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

Asus Vivotab 8 Cellular (2GB + 32GB) Review | 168 Data compared

Avg. price:~£180RAM capacity:2 GBInternal storage:32 GBScreen size:8 inchesChipset:Intel Atom Z3745

Asus Vivotab 8 Cellular (2GB + 32GB) Review: Compare 168 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Tablets category and whether it is worth buying.

5.1

Overall score

Score
5.1/ 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 88% of models
Score components

90%

5.1

Technical score

10%

?

User score

â–¼Worse than 88% of tablets
5.1

Technical score

Technical score
5.1/ 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 84% of models
Score components

22%

5.0

Performance

20%

4.3

Display

16%

5.5

Camera

14%

3.3

Battery

12%

5.9

Connectivity

8%

6.6

Software & Features

5%

8.0

Design

3%

4.8

Audio & Multimedia

â–¼Worse than 84% of tablets
?

User score

User score
8.0/ 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 63% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image

Best prices

    N/A~ £180

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 Asus Vivotab 8 Cellular (2GB + 32GB)

Technical score
Technical score
5.1/ 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 84% of models
Score components:

22%

5.0

Performance

20%

4.3

Display

16%

5.5

Camera

14%

3.3

Battery

12%

5.9

Connectivity

8%

6.6

Software & Features

5%

8.0

Design

3%

4.8

Audio & Multimedia

5.1
User score
User score
8.0/ 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 63% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

?
Popularity
Popularity
1.0/ 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 99% of models
Popularity:
Asus Vivotab 8 Cellular (2GB + 32GB) has a popularity of 1 point, which is higher than 65.8% of Tablets.
1.0
Value for money
Value for money
6.4/ 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 83% of models
Score components:

60%

5.1

Overall score

40%

9.6

Price

6.4
RAM capacity
2 GB
RAM capacity
2 GB
â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
Market range: <2 GB – >12 GB
This tablet has a RAM capacity of 2 GB which is smaller than the RAM capacity of 60.9% of tablets and equal to that of 15.6% 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
32 GB
Internal storage
32 GB
â–¼ Worse than 60% of models
Market range: <0 GB – >250 GB
This tablet has an internal storage capacity of 32 GB which is smaller than the storage of 60.5% of tablets and equal to that of 18% of tablets.
Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
?
Chipset
Intel Atom Z3745
Chipset
Intel Atom Z3745
â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
This tablet uses the Intel Atom Z3745 chipset, which is less advanced than the chipsets in 77.6% of tablets and equal to those in 1% 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
Corning Gorilla Glass
Display glass type
Corning Gorilla Glass
â–² Better than 45% of models
This tablet uses Corning Gorilla Glass display glass which is stronger than that on 45.4% of tablets and equal to that on 32.7% of tablets.
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
8 MP
Main camera megapixels
8 MP
â–² Better than 37% of models
Market range: <3.15 MP – >13 MP
This tablet has a main camera resolution of 8 MP which is higher than that of 36.5% of tablets and equal to that of 31.8% of tablets.
Front camera megapixels
2 MP
Front camera megapixels
2 MP
â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
This tablet has a front camera resolution of 2 MP which is lower than in 53.6% of tablets and equal to that in 25.5% of tablets.
Main camera aperture
f/2.2
Main camera aperture
f/2.2
â–¼ Worse than 43% of models
This tablet has a main camera aperture of f/2.2 which is wider than that of 30.2% of tablets and equal to that of 27.3% of tablets.
Optical zoom
N/A
Show more
Battery capacity
3,950 mAh
Battery capacity
3,950 mAh
â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
This tablet has a battery capacity of 3,950 mAh which is smaller than the batteries in 89.4% of tablets and equal to those in 0.7% 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
8 hours
Battery life
8 hours
â–¼ Worse than 72% of models
Market range: <6 hours – >16 hours
This tablet has a battery life of 8 hours, which is shorter than that of 72.2% of tablets and equal to that of 11.9% 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
yes
NFC
yes
â–² Better than 89% of models
This tablet supports NFC. 89.1% 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
330 g
Weight
330 g
â–² Better than 87% of models
Market range: <315 g – >730 g
This tablet weighs 330 g which is lighter than 86.7% of tablets and equal to the weight of 0.5% 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
2
N. of speakers
2
â–¼ Worse than 29% of models
Market range: <1 – >6
This tablet includes 2 speakers, which is more than in 9.8% of tablets and equal to the number in 60.9% of tablets.
FM radio
yes
FM radio
yes
â–² Better than 81% of models
This tablet includes an FM radio. 81.1% of tablets offer FM radio functionality.
Show more

Asus Vivotab 8 Cellular (2GB + 32GB) vs the average tablet

246810TotalPerformanceDisplayCameraBatteryConnectivitySoftware & FeaturesDesignAudio & Multimedia
  • Supports NFC
    NFC
    yes
    â–² Better than 89% of models
    This tablet has NFC support, the average tablet does not. 10.9% of tablets include NFC.
  • 32.7% lighter
    Weight
    330 g
    â–² Better than 87% of models
    Market range: <315 g – >730 g
    This tablet is lighter than the average tablet (330 g vs 490 g). The average tablet weighs 490 g.
    330 g vs 490 g
  • Includes battery health monitoring
    Battery health monitoring
    yes
    â–² Better than 63% of models
    This tablet features battery health monitoring, the average tablet does not. 37% of tablets include battery health tools.
  • Includes stylus
    Stylus included
    yes
    â–² Better than 83% of models
    This tablet includes a stylus, the average tablet does not. 16.9% of tablets come with a stylus.
  • Suitable for drawing
    Suitable for drawing
    yes
    â–² Better than 59% of models
    This tablet is suitable for drawing, the average tablet is not. 41% of tablets are suitable for drawing.
  • Supports stylus tilt
    Stylus tilt support
    yes
    â–² Better than 66% of models
    This tablet supports stylus tilt, the average tablet does not. 33.6% of tablets support stylus tilt.
  • 50.4 mm narrower
    Width
    124.9 mm
    â–² Better than 87% of models
    Market range: <123.8 mm – >274 mm
    This tablet is narrower than the average tablet (124.9 mm vs 175.3 mm). The average tablet is 175.3 mm wide.
    124.9 mm vs 175.3 mm
  • More capable chipset
    Chipset
    Intel Atom Z3745
    â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
    This tablet uses the Intel Atom Z3745 chipset, while the average tablet uses MediaTek MT8169A.
    Intel Atom Z3745 vs MediaTek MT8169A
  • More capable chipset
    Chipset
    Intel Atom Z3745
    â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
    This tablet uses the Intel Atom Z3745 chipset, while the average tablet uses MediaTek MT8169A.
    Intel Atom Z3745 vs MediaTek MT8169A
  • Includes battery health monitoring
    Battery health monitoring
    yes
    â–² Better than 63% of models
    This tablet features battery health monitoring, the average tablet does not. 37% of tablets include battery health tools.
  • Supports NFC
    NFC
    yes
    â–² Better than 89% of models
    This tablet has NFC support, the average tablet does not. 10.9% of tablets include NFC.
  • 32.7% lighter
    Weight
    330 g
    â–² Better than 87% of models
    Market range: <315 g – >730 g
    This tablet is lighter than the average tablet (330 g vs 490 g). The average tablet weighs 490 g.
    330 g vs 490 g
  • Includes stylus
    Stylus included
    yes
    â–² Better than 83% of models
    This tablet includes a stylus, the average tablet does not. 16.9% of tablets come with a stylus.
  • Suitable for drawing
    Suitable for drawing
    yes
    â–² Better than 59% of models
    This tablet is suitable for drawing, the average tablet is not. 41% of tablets are suitable for drawing.
  • Supports stylus tilt
    Stylus tilt support
    yes
    â–² Better than 66% of models
    This tablet supports stylus tilt, the average tablet does not. 33.6% of tablets support stylus tilt.
  • 50.4 mm narrower
    Width
    124.9 mm
    â–² Better than 87% of models
    Market range: <123.8 mm – >274 mm
    This tablet is narrower than the average tablet (124.9 mm vs 175.3 mm). The average tablet is 175.3 mm wide.
    124.9 mm vs 175.3 mm
  • 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.
  • 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
  • 3 MP lower front camera megapixels
    Front camera megapixels
    2 MP
    â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
    Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
    This tablet has less front camera megapixels than the average tablet (2 MP vs 5 MP). The average tablet has 5 MP front camera resolution.
    2 MP vs 5 MP
  • 40% smaller battery capacity
    Battery capacity
    3,950 mAh
    â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
    Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
    This tablet has a lower battery capacity than the average tablet (3950 mAh vs 6580 mAh). The average tablet battery has capacity of 6580 mAh.
    3,950 mAh vs 6,580 mAh
  • 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 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.
  • 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.
  • 2 hours shorter battery life
    Battery life
    8 hours
    â–¼ Worse than 72% of models
    Market range: <6 hours – >16 hours
    This tablet offers shorter battery life than the average tablet (8 hours vs 10 hours). The average tablet offers 10 hours of battery life.
    8 hours vs 10 hours
  • 4.81x less popular
    Asus Vivotab 8 Cellular (2GB + 32GB) is less popular than the average tablet (1 vs 4.8).
    1 vs 4.81
  • 10.4% worse value for money
    Asus Vivotab 8 Cellular (2GB + 32GB) has worse value for money than the average tablet (6.43 vs 7.1).
    6.43 vs 7.1
  • 2 GB less RAM
    RAM capacity
    2 GB
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    Market range: <2 GB – >12 GB
    This tablet has less RAM capacity than the average tablet (2 GB vs 4 GB). The average tablet has 4 GB of RAM.
    2 GB vs 4 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.
  • 800 MHz slower RAM speed
    RAM speed
    1,066 MHz
    â–¼ Worse than 73% of models
    Market range: <800 MHz – >6.4k MHz
    This tablet has a lower RAM speed than the average tablet (1066 MHz vs 1866 MHz). The average tablet has RAM speed of 1866 MHz.
    1,066 MHz vs 1,866 MHz
  • 50% less storage
    Internal storage
    32 GB
    â–¼ Worse than 60% of models
    Market range: <0 GB – >250 GB
    This tablet has less internal storage than the average tablet (32 GB vs 64 GB). The average tablet provides 64 GB of internal storage.
    32 GB vs 64 GB
  • 28.9% lower memory bandwidth
    Memory bandwidth
    10.6 GB/s
    â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
    Market range: <4.26 GB/s – >60 GB/s
    This tablet has a lower memory bandwidth than the average tablet (10.6 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s). The average tablet has memory bandwidth of 14.9 GB/s.
    10.6 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
  • 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
  • 7% lower CPU speed
    CPU speed
    1.86 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
    Market range: <1.2 GHz – >3.2 GHz
    This tablet has a lower CPU speed than the average tablet (1.9 GHz vs 2 GHz). The average tablet has CPU speed of 2 GHz.
    1.86 GHz vs 2 GHz
  • 18% slower GPU clock
    GPU frequency
    533 MHz
    â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
    Market range: <311 MHz – >1.1k MHz
    This tablet has a lower GPU frequency than the average tablet (533 MHz vs 650 MHz). The average tablet has GPU frequency of 650 MHz.
    533 MHz vs 650 MHz
  • 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
  • 61 nits lower peak brightness
    Peak brightness
    340 nits
    â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
    Market range: <320 nits – >750 nits
    This tablet has a lower peak brightness than the average tablet (340 nits vs 401 nits). The average tablet reaches 401 nits peak brightness.
    340 nits vs 401 nits
  • Lower contrast ratio
    Contrast ratio
    782:1
    â–¼ Worse than 93% of models
    This tablet has a lower contrast ratio than the average tablet (782:1 vs 1015:1). The average tablet has a contrast ratio of 1015:1.
    782:1 vs 1,015:1
  • 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
  • 59.6 nits lower typical brightness
    Typical brightness
    340.4 nits
    â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
    Market range: <300 nits – >600 nits
    This tablet has a lower typical brightness than the average tablet (340.4 nits vs 400 nits). The average tablet reaches 400 nits typical brightness.
    340.4 nits vs 400 nits
  • 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
  • 3 MP lower front camera megapixels
    Front camera megapixels
    2 MP
    â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
    Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
    This tablet has less front camera megapixels than the average tablet (2 MP vs 5 MP). The average tablet has 5 MP front camera resolution.
    2 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.
  • Worse main-camera video
    Video recording (main camera)
    720 x 30 fps
    â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
    This tablet supports worse main-camera video recording than the average tablet (720x30 fps vs 1080x30 fps). The average tablet supports 1080x30 fps main-camera video recording.
    720x30 fps vs 1080x30 fps
  • 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 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.
  • 40% smaller battery capacity
    Battery capacity
    3,950 mAh
    â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
    Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
    This tablet has a lower battery capacity than the average tablet (3950 mAh vs 6580 mAh). The average tablet battery has capacity of 6580 mAh.
    3,950 mAh vs 6,580 mAh
  • 2 hours shorter battery life
    Battery life
    8 hours
    â–¼ Worse than 72% of models
    Market range: <6 hours – >16 hours
    This tablet offers shorter battery life than the average tablet (8 hours vs 10 hours). The average tablet offers 10 hours of battery life.
    8 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.
  • No HDMI output
    HDMI output
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    This tablet does not have an HDMI output, the average tablet does. 50.1% of tablets support HDMI output.
  • 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.
  • 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).
    September 2014
    2014 vs 2019
  • 0.8 mm thicker
    Thickness
    8.8 mm
    â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
    Market range: <6.1 mm – >11.5 mm
    This tablet is thicker than the average tablet (8.8 mm vs 8 mm). The average tablet is 8.0 mm thick.
    8.8 mm vs 8.0 mm

Video reviews

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

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

P
pcmag.com
15/04/2014
Summary of the review
Asus VivoTab Note 8 Review
C
cnet.com
16/05/2014
Summary of the review
Asus VivoTab 8 Review: Tucked-in stylus makes this Windows tablet stand out
N
notebookcheck.net
21/02/2015
Summary of the review
Asus VivoTab 8 M81C Tablet Review
L
laptopmag.com
03/04/2014
Summary of the review
ASUS VivoTab Note 8 - Windows 8 Tablet Reviews
U
umpcportal.com
16/02/2014
Summary of the review
ASUS Vivotab Note 8 Review
C
computing.co.uk
12/02/2014
Summary of the review
Asus VivoTab Note 8 review
A
avforums.com
07/06/2014
Summary of the review
ASUS VivoTab Note 8 Tablet Review
N
notebookcheck.com
12/02/2015
Summary of the review
Test Asus VivoTab 8 M81C Tablet - Notebookcheck
(Translated)Show original
Q
quechoisir.org
14/03/2014
Summary of the review
Test Asus VivoTab Note 8 - Tablette tactile
(Translated)Show original
C
consumentenbond.nl
Unknown Date
Summary of the review
Asus VivoTab 8 (M81C) - Test, Reviews & Prijzen
(Translated)Show original
H
hardware.info
19/12/2014
Summary of the review
ASUS VivoTab 8 (M81C) review: mini met Windows 8.1
(Translated)Show original
I
id.nl
02/03/2015
Summary of the review
Review: ASUS Vivotab 8 M81C
(Translated)Show original
H
hardware.info
19/12/2014
Summary of the review
ASUS VivoTab 8 (M81C) review: mini met Windows 8.1
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

What we like about Asus Vivotab 8 Cellular (2GB + 32GB)

  • Integrated Wacom stylus with 1,024 levels of pressure sensitivity for precise input
  • Compact and lightweight design, making it highly portable for on-the-go use
  • Full Windows 8.1 operating system allows for standard desktop application use
  • Good battery life for its class, typically lasting between 7 to 9 hours
  • Included Microsoft Office Home & Student adds significant value for productivity
  • IPS display provides good viewing angles and vibrant colors
  • Built-in GPS/GLONASS support in cellular and high-end models

What we don't like about Asus Vivotab 8 Cellular (2GB + 32GB)

  • Limited connectivity options with a lack of dedicated video output (like Micro-HDMI)
  • Lower display resolution (1280 x 800) compared to high-end rivals like the iPad Mini Retina
  • Modest Intel Atom performance can lead to lag in demanding apps or 3D gaming
  • Small screen size can make navigating the traditional Windows desktop fiddly without the stylus
  • Mediocre camera quality, especially in low-light conditions, producing noisy images
  • The physical Windows button is often placed in an unintuitive location on the side
  • Internal speakers are frequently described as tinny or low-quality

Verdict

The Asus VivoTab 8 (M81C) is a compact 8-inch Windows 8.1 tablet powered by a quad-core Intel Atom Z3745 processor with speeds up to 1.86 GHz, featuring an IPS display with a 1280 x 800 resolution and a 16:10 aspect ratio. This specific cellular-capable model includes 2GB of LPDDR3 RAM and 32GB of eMMC storage, which is expandable via a microSD slot for added flexibility. Its main characteristics include a lightweight 330g build, dual 2MP cameras, and GPS/GLONASS support, making it a portable choice for productivity tasks. Primary pros are its full Windows desktop compatibility, vibrant IPS viewing angles, and the inclusion of stereo speakers for multimedia. However, notable cons include its limited 32GB internal capacity—of which nearly half is consumed by the operating system—a lack of physical Windows buttons on the bezel, and the absence of a dedicated HDMI port for external displays.

Compare Asus Vivotab 8 Cellular (2GB + 32GB) with other tablets

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

Graphic comparison of Asus Vivotab 8 Cellular (2GB + 32GB) and other tablets

No results found