OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Tablets Methodology v1.0
Tablets Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Tablets Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Tablets Methodology v1.0

Archos 101 Xs (1GB + 16GB) Review | 168 Data compared

Avg. price:~£330RAM capacity:1 GBInternal storage:16 GBScreen size:10.1 inchesChipset:Texas Instruments OMAP 4470

Archos 101 Xs (1GB + 16GB) Review: Compare 168 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Tablets category and whether it is worth buying.

4.8

Overall score

Score
4.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the smartphone's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best Tablets on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components

90%

4.6

Technical score

10%

6.9

User score

â–¼Worse than 96% of tablets
4.6

Technical score

Technical score
4.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the smartphone's technical performance, covering eight key areas: performance & hardware, software, camera, connectivity, display, battery, audio, and design.
When it matters
When you want to compare Tablets based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
Score components

22%

4.3

Performance

20%

4.7

Display

16%

4.3

Camera

14%

3.1

Battery

12%

5.7

Connectivity

8%

6.0

Software & Features

5%

5.2

Design

3%

4.1

Audio & Multimedia

â–¼Worse than 98% of tablets
6.9

User score

User score
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the smartphone
When it matters
When you want to know how a smartphone handles daily tasks and how reliable it remains over time according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
Score components

70%

7.5

User ratings

30%

5.5

Number of reviews

Based on 70 buyer reviews from online shops.
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
â–¼Worse than 87% of tablets
  • archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
  • archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
  • archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
  • archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
  • archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
  • archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
  • archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
  • archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb
archos-101-xs-1gb-16gb

Best prices

*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.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of tablet Archos 101 Xs (1GB + 16GB)

Technical score
Technical score
4.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the smartphone's technical performance, covering eight key areas: performance & hardware, software, camera, connectivity, display, battery, audio, and design.
When it matters
When you want to compare Tablets based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
Score components:

22%

4.3

Performance

20%

4.7

Display

16%

4.3

Camera

14%

3.1

Battery

12%

5.7

Connectivity

8%

6.0

Software & Features

5%

5.2

Design

3%

4.1

Audio & Multimedia

4.6
User score
User score
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the smartphone
When it matters
When you want to know how a smartphone handles daily tasks and how reliable it remains over time according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
Score components

70%

7.5

User ratings

30%

5.5

Number of reviews

Based on 70 buyer reviews from online shops.
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
6.9
Popularity
Popularity
5.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the smartphone.
When it matters
When you prefer to purchase a product chosen and reviewed by many other consumers.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 55% of models
Popularity:
Archos 101 Xs (1GB + 16GB) has a user popularity of 5.5 points, which is lower than 54.9% of Tablets.
5.5
Value for money
Value for money
6.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the smartphone's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a smartphone with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components:

60%

4.8

Overall score

40%

8.8

Price

6.0
RAM capacity
1 GB
RAM capacity
1 GB
â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
Market range: <2 GB – >12 GB
This tablet has a RAM capacity of 1 GB which is smaller than the RAM capacity of 77.8% of tablets and equal to that of 19.3% of tablets.
Process node
45 nm
Process node
45 nm
â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >40 nm
This tablet is built on a 45 nm process node, which is larger than the node size used in 94.9% of tablets and equal to the node used in 4.4% of tablets.
Internal storage
16 GB
Internal storage
16 GB
â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
Market range: <0 GB – >250 GB
This tablet has an internal storage capacity of 16 GB which is smaller than the storage of 78.5% of tablets and equal to that of 15% of tablets.
Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
?
Chipset
Texas Instruments OMAP 4470
Chipset
Texas Instruments OMAP 4470
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
This tablet uses the Texas Instruments OMAP 4470 chipset, which is less advanced than the chipsets in 67.7% of tablets.
Show more
Screen resolution
1280×800
Screen resolution
1280×800
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
This tablet has a screen resolution of 1280×800 which is lower than that of 68.1% of tablets and equal to that of 21.7% of tablets.
Refresh rate
60 Hz
Refresh rate
60 Hz
â–¼ Worse than 26% of models
Market range: <60 Hz – >120 Hz
This tablet supports a refresh rate of 60 Hz which is equal to that in 73.8% of tablets.
Display type
TFT LCD
Display type
TFT LCD
â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
This tablet uses a TFT LCD display type. 89.9% of tablets use this display technology.
Pixel density
149 ppi
Pixel density
149 ppi
â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
Market range: <149 ppi – >291 ppi
This tablet has a pixel density of 149 ppi which is lower than that of 86.8% of tablets and equal to that of 9.2% of tablets.
Display glass type
?
Show more
Optical image stabilization
no
Optical image stabilization
no
Category Benchmark
This tablet does not support optical image stabilization. 0.4% of tablets include OIS.
Main camera megapixels
N/A
Front camera megapixels
1.3 MP
Front camera megapixels
1.3 MP
â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
This tablet has a front camera resolution of 1.3 MP which is lower than in 80.8% of tablets and equal to that in 5.5% of tablets.
Main camera aperture
N/A
Optical zoom
N/A
Show more
Battery capacity
6,800 mAh
Battery capacity
6,800 mAh
â–² Better than 52% of models
Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
This tablet has a battery capacity of 6,800 mAh which is larger than the batteries in 52.3% of tablets and equal to those in 1% of tablets.
Charging speed
10 W
Charging speed
10 W
â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
Market range: <10 W – >60 W
This tablet supports charging speeds of 10 W which is slower than in 61% of tablets and equal to speeds in 33.2% of tablets.
Battery life
6 hours
Battery life
6 hours
â–¼ Worse than 92% of models
Market range: <6 hours – >16 hours
This tablet has a battery life of 6 hours, which is shorter than that of 92% of tablets and equal to that of 2.6% of tablets.
Wireless charging
no
Wireless charging
no
â–¼ Worse than 2% of models
This tablet does not support wireless charging. 1.5% of tablets support wireless charging.
Fast charging
no
Fast charging
no
â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
This tablet does not support fast charging. 49.7% of tablets support fast charging.
Show more
LTE support
no
LTE support
no
â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
This tablet does not support LTE. 63.3% of tablets include LTE connectivity.
Wi-Fi connectivity
yes
Wi-Fi connectivity
yes
Category Benchmark
This tablet supports Wi-Fi connectivity. 0.2% of tablets offer Wi-Fi support.
GPS
yes
GPS
yes
â–² Better than 17% of models
This tablet supports GPS. 17.3% of tablets include GPS functionality.
5G connectivity
no
5G connectivity
no
â–¼ Worse than 11% of models
This tablet does not support 5G connectivity. 11.1% of tablets support 5G.
NFC
no
NFC
no
â–¼ Worse than 11% of models
This tablet does not support NFC. 10.9% of tablets support NFC.
Show more
Operating system
Android
Operating system
Android
â–² Better than 23% of models
This tablet uses the Android operating system, which is more advanced than the one used by 23.3%.
Update support duration
short
Update support duration
short
â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
This tablet offers short update support, which is shorter than the support period of 52.7% of tablets and equal to that of 47.3% of tablets.
Direct OS updates
yes
Direct OS updates
yes
â–² Better than 20% of models
This tablet receives direct OS updates. 20.3% of tablets receive direct updates.
On-device AI
no
On-device AI
no
â–¼ Worse than 28% of models
This tablet does not support on-device AI. 28.3% of tablets support this capability.
App tracking protection
no
App tracking protection
no
â–¼ Worse than 28% of models
This tablet does not include app tracking protection. 28.3% of tablets include app tracking protection.
Show more
IP rating
not rated
IP rating
not rated
â–¼ Worse than 16% of models
This tablet has an IP rating of not rated which is lower than that of 16.3% of tablets and equal to that of 83.7% of tablets.
Weight
600 g
Weight
600 g
â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
Market range: <315 g – >730 g
This tablet weighs 600 g which is heavier than 76.9% of tablets and equal to the weight of 0.7% of tablets.
Backlit keyboard
no
Backlit keyboard
no
â–¼ Worse than 10% of models
This tablet does not support a backlit keyboard. 9.8% of tablets support backlit keyboards.
Keyboard accessory
yes
Keyboard accessory
yes
â–² Better than 16% of models
This tablet supports a keyboard accessory. 15.8% of tablets support this option.
Pen latency
N/A
Show more
Number of microphones
1
Number of microphones
1
â–¼ Worse than 45% of models
Market range: <0 – >5
This tablet includes 1 microphones, which is more than in 0.2% of tablets and equal to the number in 54.8% of tablets.
aptX Adaptive
no
aptX Adaptive
no
â–¼ Worse than 7% of models
This tablet does not support aptX Adaptive. 6.9% of tablets offer this codec.
Dolby Atmos support
no
Dolby Atmos support
no
â–¼ Worse than 31% of models
This tablet does not support Dolby Atmos. 31.5% of tablets support Dolby Atmos.
N. of speakers
1
N. of speakers
1
â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
Market range: <1 – >6
This tablet includes 1 speakers, which is fewer than in 90.2% of tablets and equal to the number in 9.6% of tablets.
FM radio
no
FM radio
no
â–¼ Worse than 19% of models
This tablet does not include an FM radio. 19% of tablets offer FM radio functionality.
Show more

Archos 101 Xs (1GB + 16GB) vs the average tablet

246810TotalPerformanceDisplayCameraBatteryConnectivitySoftware & FeaturesDesignAudio & Multimedia
  • More capable chipset
    Chipset
    Texas Instruments OMAP 4470
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    This tablet uses the Texas Instruments OMAP 4470 chipset, while the average tablet uses MediaTek MT8169A.
    Texas Instruments OMAP 4,470 vs MediaTek MT8169A
  • Supports slow-motion recording
    Slow-motion recording
    yes
    â–² Better than 63% of models
    This tablet supports slow-motion recording, the average tablet does not. 37.5% of tablets offer slow-mo.
  • Higher contrast ratio
    Contrast ratio
    1260:1
    â–² Better than 54% of models
    This tablet has a higher contrast ratio than the average tablet (1260:1 vs 1015:1). The average tablet contrast ratio is 1015:1.
    1,260:1 vs 1,015:1
  • Supports aptX Low Latency
    aptX Low Latency
    yes
    ★ Better than 97% of models
    This tablet supports aptX Low Latency, the average tablet does not. 2.6% of tablets support aptX Low Latency.
  • More capable chipset
    Chipset
    Texas Instruments OMAP 4470
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    This tablet uses the Texas Instruments OMAP 4470 chipset, while the average tablet uses MediaTek MT8169A.
    Texas Instruments OMAP 4,470 vs MediaTek MT8169A
  • Higher contrast ratio
    Contrast ratio
    1260:1
    â–² Better than 54% of models
    This tablet has a higher contrast ratio than the average tablet (1260:1 vs 1015:1). The average tablet contrast ratio is 1015:1.
    1,260:1 vs 1,015:1
  • Supports slow-motion recording
    Slow-motion recording
    yes
    â–² Better than 63% of models
    This tablet supports slow-motion recording, the average tablet does not. 37.5% of tablets offer slow-mo.
  • Supports aptX Low Latency
    aptX Low Latency
    yes
    ★ Better than 97% of models
    This tablet supports aptX Low Latency, the average tablet does not. 2.6% of tablets support aptX Low Latency.
  • 3.7 MP lower front camera megapixels
    Front camera megapixels
    1.3 MP
    â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
    Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
    This tablet has less front camera megapixels than the average tablet (1.3 MP vs 5 MP). The average tablet has 5 MP front camera resolution.
    1.3 MP vs 5 MP
  • Inferior display type
    Display type
    TFT LCD
    â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
    This tablet has an inferior display type compared to the average tablet (TFT LCD vs IPS LCD). 0.00% of tablets use the superior display type.
    TFT LCD vs IPS LCD
  • 4 hours shorter battery life
    Battery life
    6 hours
    â–¼ Worse than 92% of models
    Market range: <6 hours – >16 hours
    This tablet offers shorter battery life than the average tablet (6 hours vs 10 hours). The average tablet offers 10 hours of battery life.
    6 hours vs 10 hours
  • No USB Type-C
    USB Type-C
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This tablet lacks a USB Type-C port, the average tablet includes one. 53.4% of tablets use USB Type-C.
  • 3 GB less RAM
    RAM capacity
    1 GB
    â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
    Market range: <2 GB – >12 GB
    This tablet has less RAM capacity than the average tablet (1 GB vs 4 GB). The average tablet has 4 GB of RAM.
    1 GB vs 4 GB
  • Shorter update support
    Update support duration
    short
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This tablet offers shorter update support than the average tablet (short vs medium). The average tablet gets medium of update support.
    short vs medium
  • 33.5% lower pixel density
    Pixel density
    149 ppi
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    Market range: <149 ppi – >291 ppi
    This tablet has a lower pixel density than the average tablet (149 ppi vs 224 ppi). The average tablet has pixel density of 224 ppi.
    149 ppi vs 224 ppi
  • 3.21x larger process node
    Process node
    45 nm
    â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >40 nm
    This tablet uses a larger process node than the average tablet (45 nm vs 14 nm). The average tablet uses a process node of 14 nm.
    45 nm vs 14 nm
  • 18.4% worse value for money
    Archos 101 Xs (1GB + 16GB) has worse value for money than the average tablet (6 vs 7.1).
    6 vs 7.1
  • 15.8% lower user score
    User score
    6.9/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the smartphone
    When it matters
    When you want to know how a smartphone handles daily tasks and how reliable it remains over time according to user feedback.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    Archos 101 Xs
    the average tablet
    Archos 101 Xs (1GB + 16GB) has a lower user score than the average tablet (6.91 vs 8.000).
    6.91 vs 8
  • 3 GB less RAM
    RAM capacity
    1 GB
    â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
    Market range: <2 GB – >12 GB
    This tablet has less RAM capacity than the average tablet (1 GB vs 4 GB). The average tablet has 4 GB of RAM.
    1 GB vs 4 GB
  • 3.21x larger process node
    Process node
    45 nm
    â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >40 nm
    This tablet uses a larger process node than the average tablet (45 nm vs 14 nm). The average tablet uses a process node of 14 nm.
    45 nm vs 14 nm
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    CPU threads
    2
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This tablet has less CPU threads than the average tablet (2 vs 6). The average tablet has 6 CPU threads.
    2 vs 6
  • 25% lower CPU speed
    CPU speed
    1.5 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 73% of models
    Market range: <1.2 GHz – >3.2 GHz
    This tablet has a lower CPU speed than the average tablet (1.5 GHz vs 2 GHz). The average tablet has CPU speed of 2 GHz.
    1.5 GHz vs 2 GHz
  • 75% less storage
    Internal storage
    16 GB
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    Market range: <0 GB – >250 GB
    This tablet has less internal storage than the average tablet (16 GB vs 64 GB). The average tablet provides 64 GB of internal storage.
    16 GB vs 64 GB
  • Worse GPU
    GPU model
    PowerVR SGX544
    â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
    This tablet uses the PowerVR SGX544 GPU, while the average tablet uses the stronger Mali-G51. GPU choice is one of the main performance differences between tablets.
    PowerVR SGX544 vs Mali-G51
  • No big.LITTLE architecture
    big.LITTLE Architecture
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    This tablet does not use a big.LITTLE architecture, the average tablet does. 51.3% of tablets use a big.LITTLE architecture.
  • 40.9% slower GPU clock
    GPU frequency
    384 MHz
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <311 MHz – >1.1k MHz
    This tablet has a lower GPU frequency than the average tablet (384 MHz vs 650 MHz). The average tablet has GPU frequency of 650 MHz.
    384 MHz vs 650 MHz
  • Older DDR memory version
    DDR memory version
    DDR2
    â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
    This tablet uses an older DDR memory version than the average tablet (DDR2 vs LPDDR3). The average tablet uses DDR version LPDDR3.
    DDR2 vs LPDDR3
  • 2 fewer GPU execution units
    GPU execution units
    2
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    Market range: <2 – >24
    This tablet has less GPU execution units than the average tablet (2 vs 4). The average tablet has 4 GPU execution units.
    2 vs 4
  • 14.1% lower memory bandwidth
    Memory bandwidth
    12.8 GB/s
    â–¼ Worse than 57% of models
    Market range: <4.26 GB/s – >60 GB/s
    This tablet has a lower memory bandwidth than the average tablet (12.8 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s). The average tablet has memory bandwidth of 14.9 GB/s.
    12.8 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s
  • Inferior display type
    Display type
    TFT LCD
    â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
    This tablet has an inferior display type compared to the average tablet (TFT LCD vs IPS LCD). 0.00% of tablets use the superior display type.
    TFT LCD vs IPS LCD
  • 33.5% lower pixel density
    Pixel density
    149 ppi
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    Market range: <149 ppi – >291 ppi
    This tablet has a lower pixel density than the average tablet (149 ppi vs 224 ppi). The average tablet has pixel density of 224 ppi.
    149 ppi vs 224 ppi
  • 170 nits lower typical brightness
    Typical brightness
    230 nits
    â–¼ Worse than 97% of models
    Market range: <300 nits – >600 nits
    This tablet has a lower typical brightness than the average tablet (230 nits vs 400 nits). The average tablet reaches 400 nits typical brightness.
    230 nits vs 400 nits
  • Lower screen resolution
    Screen resolution
    1280×800
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    This tablet has a lower screen resolution than the average tablet (1280×800 vs 1920×1200). The average tablet has a resolution of 1920×1200.
    1280×800 vs 1920×1200
  • 72 ppi lower screen sharpness
    Screen sharpness
    149 ppi
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    Market range: <149 ppi – >291 ppi
    This tablet has a lower screen sharpness than the average tablet (149 ppi vs 221 ppi). The average tablet has screen sharpness of 221 ppi.
    149 ppi vs 221 ppi
  • 3.7 MP lower front camera megapixels
    Front camera megapixels
    1.3 MP
    â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
    Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
    This tablet has less front camera megapixels than the average tablet (1.3 MP vs 5 MP). The average tablet has 5 MP front camera resolution.
    1.3 MP vs 5 MP
  • No continuous video AF
    Continuous autofocus in video
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 58% of models
    This tablet does not support continuous video AF, the average tablet does. 57.7% of tablets support continuous video autofocus.
  • No touch autofocus
    Touch autofocus
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
    This tablet does not support touch autofocus, the average tablet does. 82.8% of tablets allow touch-to-focus.
  • No manual exposure control
    Manual exposure
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
    This tablet does not offer manual exposure control, the average tablet does. 63.6% of tablets have manual exposure.
  • No HDR photo mode
    HDR photo mode
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
    This tablet does not have HDR photo mode, the average tablet does. 79.6% of tablets support HDR photo mode.
  • No manual white balance
    Manual white balance
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 52% of models
    This tablet does not allow manual white balance adjustments, the average tablet does. 51.6% of tablets include white balance controls.
  • No burst mode
    Serial shot / Burst mode
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    This tablet does not support burst mode, the average tablet does. 60.5% of tablets support burst mode.
  • No BSI sensor
    BSI sensor
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This tablet lacks a BSI sensor, the average tablet has one. 52.6% of tablets use BSI sensors for better low-light shots.
  • No timelapse video
    Timelapse video
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 58% of models
    This tablet does not support timelapse video, the average tablet does. 57.5% of tablets include timelapse modes.
  • 4 hours shorter battery life
    Battery life
    6 hours
    â–¼ Worse than 92% of models
    Market range: <6 hours – >16 hours
    This tablet offers shorter battery life than the average tablet (6 hours vs 10 hours). The average tablet offers 10 hours of battery life.
    6 hours vs 10 hours
  • 44.4% slower charging speed
    Charging speed
    10 W
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    Market range: <10 W – >60 W
    This tablet supports slower charging than the average tablet (10 W vs 18 W). The average tablet supports charging speed of 18 W.
    10 W vs 18 W
  • No USB Type-C
    USB Type-C
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This tablet lacks a USB Type-C port, the average tablet includes one. 53.4% of tablets use USB Type-C.
  • No LTE support
    LTE support
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
    This tablet does not support LTE, the average tablet does. 63.2% of tablets support LTE.
  • Older Wi-Fi version
    Wi-Fi version
    Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n)
    â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
    This tablet uses an older Wi-Fi version than the average tablet (Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)). The average tablet uses Wi-Fi Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac).
    Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)
  • Older Bluetooth version
    Bluetooth version
    4.0
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    This tablet uses an older Bluetooth version than the average tablet (4 vs 5). The average tablet uses Bluetooth 5.0.
    4.0 vs 5.0
  • No cellular module
    Cellular module
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
    This tablet does not have a cellular module, the average tablet does. 59.3% of tablets include a cellular module.
  • Fewer Wi-Fi bands
    Wi-Fi bands
    2.4GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
    This tablet supports fewer Wi-Fi bands than the average tablet (2.4GHz vs 2.4GHz/5GHz). The average tablet supports 2.4GHz/5GHz Wi-Fi bands.
    2.4GHz vs 2.4GHz/5GHz
  • Shorter update support
    Update support duration
    short
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This tablet offers shorter update support than the average tablet (short vs medium). The average tablet gets medium of update support.
    short vs medium
  • No split-screen
    Split-screen support
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 72% of models
    This tablet does not support split-screen, the average tablet does. 72.4% of tablets support split-screen.
  • No picture-in-picture mode
    Picture-in-picture
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    This tablet does not support picture-in-picture, the average tablet does. 61% of tablets support picture-in-picture.
  • No camera/mic privacy toggles
    Camera/mic privacy
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
    This tablet lacks camera and microphone privacy toggles, the average tablet includes them. 56.2% of tablets offer these toggles.
  • No multi-user mode
    User score
    6.9/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the smartphone
    When it matters
    When you want to know how a smartphone handles daily tasks and how reliable it remains over time according to user feedback.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    Archos 101 Xs
    the average tablet
    Archos 101 Xs (1GB + 16GB) does not support multi-user mode, the average tablet does. 73.6% of tablets allow multiple user profiles.
  • No full-page screenshots
    Full-page screenshots
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This tablet does not support full-page screenshots, the average tablet does. 52.5% of tablets support full-page screenshots.
  • No location privacy controls
    Location privacy
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 76% of models
    This tablet does not offer location privacy controls, the average tablet does. 76.5% of tablets include location privacy features.
  • No dark mode
    Dark mode
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 57% of models
    This tablet does not support dark mode, the average tablet does. 57.2% of tablets have dark mode.
  • No offline voice recognition
    Offline voice recognition
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 76% of models
    This tablet does not support offline voice recognition, the average tablet does. 76.1% of tablets support offline voice recognition.
  • 22.4% heavier
    Weight
    600 g
    â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
    Market range: <315 g – >730 g
    This tablet is heavier than the average tablet (600 g vs 490 g). The average tablet weighs 490 g.
    600 g vs 490 g
  • 97.7 mm wider
    Width
    273 mm
    â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
    Market range: <123.8 mm – >274 mm
    This tablet is wider than the average tablet (273 mm vs 175.3 mm). The average tablet is 175.3 mm wide.
    273 mm vs 175.3 mm
  • 7 older release date
    Release date
    2012
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <2k – >2k
    This tablet is an older model than the average tablet (2012 vs 2019).
    September 2012
    2012 vs 2019
  • 1 fewer speakers
    N. of speakers
    1
    â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
    Market range: <1 – >6
    This tablet has less speakers than the average tablet (1 vs 2). The average tablet has 2 speakers.
    1 vs 2

Video reviews

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

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

S
stuff.tv
11/01/2022
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS Gen 10 review | Stuff Would you like to know more about the technical specifications or current availability of the Archos 101 XS?
T
theregister.com
11/09/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS 10.1in Android tablet review - The Register
I
ibtimes.co.uk
01/11/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS Android Tablet Review
I
itpro.com
02/10/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS tablet review | IT Pro
P
pocket-lint.com
16/04/2013
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS - Pocket-lint Would you like me to find the original retail pricing or technical specifications for this specific model?
T
techradar.com
04/09/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS review - TechRadar
E
expertreviews.co.uk
22/08/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS review
C
cnet.com
23/08/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS review - CNET
T
trustedreviews.com
23/08/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS Review
T
theverge.com
22/08/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS review - The Verge
S
slashgear.com
22/08/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS Review - SlashGear
L
laptopmag.com
21/08/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS Review | Android Tablet Review
A
armdevices.net
25/08/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS review, Ultrabook-killing machine
P
pcwelt.de
22/10/2012
Summary of the review
Test: Archos 101xs - PC-WELT
(Translated)Show original
C
connect.de
16/01/2013
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS im Test - connect
(Translated)Show original
C
chip.de
23/04/2013
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS (Tablet-PC) Test - CHIP
(Translated)Show original
N
notebookcheck.com
18/12/2012
Summary of the review
Test Archos 101 XS Tablet - Notebookcheck
(Translated)Show original
C
clubic.com
29/08/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS: entre améliorations et déception
(Translated)Show original
J
journaldugeek.com
22/08/2012
Summary of the review
Test: Archos 101 XS
(Translated)Show original
L
lesnumeriques.com
22/08/2012
Summary of the review
Test Archos 101 XS: le renouveau dans une puissante tablette hybride
(Translated)Show original
0
01net.com
22/08/2012
Summary of the review
Test 101 XS : Archos signe une tablette très innovante, mais perfectible
(Translated)Show original
F
frandroid.com
01/10/2015
Summary of the review
Test de l'Archos Gen10 101 XS sous Android - Frandroid
(Translated)Show original
X
xatakandroid.com
22/10/2012
Summary of the review
Análisis del Archos 101 XS - Xataka Android
(Translated)Show original
T
teknofilo.com
23/02/2013
Summary of the review
Análisis del Archos 101 XS | Teknófilo
(Translated)Show original
X
xataka.com
22/10/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101 XS, análisis - Xataka
(Translated)Show original
X
xataka.com
22/08/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101XS, el primero de unos interesantes y convertibles tablets
(Translated)Show original
T
tvtech.it
04/09/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 10.1 XS: tablet con cover/tastiera ad aggancio magnetico
(Translated)Show original
F
fwd.nl
23/08/2012
Summary of the review
Archos 101 G10 XS reviews: Tablet met potentie maar niet perfect
(Translated)Show original
T
techzine.nl
24/04/2013
Summary of the review
Review: Archos 101 XS
(Translated)Show original
T
telegraaf.nl
26/10/2012
Summary of the review
Review Archos 101 XS
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

Based on 70 buyer reviews from online shops.
Reviews last updated: May 2026 · How we calculate this
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →

What we like about Archos 101 Xs (1GB + 16GB)

  • Includes a magnetic 'Coverboard' keyboard dock that also serves as a protective screen cover
  • Impressively thin (8mm) and lightweight design for a 10.1-inch tablet
  • Strong media playback capabilities with a dedicated video app and broad file format support
  • Near-stock Android experience (Ice Cream Sandwich at launch) with minimal bloatware
  • Decent connectivity options including Mini-HDMI, Micro-USB, and a MicroSD slot
  • Respectable gaming and multitasking performance for its price bracket

What we don't like about Archos 101 Xs (1GB + 16GB)

  • Subpar display with low maximum brightness, poor outdoor visibility, and limited viewing angles
  • Below-average battery life, lasting significantly less than main competitors like the Asus Transformer series
  • Build quality issues, specifically flimsy plastic components and a magnetic dock that can feel insecure
  • Awkwardly placed front-facing camera (side-aligned in landscape) and lack of a rear-facing camera
  • Keyboard lacks a trackpad and does not contain an additional battery
  • Tinny, low-quality mono speaker that distorts at higher volumes

Verdict

The Archos 101 XS is a 10.1-inch Android tablet featuring a 1280 x 800 resolution display and an ultra-slim 8mm profile. Under the hood, it is powered by a 1.5 GHz dual-core TI OMAP 4470 processor paired with 1GB of RAM and 16GB of internal storage, which is expandable via a microSD slot. Its standout characteristic is the included magnetic 'Coverboard' that functions as both a protective screen cover and a physical QWERTY keyboard. Main pros include its lightweight design, strong multimedia format support, and the value added by the bundled keyboard. However, common cons include a relatively dim display with limited viewing angles, mediocre battery life, the absence of a rear-facing camera, and a somewhat flimsy build quality for the docking mechanism.

Compare Archos 101 Xs (1GB + 16GB) with other tablets

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

Graphic comparison of Archos 101 Xs (1GB + 16GB) and other tablets

No results found