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

Gigaset QV1030 (2GB + 16GB) review: 168 specs compared

Avg. price:~£330RAM capacity:2 GBInternal storage:16 GBScreen size:10.1 inchesChipset:Nvidia Tegra 4

Gigaset QV1030 (2GB + 16GB) Review: Compare 168 technical specifications and 13 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Tablets category and whether it is worth buying.

Gigaset QV1030 (2GB + 16GB)
6.9/10

Overall score

Score
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, best-of lists, expert reviews and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 35%, List score 30%, Reviews score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
Score components

35%

5.7

Technical score

30%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

7.9

Reviews score

10%

?

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

â–¼Worse than 54% of tablets
7.5

Value for money

Value for money
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the tablet's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a tablet with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 57% of models
Score components

70%

6.9

Overall score

30%

8.8

Price

â–¼Worse than 57%
5.7

Technical score

Technical score
5.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 35% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
Score components

22%

5.2

Performance

20%

6.6

Display

16%

6.2

Camera

14%

5.5

Battery

12%

5.8

Connectivity

8%

5.3

Software

5%

4.5

Design

3%

4.8

Audio

â–¼Worse than 64%
7.9

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.4 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 52% of models

80%

7.8

Average grade

20%

8.0

Popularity

Grades by review (13)
8 reviews: 5 with a printed score, 3 estimated from the review. 5 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 52%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 30% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • gigaset-qv1030-2gb-16gb
  • gigaset-qv1030-2gb-16gb
  • gigaset-qv1030-2gb-16gb
  • gigaset-qv1030-2gb-16gb
  • gigaset-qv1030-2gb-16gb
gigaset-qv1030-2gb-16gb
gigaset-qv1030-2gb-16gb
gigaset-qv1030-2gb-16gb
gigaset-qv1030-2gb-16gb
gigaset-qv1030-2gb-16gb
Where to buy
    N/A~ £330
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Gigaset QV1030 (2GB + 16GB)

Based on 8 · 5

Reviewers love the screen and find battery and camera decent, but build quality draws the most complaints, with slow charging too.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of tablet Gigaset QV1030 (2GB + 16GB)

Technical score
Technical score
5.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 35% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
Score components:

22%

5.2

Performance

20%

6.6

Display

16%

6.2

Camera

14%

5.5

Battery

12%

5.8

Connectivity

8%

5.3

Software

5%

4.5

Design

3%

4.8

Audio

5.7
Reviews score
7.9
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the tablet's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a tablet with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 57% of models
Score components:

70%

6.9

Overall score

30%

8.8

Price

7.5
RAM capacity
2 GB
Market range: <1 GB – >8 GB
This tablet has 2 GB of RAM, which is less than 61.3% of tablets and equal to 15.5% of tablets.
Process node
28 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >40 nm
This tablet is built on a 28 nm process, which is larger than 65.1% of tablets and equal to 17.6% of tablets.
Internal storage
16 GB
Market range: <16 GB – >256 GB
This tablet has 16 GB of internal storage, which is less than 78.8% of tablets and equal to 14.8% of tablets.
Geekbench 6 single-core score
?
Chipset
Nvidia Tegra 4
This tablet runs on Nvidia Tegra 4, which is less advanced than 64% of tablets and equal to 0.8% of tablets.
Show more
What reviewers say
Screen resolution
2560×1600
This tablet has a 2560×1600 screen, which is sharper than 77.5% of tablets and equal to 10% of tablets.
Refresh rate
?
Display type
IPS LCD
This tablet uses a IPS LCD display type. 17% of tablets use this display technology.
Pixel density
300 ppi
Market range: <149 ppi – >291 ppi
This tablet has a pixel density of 300 ppi, which is higher than 92.3% of tablets and equal to 0.3% of tablets.
Display glass type
?
Show more
What reviewers say
Optical image stabilization
no
This tablet does not support optical stabilisation. 0.4% of tablets offer this.
Main camera megapixels
8 MP
Market range: <3.15 MP – >13 MP
This tablet has a rear camera with 8 MP resolution, which is higher than 36.4% of tablets and equal to 31.9% of tablets.
Front camera megapixels
1.2 MP
Market range: <1.2 MP – >9 MP
This tablet has a front camera with 1.2 MP resolution, which is lower than 86.3% of tablets and equal to 4.8% of tablets.
Main camera aperture
?
Optical zoom
1xxx
This tablet has 1xx optical zoom, which is stronger than 18.2% of tablets and equal to 80.9% of tablets.
Show more
What reviewers say
Battery capacity
9,000 mAh
Market range: <4k mAh – >10.1k mAh
This tablet has 9,000 mAh battery capacity, which is larger than 82.6% of tablets and equal to 1.1% of tablets.
Charging speed
10 W
Market range: <10 W – >45 W
This tablet charges at 10 W, which is slower than 60.9% of tablets and equal to 33.3% of tablets.
Battery life
10 hours
Market range: <7 hours – >16 hours
This tablet has a battery life of 10 hours, which is longer than that of 39.1% of tablets and equal to that of 20.5% of tablets.
Wireless charging
no
This tablet does not support wireless charging. 1.5% of tablets offer this.
Fast charging
no
This tablet does not support fast charging. 56.9% of tablets offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say
LTE support
no
This tablet does not have built-in LTE. 42.9% of tablets offer this.
Wi-Fi connectivity
yes
This tablet connects to Wi-Fi. 0.2% of tablets offer this.
GPS
yes
This tablet has built-in GPS. 17.1% of tablets offer this.
5G connectivity
no
This tablet does not support 5G. 8.1% of tablets offer this.
NFC
no
This tablet does not include NFC. 10.8% of tablets offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say
Operating system
Android
This tablet uses the Android operating system, which is more advanced than the one used by 23.2%.
Update support duration
short
This tablet offers short update support, which is shorter than the support period of 52.4% of tablets and equal to that of 47.6% of tablets.
Direct OS updates
no
This tablet does not support direct OS updates. 79.8% of tablets offer this.
On-device AI
no
This tablet does not support on-device AI. 28.3% of tablets support this capability.
App tracking protection
no
This tablet does not support app tracking protection. 28.4% of tablets offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say
IP rating
not rated
This tablet's IP rating is not rated, which is less protected than 16.5% of tablets and the same as 83.6% of tablets.
Weight
590 g
Market range: <315 g – >730 g
This tablet weighs 590 g, which is heavier than 74% of tablets and equal to 0.6% of tablets.
Backlit keyboard
no
This tablet does not support a backlit keyboard. 9.7% of tablets support backlit keyboards.
Keyboard accessory
no
This tablet does not support a keyboard accessory. 84.3% of tablets support this option.
Pen latency
N/A
Show more
What reviewers say
Number of microphones
1
Market range: <1 – >3
This tablet has a microphone array of 1, which is more than 0.2% of tablets and equal to 54.8% of tablets.
aptX Adaptive
no
This tablet does not support aptX Adaptive. 6.9% of tablets offer this.
Dolby Atmos support
no
This tablet does not support Dolby Atmos. 31.3% of tablets support Dolby Atmos.
N. of speakers
2
Market range: <2 – >4
This tablet includes 2 speakers, which is more than in 9.8% of tablets and equal to the number in 60.8% of tablets.
FM radio
no
This tablet does not include an FM radio. 19% of tablets offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say

Gigaset QV1030 (2GB + 16GB) vs the average tablet

246810TotalPerformanceDisplayCameraBatteryConnectivitySoftwareDesignAudio
  • 35.7% sharper screen detail
    This tablet has sharper screen detail than the average tablet (300 ppi vs 221 ppi). The average tablet has a pixel density of 221 ppi.
    300 ppi vs 221 ppi
  • 36.4% larger battery capacity
    This tablet has a larger battery capacity than the average tablet (9,000 mAh vs 6,600 mAh). The average tablet offers 6,600 mAh of battery capacity.
    9,000 mAh vs 6,600 mAh
  • Sharper display
    This tablet has a sharper screen than the average tablet (2560×1600 vs 1920×1200).
    2,560×1,600 vs 1,920×1,200
  • 68 more GPU execution units
    This tablet has more GPU execution units than the average tablet (72 vs 4). The average tablet has 4 GPU execution units.
    72 vs 4
  • More advanced chipset
    This tablet has a more advanced chipset than the average tablet (Nvidia Tegra 4 vs MediaTek MT8169A).
    Nvidia Tegra 4 vs MediaTek MT8169A
  • 12.9% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.9/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.4 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 52% of models

    80%

    7.8

    Average grade

    20%

    8.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (13)
    8 reviews: 5 with a printed score, 3 estimated from the review. 5 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.9 vs 7.0
  • Supports slow-motion video
    This tablet supports slow-motion recording, while the average tablet does not. 37.3% of tablets support slow-motion recording.
  • Built-in camera flash
    This tablet has a camera flash, while the average tablet does not. 45.5% of tablets have one.
  • 12.9% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.9/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.4 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 52% of models

    80%

    7.8

    Average grade

    20%

    8.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (13)
    8 reviews: 5 with a printed score, 3 estimated from the review. 5 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.9 vs 7.0
  • 68 more GPU execution units
    This tablet has more GPU execution units than the average tablet (72 vs 4). The average tablet has 4 GPU execution units.
    72 vs 4
  • More advanced chipset
    This tablet has a more advanced chipset than the average tablet (Nvidia Tegra 4 vs MediaTek MT8169A).
    Nvidia Tegra 4 vs MediaTek MT8169A
  • More advanced memory type
    This tablet uses more advanced memory than the average tablet (DDR3 vs LPDDR3).
    DDR3 vs LPDDR3
  • 35.7% sharper screen detail
    This tablet has sharper screen detail than the average tablet (300 ppi vs 221 ppi). The average tablet has a pixel density of 221 ppi.
    300 ppi vs 221 ppi
  • Sharper display
    This tablet has a sharper screen than the average tablet (2560×1600 vs 1920×1200).
    2,560×1,600 vs 1,920×1,200
  • Supports slow-motion video
    This tablet supports slow-motion recording, while the average tablet does not. 37.3% of tablets support slow-motion recording.
  • Built-in camera flash
    This tablet has a camera flash, while the average tablet does not. 45.5% of tablets have one.
  • 36.4% larger battery capacity
    This tablet has a larger battery capacity than the average tablet (9,000 mAh vs 6,600 mAh). The average tablet offers 6,600 mAh of battery capacity.
    9,000 mAh vs 6,600 mAh
  • 3.8 MP lower front resolution
    This tablet has a lower-resolution front camera than the average tablet (1.2 MP vs 5 MP). The average tablet has a front camera of 5 MP.
    1.2 MP vs 5 MP
  • No USB-C port
    This tablet does not have a USB Type-C port, while the average tablet does. 54% of tablets have one.
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    This tablet has fewer CPU threads than the average tablet (4 vs 8). The average tablet has 8 CPU threads.
    4 vs 8
  • Shorter update support
    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 fast charging
    This tablet does not support fast charging, while the average tablet does. 56.8% of tablets support fast charging.
  • No direct OS updates
    This tablet does not support direct OS updates, while the average tablet does. 79.7% of tablets offer this.
  • Older Wi-Fi standard
    This tablet has an older Wi-Fi standard than the average tablet (Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)).
    Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)
  • 2 GB less RAM
    This tablet has less RAM than the average tablet (2 GB vs 4 GB). The average tablet has 4 GB of RAM.
    2 GB vs 4 GB
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    This tablet has fewer CPU threads than the average tablet (4 vs 8). The average tablet has 8 CPU threads.
    4 vs 8
  • 2 GB less RAM
    This tablet has less RAM than the average tablet (2 GB vs 4 GB). The average tablet has 4 GB of RAM.
    2 GB vs 4 GB
  • 75% less internal storage
    This tablet has less internal storage than the average tablet (16 GB vs 64 GB). The average tablet has 64 GB of internal storage.
    16 GB vs 64 GB
  • 2x larger process node
    This tablet has a larger process node than the average tablet (28 nm vs 14 nm). The average tablet is built on 14 nm.
    28 nm vs 14 nm
  • No big.LITTLE architecture
    This tablet does not support big.LITTLE architecture, while the average tablet does. 51.7% of tablets support big.LITTLE architecture.
  • 10% lower CPU speed
    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.
    1.8 GHz vs 2 GHz
  • 6 years older
    This tablet was released earlier than the average tablet (2013 vs 2019). The average tablet was released in 2019.
    December 2013
    2013 vs 2019
  • 266 MHz slower RAM speed
    This tablet has a lower RAM speed than the average tablet (1,600 MHz vs 1,866 MHz). The average tablet has RAM speed of 1,866 MHz.
    1,600 MHz vs 1,866 MHz
  • 14.1% less memory bandwidth
    This tablet has less memory bandwidth than the average tablet (12.8 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s). The average tablet has 14.9 GB/s of memory bandwidth.
    12.8 GB/s vs 14.9 GB/s
  • 39 nits dimmer screen
    This tablet is dimmer than the average tablet (362 nits vs 401 nits). The average tablet reaches 401 nits.
    362 nits vs 401 nits
  • 38 nits lower typical brightness
    This tablet has a lower typical brightness than the average tablet (362 nits vs 400 nits). The average tablet reaches 400 nits typical brightness.
    362 nits vs 400 nits
  • 3.8 MP lower front resolution
    This tablet has a lower-resolution front camera than the average tablet (1.2 MP vs 5 MP). The average tablet has a front camera of 5 MP.
    1.2 MP vs 5 MP
  • No manual exposure control
    This tablet does not support manual exposure, while the average tablet does. 63.6% of tablets support manual exposure.
  • No burst mode
    This tablet does not support burst mode, the average tablet does. 60.6% of tablets support burst mode.
  • No backside-illuminated sensor
    This tablet does not have a BSI sensor, while the average tablet does. 52.6% of tablets have a BSI sensor.
  • No timelapse video
    This tablet does not support timelapse video, while the average tablet does. 57.5% of tablets support timelapse video.
  • No fast charging
    This tablet does not support fast charging, while the average tablet does. 56.8% of tablets support fast charging.
  • 44.4% slower charging
    This tablet charges slower than the average tablet (10 W vs 18 W). The average tablet charges at 18 W.
    10 W vs 18 W
  • No USB-C port
    This tablet does not have a USB Type-C port, while the average tablet does. 54% of tablets have one.
  • Older Wi-Fi standard
    This tablet has an older Wi-Fi standard than the average tablet (Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)).
    Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n) vs Wi-Fi 5 (802.11ac)
  • Older Bluetooth version
    This tablet has an older Bluetooth version than the average tablet (4 vs 5).
    4 vs 5
  • Shorter update support
    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 direct OS updates
    This tablet does not support direct OS updates, while the average tablet does. 79.7% of tablets offer this.
  • No split-screen
    This tablet does not support split-screen, the average tablet does. 72.8% of tablets support split-screen.
  • No picture-in-picture mode
    This tablet does not support picture-in-picture, the average tablet does. 61.4% of tablets support picture-in-picture.
  • No camera and mic privacy
    This tablet does not support camera and mic privacy, while the average tablet does. 56.6% of tablets offer this.
  • No full-page screenshots
    This tablet does not support full-page screenshots, the average tablet does. 53% of tablets support full-page screenshots.
  • No location privacy
    This tablet does not support location privacy, while the average tablet does. 76.7% of tablets offer this.
  • No dark mode
    This tablet does not support dark mode, while the average tablet does. 57.7% of tablets offer this.
  • 20.4% heavier
    This tablet is heavier than the average tablet (590 g vs 490 g). The average tablet weighs 490 g.
    590 g vs 490 g
  • No keyboard accessory
    This tablet does not support a keyboard accessory, the average tablet does. 84.2% of tablets support a keyboard accessory.
  • 86.7 mm wider
    This tablet is wider than the average tablet (262 mm vs 175.3 mm). The average tablet is 175.3 mm wide.
    262 mm vs 175.3 mm
  • 0.9 mm thicker
    This tablet is thicker than the average tablet (8.9 mm vs 8 mm). The average tablet is 8 mm thick.
    8.9 mm vs 8 mm
  • 62 mm taller
    This tablet is taller than the average tablet (262 mm vs 200 mm). The average tablet is 200 mm tall.
    262 mm vs 200 mm

Video reviews

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

9.0
Droid Panic
≈ estimated
31/03/2015
Unboxing and review · sound, camera and performance tests
Verdict
Gigaset QV1030 is good value at its price, though it is stuck on an old Android version.
8.0
Tweakers Tech Hub
≈ estimated
02/04/2014
Review · display, battery and software
Verdict
Gigaset QV1030 is an interesting choice for buyers who want a sharp screen and acceptable performance, with battery caveats.
9.0
TechVideo
≈ estimated
03/12/2013
Hands-on review · display, speed and size comparison
Verdict
Gigaset QV1030 feels good in hand, with fast performance and a sharp high-resolution screen.
Brand video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.5
notebookcheck.com
✓ explicit
13/02/2014
Lab test · 10-inch Android
Verdict
The Gigaset QV1030 is quick and has a sharp screen, but its plastic build and weak front camera hold it back.
7.2
computerbild.de
✓ explicit
17/02/2014
Hands-on test · Android tablet
Verdict
The Gigaset QV1030 is a stylish, well-built tablet with a sharp screen and long battery life, but it does not stand out from rivals like the Google Nexus 10.
6.0
futurezone.at
≈ estimated
30/01/2014
Lab test · Android tablet
Verdict
The Gigaset QV1030 has a very sharp screen, but its sluggish performance and tinny speakers make it a weaker choice than the Nexus 10.
8.0
krone.at
≈ estimated
28/12/2013
Hands-on test · Android tablet
Verdict
The Gigaset QV1030 is a convincing debut with a sharp screen, a quick processor and expandable storage, but its battery falls short of its claimed life.
8.0
it-markt.ch
≈ estimated
03/07/2016
Hands-on test · 10-inch Android
Verdict
The Gigaset QV1030 is a smooth, sharp 10-inch tablet whose battery lasts a full workday, though its 600 g weight is noticeable.
6.2
01net.com
✓ explicit
27/03/2014
Hands-on test · 10-inch Android
Verdict
The Gigaset QV1030 is a very sharp 10-inch tablet at a fair price, though it is heavy and slow to recharge.
8.5
les-objets-connectes.fr
✓ explicit
05/06/2014
Hands-on test · 10-inch Android
Verdict
The Gigaset QV1030 is a very sharp 10-inch tablet at a fair price, though it is heavy and slow to recharge.
6.0
tweakers.net
✓ explicit
23/05/2014
Lab test · Android tablet
Verdict
The Gigaset QV1030 offers a sharp screen and fast chip for its price, but its cheap-feeling body, short battery and old Android hold it back.
tweakers.net
01/05/2014
Same outlet as a graded review (counted once)

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Gigaset QV1030 (2GB + 16GB)

  • High-resolution display (2560 x 1600 px) with high pixel density (300 ppi) for sharp images.
  • Strong graphical performance powered by the Nvidia Tegra 4 processor, described as fast for everyday use.
  • Large battery capacity (9000 mAh) offering significantly more power than many contemporaneous tablets.
  • Includes an external memory slot for expandable storage via micro SD.
  • Equipped with a rear camera flash, 3.5mm audio jack, and GPS support.

What customers don't like about Gigaset QV1030 (2GB + 16GB)

  • Long battery recharge time, reportedly taking up to 9 hours to reach full charge.
  • Heavier than some competitors, weighing approximately 590g.
  • Lacks modern features like NFC, a gyroscope, or a fingerprint scanner found on higher-end alternatives.
  • Internal storage is limited to 16GB, which is lower than some competing 64GB models.
  • Average front camera quality (1.2 MP), which may be inferior to similar devices.

Verdict

The Gigaset QV1030 is a high-performance 10.1-inch tablet featuring a sharp 2560 x 1600 IPS display with 300 ppi, powered by a quad-core Nvidia Tegra 4 processor and 2GB of RAM. It includes 16GB of internal storage (expandable via microSD), an 8MP rear camera with dual-LED flash, a 1.2MP front camera, and a substantial 9000mAh battery providing roughly 9 hours of use. Its main pros include an exceptionally high-resolution screen for its class, a premium solid build with a slim 8.9mm profile, and smooth performance for media consumption and browsing. However, it is known for significant heat generation during intensive tasks due to the processor, lacks modern software support as it runs on the older Android 4.2 Jelly Bean, and has a back panel that is prone to fingerprints.

Compare Gigaset QV1030 (2GB + 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 Gigaset QV1030 (2GB + 16GB) and other tablets

No results found