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 80 Cesium (1GB + 16GB) Review | 168 Data compared

Avg. price:~£130RAM capacity:1 GBInternal storage:16 GBScreen size:8 inchesChipset:Intel Atom Z3735G

Archos 80 Cesium (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%

4.8

Technical score

10%

5.4

User score

â–¼Worse than 96% of tablets
4.8

Technical score

Technical score
4.8/ 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 94% of models
Score components

22%

4.9

Performance

20%

5.7

Display

16%

4.3

Camera

14%

2.1

Battery

12%

5.3

Connectivity

8%

6.3

Software & Features

5%

6.1

Design

3%

3.9

Audio & Multimedia

â–¼Worse than 94% of tablets
5.4

User score

User score
5.4/ 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 98% of models
Score components

70%

6.6

User ratings

30%

2.5

Number of reviews

Based on 3 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 98% of tablets
  • archos-80-cesium-1gb-16gb
archos-80-cesium-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 80 Cesium (1GB + 16GB)

Technical score
Technical score
4.8/ 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 94% of models
Score components:

22%

4.9

Performance

20%

5.7

Display

16%

4.3

Camera

14%

2.1

Battery

12%

5.3

Connectivity

8%

6.3

Software & Features

5%

6.1

Design

3%

3.9

Audio & Multimedia

4.8
User score
User score
5.4/ 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 98% of models
Score components

70%

6.6

User ratings

30%

2.5

Number of reviews

Based on 3 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.
5.4
Popularity
Popularity
2.5/ 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–¼ Worse than 62% of models
Popularity:
Archos 80 Cesium (1GB + 16GB) has a popularity of 2.5 points, which is higher than 61.8% of Tablets.
2.5
Value for money
Value for money
6.3/ 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 87% of models
Score components:

60%

4.8

Overall score

40%

9.8

Price

6.3
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
22 nm
Process node
22 nm
â–¼ Worse than 57% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >40 nm
This tablet is built on a 22 nm process node, which is larger than the node size used in 57.5% of tablets and equal to the node used in 7.2% 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
Intel Atom Z3735G
Chipset
Intel Atom Z3735G
â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
This tablet uses the Intel Atom Z3735G chipset, which is less advanced than the chipsets in 80.5% of tablets and equal to those in 0.7% 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
IPS LCD
Display type
IPS LCD
â–² Better than 17% of models
This tablet uses a IPS LCD display type. 17% of tablets use this display technology.
Pixel density
189 ppi
Pixel density
189 ppi
â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
Market range: <149 ppi – >291 ppi
This tablet has a pixel density of 189 ppi which is lower than that of 66.5% of tablets and equal to that of 6.8% 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
2 MP
Main camera megapixels
2 MP
â–¼ Worse than 94% of models
Market range: <3.15 MP – >13 MP
This tablet has a main camera resolution of 2 MP which is lower than that of 93.5% of tablets and equal to that of 5.6% of tablets.
Front camera megapixels
0.3 MP
Front camera megapixels
0.3 MP
â–¼ Worse than 93% of models
Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
This tablet has a front camera resolution of 0.3 MP which is lower than in 93% of tablets and equal to that in 7% of tablets.
Main camera aperture
?
Optical zoom
1xxx
Optical zoom
1xx
â–² Better than 18% of models
This tablet supports 1xx optical zoom which is higher than in 18.4% of tablets and equal to that in 80.7% of tablets.
Show more
Battery capacity
4,000 mAh
Battery capacity
4,000 mAh
â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
This tablet has a battery capacity of 4,000 mAh which is smaller than the batteries in 84.6% of tablets and equal to those in 4.5% 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
4 hours
Battery life
4 hours
â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
Market range: <6 hours – >16 hours
This tablet has a battery life of 4 hours, which is shorter than that of 98% of tablets and equal to that of 1% 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
no
GPS
no
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
This tablet does not support GPS. 82.7% 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
Windows
Operating system
Windows
â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
This tablet uses the Windows operating system, which is less advanced than the one used by 84.1%.
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
360 g
Weight
360 g
â–² Better than 79% of models
Market range: <315 g – >730 g
This tablet weighs 360 g which is lighter than 79.2% of tablets and equal to the weight of 0.8% 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
no
Keyboard accessory
no
â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
This tablet does not support a keyboard accessory. 84.3% 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 80 Cesium (1GB + 16GB) vs the average tablet

246810TotalPerformanceDisplayCameraBatteryConnectivitySoftware & FeaturesDesignAudio & Multimedia
  • Includes anti-reflection coating
    Anti-reflection coating
    yes
    â–² Better than 75% of models
    This tablet has anti-reflection coating, the average tablet does not. 24.7% of tablets use anti-reflection coating.
  • 26.5% lighter
    Weight
    360 g
    â–² Better than 79% of models
    Market range: <315 g – >730 g
    This tablet is lighter than the average tablet (360 g vs 490 g). The average tablet weighs 490 g.
    360 g vs 490 g
  • 52.3 mm narrower
    Width
    123 mm
    ★ Better than 91% of models
    Market range: <123.8 mm – >274 mm
    This tablet is narrower than the average tablet (123 mm vs 175.3 mm). The average tablet is 175.3 mm wide.
    123 mm vs 175.3 mm
  • 77 mm shorter
    Width
    123.0 mm
    ★ Better than 91% of models
    Market range: <123.8 mm – >274 mm
    This tablet is shorter than the average tablet (123 mm vs 200 mm). The average tablet is 200.0 mm tall.
    123.0 mm vs 200.0 mm
  • Newer DDR memory version
    DDR memory version
    DDR3L
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    This tablet supports a newer DDR version than the average tablet (DDR3L vs LPDDR3). The average DDR version is LPDDR3.
    DDR3L vs LPDDR3
  • 2x cheaper
    Archos 80 Cesium (1GB + 16GB) is cheaper than the average tablet (£130 vs £260).
    £130 vs £260
  • More capable chipset
    Chipset
    Intel Atom Z3735G
    â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
    This tablet uses the Intel Atom Z3735G chipset, while the average tablet uses MediaTek MT8169A.
    Intel Atom Z3735G vs MediaTek MT8169A
  • 2x cheaper
    Archos 80 Cesium (1GB + 16GB) is cheaper than the average tablet (£130 vs £260).
    £130 vs £260
  • Newer DDR memory version
    DDR memory version
    DDR3L
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    This tablet supports a newer DDR version than the average tablet (DDR3L vs LPDDR3). The average DDR version is LPDDR3.
    DDR3L vs LPDDR3
  • More capable chipset
    Chipset
    Intel Atom Z3735G
    â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
    This tablet uses the Intel Atom Z3735G chipset, while the average tablet uses MediaTek MT8169A.
    Intel Atom Z3735G vs MediaTek MT8169A
  • Includes anti-reflection coating
    Anti-reflection coating
    yes
    â–² Better than 75% of models
    This tablet has anti-reflection coating, the average tablet does not. 24.7% of tablets use anti-reflection coating.
  • 26.5% lighter
    Weight
    360 g
    â–² Better than 79% of models
    Market range: <315 g – >730 g
    This tablet is lighter than the average tablet (360 g vs 490 g). The average tablet weighs 490 g.
    360 g vs 490 g
  • 52.3 mm narrower
    Width
    123 mm
    ★ Better than 91% of models
    Market range: <123.8 mm – >274 mm
    This tablet is narrower than the average tablet (123 mm vs 175.3 mm). The average tablet is 175.3 mm wide.
    123 mm vs 175.3 mm
  • 77 mm shorter
    Width
    123.0 mm
    ★ Better than 91% of models
    Market range: <123.8 mm – >274 mm
    This tablet is shorter than the average tablet (123 mm vs 200 mm). The average tablet is 200.0 mm tall.
    123.0 mm vs 200.0 mm
  • 4.7 MP lower front camera megapixels
    Front camera megapixels
    0.3 MP
    â–¼ Worse than 93% of models
    Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
    This tablet has less front camera megapixels than the average tablet (0.3 MP vs 5 MP). The average tablet has 5 MP front camera resolution.
    0.3 MP vs 5 MP
  • 6 hours shorter battery life
    Battery life
    4 hours
    â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
    Market range: <6 hours – >16 hours
    This tablet offers shorter battery life than the average tablet (4 hours vs 10 hours). The average tablet offers 10 hours of battery life.
    4 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.
  • 6 MP lower main camera megapixels
    Main camera megapixels
    2 MP
    â–¼ Worse than 94% of models
    Market range: <3.15 MP – >13 MP
    This tablet has a lower-resolution main camera than the average tablet (2 MP vs 8 MP). The average tablet has a 8 MP main camera.
    2 MP vs 8 MP
  • 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
  • Less advanced operating system
    Operating system
    Windows
    â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
    This tablet runs on a less advanced operating system than the average tablet (Windows vs Android). Operating system choice shapes app support, updates, and ecosystem features.
    Windows vs Android
  • 39.2% smaller battery capacity
    Battery capacity
    4,000 mAh
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
    This tablet has a lower battery capacity than the average tablet (4000 mAh vs 6580 mAh). The average tablet battery has capacity of 6580 mAh.
    4,000 mAh vs 6,580 mAh
  • 49.4% lower user score
    User score
    5.4/ 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 80 Cesium
    the average tablet
    Archos 80 Cesium (1GB + 16GB) has a lower user score than the average tablet (5.36 vs 8.000).
    5.36 vs 8
  • 12.1% worse value for money
    Archos 80 Cesium (1GB + 16GB) has worse value for money than the average tablet (6.33 vs 7.1).
    6.33 vs 7.1
  • 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
  • 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
  • 2 fewer CPU threads
    CPU threads
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This tablet has less CPU threads than the average tablet (4 vs 6). The average tablet has 6 CPU threads.
    4 vs 6
  • 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.
  • 69.2% slower GPU clock
    GPU frequency
    200 MHz
    â–¼ Worse than 97% of models
    Market range: <311 MHz – >1.1k MHz
    This tablet has a lower GPU frequency than the average tablet (200 MHz vs 650 MHz). The average tablet has GPU frequency of 650 MHz.
    200 MHz vs 650 MHz
  • 64.4% lower memory bandwidth
    Memory bandwidth
    5.3 GB/s
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    Market range: <4.26 GB/s – >60 GB/s
    This tablet has a lower memory bandwidth than the average tablet (5.3 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s). The average tablet has memory bandwidth of 14.9 GB/s.
    5.3 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s
  • 57.1% larger process node
    Process node
    22 nm
    â–¼ Worse than 57% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >40 nm
    This tablet uses a larger process node than the average tablet (22 nm vs 14 nm). The average tablet uses a process node of 14 nm.
    22 nm vs 14 nm
  • 8.5% lower CPU speed
    CPU speed
    1.83 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 60% of models
    Market range: <1.2 GHz – >3.2 GHz
    This tablet has a lower CPU speed than the average tablet (1.8 GHz vs 2 GHz). The average tablet has CPU speed of 2 GHz.
    1.83 GHz vs 2 GHz
  • Worse GPU
    GPU model
    Intel HD Graphics
    â–¼ Worse than 60% of models
    This tablet uses the Intel HD Graphics GPU, while the average tablet uses the stronger Mali-G51. GPU choice is one of the main performance differences between tablets.
    Intel HD Graphics vs Mali-G51
  • 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
  • 2.1 inches smaller screen size
    Screen size
    8 inches
    â–¼ Worse than 76% of models
    Market range: <7 inches – >12 inches
    This tablet has a lower screen size than the average tablet (8 inches vs 10.1 inches). The average tablet has screen size of 10.1 inches.
    8 inches vs 10.1 inches
  • 15.6% lower pixel density
    Pixel density
    189 ppi
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <149 ppi – >291 ppi
    This tablet has a lower pixel density than the average tablet (189 ppi vs 224 ppi). The average tablet has pixel density of 224 ppi.
    189 ppi vs 224 ppi
  • 32 ppi lower screen sharpness
    Screen sharpness
    189 ppi
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    Market range: <149 ppi – >291 ppi
    This tablet has a lower screen sharpness than the average tablet (189 ppi vs 221 ppi). The average tablet has screen sharpness of 221 ppi.
    189 ppi vs 221 ppi
  • 4.7 MP lower front camera megapixels
    Front camera megapixels
    0.3 MP
    â–¼ Worse than 93% of models
    Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
    This tablet has less front camera megapixels than the average tablet (0.3 MP vs 5 MP). The average tablet has 5 MP front camera resolution.
    0.3 MP vs 5 MP
  • 6 MP lower main camera megapixels
    Main camera megapixels
    2 MP
    â–¼ Worse than 94% of models
    Market range: <3.15 MP – >13 MP
    This tablet has a lower-resolution main camera than the average tablet (2 MP vs 8 MP). The average tablet has a 8 MP main camera.
    2 MP vs 8 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.
  • 6 hours shorter battery life
    Battery life
    4 hours
    â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
    Market range: <6 hours – >16 hours
    This tablet offers shorter battery life than the average tablet (4 hours vs 10 hours). The average tablet offers 10 hours of battery life.
    4 hours vs 10 hours
  • 39.2% smaller battery capacity
    Battery capacity
    4,000 mAh
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
    This tablet has a lower battery capacity than the average tablet (4000 mAh vs 6580 mAh). The average tablet battery has capacity of 6580 mAh.
    4,000 mAh vs 6,580 mAh
  • 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)
  • No GPS
    GPS
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
    This tablet does not have GPS, the average tablet does. 82.7% of tablets feature GPS.
  • 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
  • No face recognition
    Face recognition
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
    This tablet does not have face recognition, the average tablet does. 56% of tablets support face recognition.
  • 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
  • Less advanced operating system
    Operating system
    Windows
    â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
    This tablet runs on a less advanced operating system than the average tablet (Windows vs Android). Operating system choice shapes app support, updates, and ecosystem features.
    Windows vs Android
  • 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 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 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 keyboard accessory
    Keyboard accessory
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
    This tablet does not support a keyboard accessory, the average tablet does. 84.2% of tablets support a keyboard accessory.
  • 5 older release date
    Release date
    2014
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    Market range: <2k – >2k
    This tablet is an older model than the average tablet (2014 vs 2019).
    October 2014
    2014 vs 2019
  • 0.6 mm thicker
    Thickness
    8.6 mm
    â–¼ Worse than 60% of models
    Market range: <6.1 mm – >11.5 mm
    This tablet is thicker than the average tablet (8.6 mm vs 8 mm). The average tablet is 8.0 mm thick.
    8.6 mm vs 8.0 mm
  • 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

W
windowsunited.de
17/02/2015
Summary of the review
Archos 80 Cesium – günstiges 8 Zoll Windows Tablet im Test
(Translated)Show original
N
netzwelt.de
2015
Summary of the review
Archos 80 Cesium im Test | NETZWELT Would you like technical specifications or a summary of the pros and cons found in these German reviews?
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

Based on 3 buyer reviews from online shops.
Reviews last updated: May 2026 · How we calculate this
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →

What we like about Archos 80 Cesium (1GB + 16GB)

  • Affordable price point, often cited as high value for a Windows tablet
  • IPS display provides decent viewing angles and a 1280x800 resolution
  • Includes a free one-year subscription to Microsoft Office 365
  • Portable and lightweight design with a rubberised finish for better grip
  • Features a micro HDMI port for connecting to external monitors
  • Expandable storage via micro SD slot supporting up to 128GB

What we don't like about Archos 80 Cesium (1GB + 16GB)

  • Limited 1GB of RAM causes performance issues and frequent freezing
  • Short battery life, typically lasting only a few hours of use
  • Poor camera quality with a 0.3MP front and 2MP rear sensor
  • Slow processor response times during multitasking or heavy web browsing
  • Limited 16GB internal storage, much of which is occupied by the Windows OS
  • Reported weak Wi-Fi reception and range issues

Verdict

The Archos 80 Cesium is a budget-friendly 8-inch tablet originally running Windows 8.1, powered by a quad-core Intel Atom Z3735G processor (up to 1.83 GHz) with 1GB of RAM and 16GB of internal storage. It features an IPS LCD display with a 1280x800 resolution, a 4000mAh battery, and essential connectivity including Micro HDMI, Micro USB with OTG support, and a microSD slot expandable up to 128GB. Main advantages include its highly affordable price point for a full Windows experience, solid build quality for its class, and the inclusion of a 1-year Microsoft Office 365 subscription. However, the device is significantly hindered by its limited 1GB of RAM which causes multitasking lag, and the 16GB storage is almost entirely consumed by the operating system, leaving very little room for additional applications.

Compare Archos 80 Cesium (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 80 Cesium (1GB + 16GB) and other tablets

No results found