHz + 40 MHz vs 20 MHz + 40 MHz + 80 MHz). The average router supports channel width of 20 MHz + 40 MHz + 80 MHz.
    20 MHz + 40 MHz vs 20 MHz + 40 MHz + 80 MHz
  • No band steering
    This router does not support band steering, while the average router does. 57.6% of routers support band steering.
  • No beamforming
    This router does not support beamforming, while the average router does. 62.1% of routers support beamforming.
  • 3 fewer LAN ports
    This router has fewer LAN ports than the average router (1 vs 4). The average router has 4 LAN ports.
    1 vs 4
  • Slower LAN ports
    This router has a lower LAN port speed than the average router (100 Mbps vs 1 Gbps). The average router has a LAN port speed of 1 Gbps.
    100 Mbps vs 1 Gbps
  • Limited firmware updates
    This router supports the firmware update methods Web UI, App, while the average router supports Web UI, App, Automatic.
    Web UI, App vs Web UI, App, Automatic
  • No DLNA support
    This router does not support DLNA, while the average router does. 50.4% of routers support DLNA.
  • Less capable NAS services
    This router includes none NAS services, while the average router includes SMB, media server.
    none vs SMB, media server
  • 50% less RAM
    This router has less RAM than the average router (128 MB vs 256 MB). The average router has 256 MB of RAM.
    128 MB vs 256 MB

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

7.0
DOMIX ORBIT
≈ estimated
22/08/2024
Hands-on review · speed test and setup
Verdict
Tenda 4G03 Pro is fine for basic home internet only; for more devices or speed, an external modem is advised.
Not graded
Not graded

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Tenda 4G03 Pro

  • LTE Cat.4 with 150 Mbps down and 50 Mbps up
  • Light 134 g body, 116 x 95 x 26 mm
  • Powered by a USB-to-DC cable or power bank
  • Two external 4G antennas for a stronger signal
  • Plug and play with a Nano SIM, no contract needed
  • Three-year warranty
  • Guest Wi-Fi, QoS and parental controls

What customers don't like about Tenda 4G03 Pro

  • Wi-Fi 4 on 2.4 GHz only, 300 Mbps
  • Two Ethernet ports, both limited to 100 Mbps
  • Cellular antennas are not removable
  • No automatic failover between WAN and cellular

Verdict

Portability is the selling point of Tenda's 4G03 Pro, a SIM router that fits in a backpack at 134 grams. Insert a Nano SIM and the LTE Cat.4 modem gives up to 150 Mbps download and 50 Mbps upload. Wi-Fi 4 on 2.4 GHz adds 300 Mbps for phones and laptops. Two external antennas improve the cellular signal, and two internal ones handle Wi-Fi. A USB-to-DC cable allows power from a power bank, which suits caravans, rentals and outdoor work. Two Ethernet ports can serve as LAN or WAN, but both run at 100 Mbps only. With 128 MB of RAM and a single band, it is a basic tool rather than a family hub. Guest Wi-Fi and parental controls are included, and a three-year warranty backs it. It is a budget option for travel and backup use.

Compare Tenda 4G03 Pro with other routers

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Tenda 4G03 Pro and other routers

No results found